My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07/20/2022 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
>
07/20/2022 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2025 2:57:01 PM
Creation date
8/8/2022 12:14:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
PLANNING BOARD
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/20/2022
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
___ <br />,M iGZSPCannn�° B <br />..__....._ 2_ e:...................:: oas ... <br />76 Great Neck Road North <br />Nashpee, Massachusetts 02649 <br />Mr. Lehrer noted they will not use "increase in property tax rates". People get turned off when they think <br />about tax increases. When we discussed, a big goal is to get at specific actionable items. If it directly <br />impacts their wallet, everyone would say no. <br />Ms. Waygan stated questions three, four, five, and six will deal with zoning charrettes afterwards. She <br />asked what they would do about question seven, she wanted it merged with question one and <br />wondered if that was possible. She thought it was redundant of the first question. <br />Mr. Lehrer commented that question one gets at the general economic development strategies in terms <br />of uses, the other is what should we subsidize or should we provide tax breaks, or some other <br />incentive. We can keep it for now and reevaluate. <br />Ms. Faulkner stated to keep that question. <br />Ms. Waygan commented they are moving on to sustainability. She wanted to look up the definition, to <br />which Mr. Lehrer stated he will find a better definition. She went on to read the question, how do you <br />rate your understanding of sustainability? <br />Mr. Lehrer doesn't think the definition she provided gave enough clarity. <br />Ms. Faulkner doesn't see the need for that question. <br />Mr. Lehrer stated this question gets at the persons understanding of the issues. It could impact how <br />they respond but he didn't want to alienate or patronize our residents and assume they don't know <br />anything, he is not opposed to striking it. <br />Ms. Waygan reiterated they are going to keep the definition and define sustainability up top, but strike <br />question one. She also didn't think they needed question two. She asked how concerned they were <br />about sustainability issues, these are from the MVP. <br />Mr. Fulone thinks if you are going to keep question three you need to keep question two. <br />Ms. Faulkner stated it's like asking the person taking the survey to be a scientist. She wouldn't know <br />deeply how sustainable we are she could only give a couple ideas. If we get a good definition of <br />sustainability she could intelligently answer. <br />Mr. Lehrer noted we are dealing with valuable survey real estate, if there are questions that can be <br />removed he is fine with that. We want the data gathered to add utility and value at the end of the <br />analysis of the results. <br />Mr. Richardson noted you don't want people guessing, you want them to understand as to not skew <br />data. <br />15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.