Laserfiche WebLink
use town meeting (as an example) as a venue to be active and vocal in these areas to <br />help raise awareness. <br /> <br />Agent says a vote of endorsement would be fine. <br /> <br />Thomas J O’Neil states he just finished his 30th year in building in Mashpee, always <br />encourage people to add more mitigation, encouraging drainage, how much lawn they <br />should be thinking about, etc., and says he doesn’t think a 75 ft buffer is going to work <br />out. Many of these lots are too small. Says Cape Cod was much different years ago with <br />smaller lots and cottages. Feels some projects aren’t being passed based on bylaws, <br />but people’s opinions so to tell people your lot will still be buildable and get a waiver, <br />they will be left with nothing. He says people will be left with an unbuildable lot and <br />people won’t be able to reconstruct their home, bring it up to code, etc. I object to that <br />and will not support these changes, based on the 75 ft set back the I’ve seen the lots <br />and they are completely unmanageable and unrealistic. There are other ways to create <br />cleaner water through other ways, using new technology, citing ozone. <br /> <br />Further discussion around specific language around buffer extension, and how clarity is <br />needed to help understand restrictions. <br />Further discussion is held around accuracy of satellite images of flood zones. <br /> <br />Brian Weeden asks for a Point of Order, citing this is a difficult of discussion, with he <br />believes a potential conflict of interest. Brian Weeden states he is usure how we are <br />having this discussion when we are talking about reconstructing homes and businesses <br />and doing over 400 projects, and where this could be perceived as a conflict of interest. <br />Tom (O’Neill) has expressed his concerns as a business man or commissioner, I’m not <br />sure, and if the commission moves forward to support the amendments, would there be <br />opposition? What opposition or stance are you taking? <br />Brian Weeded further states if we are going to go back and forth, we should take up a <br />conflict-of-interest vote for Tom (O’Neill) or placing this on an agenda and give Tom <br />(O’Neill) the right to express himself. Brian (Weeden) isn’t comfortable about the <br />discussion, input being done, not sure of personal interest and this should concern <br />everyone. <br /> <br />Paul Columbo brings discussion back to Agent. <br />Marjorie Claprood clarifying what is the question on the floor, to move the question to a <br />vote. <br />Marjorie Claprood makes a motion to move forward the verbal amended question <br />(clarification language going to warrant) to a vote. This would free everyone up cam <br />move forward for submission in September <br />Alex seconded <br />No discussion on the motion on the table <br /> Tomas J. O’Neill: Yes <br /> Brian Weeden: Yes <br /> Alex Zollo: Yes <br /> Marjorie Claprood: Yes <br /> Charlie Dalton: Yes <br /> Paul Columbo: Yes, the motion carries <br /> <br />Brian moves to place Executive session on agenda for next meeting <br />Alex seconded motion <br /> Tomas J O’Neill: Yes <br /> <br />