02/03/2024 BOARD OF HEALTH Minutes (2)

Home Browse Search

urgency in pursuing it beyond trying to mediate this now and do the best we can. If the sewer commission looks at this parcel and says yes, this is critical to our future compliance and our future nitrogen meditation needs and not taking the opportunity now to address this property would be detrimental. Then I think it would be worth pursuing. And, I understand that the town manager is going to look at it based on odds, which is we're getting a message from town counsel that DEP doesn't feel we have standing. He's going to look at it and say this is what I'm getting from town counsel; is this worth spending the money; what are the odds of a positive outcome legally? I think the map there for us needs to be informed by the importance of addressing this property. Does that make sense? If it's not an important property in terms of nitrogen removal;there's less need to fight for it. But if it matters and there is some sort of consensus with the sewer commission and the selectmen,then I think it's worth pursuing. Mr. Harrington: Ok, we can certainly investigate that. Chair Baumgaertel: I'm not trying to kick the can down the road. It's kind of a big decision point if it really matters. I don't what to waste the town's time and resources if it's not something that's impactful at all anyway. Mr. Harrington: I think you came out and asked Mike Reparis right out in the open this question anyway and I don't think he had an answer. Chair Baumgaertel: We have to assess this property and how it fits in the broader plan. It's impactful enough to pursue further because I think the town should have some sort of standing in this. I'm not a lawyer but I don't agree counsel's assessment that it's not worth fighting for. The calculus you're doing on the risk of losing the case is not properly qualified without the information as to the importance of this parcel. Mr. Harrington: Ok, let me throw this at you. Now that we're in executive session and we have a septic system that has been proposed by the owner of the property, a system that would be considered at least a valuable denitrification system. What if he bites? We get him to put a denite on the property. We move forward and he moves forward on selling the property. If he says no, then we can go back and look at exactly where this property fits in and to see if we continue the fight. This way we have at least responded and given him and counsel something to go on. Let's at least hit him with something that will meet our goals for nitrogen removal on the property. Chair Baumgaertel: All things being equal I would 100% agree with sending them some sort of counter proposal, however, given my position in my professional career and my professional association with some of the vendors of those technologies, I would fear that if I were to sign on to a plan to say this technology would be acceptable, this one would not, would put me in a bit of a precarious position ethically, and that could be something that if they were to reject it they could say, hey, he's the test center director and he works with these guys all the time. Why are you telling me I have to use this one, it gives the perception of a conflict of interest.