Laserfiche WebLink
Chairman Phelan inquired of the Board if they would like to make a motion to appoint two board <br /> members or if they would like a discussion. Board members indicated they would like a <br /> discussion. <br /> Mr. Lehrer reported to the Chair and Board that there were approximately 10 phone calls <br /> received from the public on the matter of appointing two members of the board and there were <br /> concerns on this process. He stated he wanted to make the Board aware of the phone calls so <br /> that the Chair could decide how to manage these concerns. <br /> Mr. Balzarini recalled from about a year ago that the Planning Board had a discussion and had <br /> agreed that the entire Planning Board would be present at meetings. He questioned why only <br /> two board members would be participating while there are five board members with five <br /> different perspectives on the proposed development agreement. He stated his opinion was that <br /> since the Planning Board plays such a vital role in this process the entire board as well as the <br /> public should be present at every meeting. <br /> Chairman Phelan said while Mr. Balzarini made valid points, his interpretation when he read the <br /> proposal was that this subcommittee would be meeting more frequently than the regularly <br /> scheduled board meetings. The two elected members would only be gathering information and <br /> reporting back to the Board and felt it would make the process easier. He explained the entire <br /> Board would be engaging in discussions. <br /> Ms. Waygan indicated that she was happy to hear the meetings were being planned and being <br /> held in public which would mean all Planning Board members would be present as well. She <br /> indicated that the Board voted to pursue a three parry development agreement with the Town, <br /> Mashpee Commons and The Cape Cod Commission. At that time it was acknowledged that the <br /> negotiation team would be comprised of the entire Planning Board and one member from the <br /> Board of Selectmen. She explained that she was against this however she was convinced that <br /> having more people involved would offer more talent to draw from. She said she was <br /> tremendously disappointed that the first action from the applicant was to go from a board of six <br /> to a group of two. She felt that any Planning Board member that wanted to attend and participate <br /> as a full member of the Planning Board during these meetings should be able to do so. She <br /> stated that she was readily available for meetings. Ms. Waygan explained that the applicant <br /> came before the Board voluntarily with a proposed development agreement and did not have the <br /> authority to dictate that only part of the Planning Board could participate in discussions. She <br /> further explained that the Planning Board members elected by the public have the right to sit at <br /> any meeting as a full Planning Board member. <br /> Chair Phelan indicated that he understood Ms. Waygan's position however, he explained that he <br /> did not feel this was an affront by the applicant to subvert or undermine the Planning Board in <br /> any way. Ms. Waygan stated that there is no authority who could stop her from participating in <br /> any of these meetings being held if they are in public session as a full Planning Board member. <br /> Mr. Phelan stated that he actually had hoped Ms. Waygan would accept his nomination to be one <br /> of the two members selected for this subcommittee. <br /> 3 <br />