2026-09-30 - Lake Quinsigamond Commission

00:45Okay. Welcome to the Wednesday,

00:47September 30th, 2026, 700 p.m. uh

00:51Lakewin Sigamin Commission uh monthly

00:54meeting.

00:58Uh this was the call to order. Uh let's

01:02go down the meeting agenda.

01:07Uh

01:09to finish the call to order, uh has our

01:13external person connecting by Zoom

01:17connected in?

01:21>> Yes.

01:22>> Okay. Thank you.

01:25Item number two, review and act on the

01:28acceptance of the July Julian August uh

01:31meeting minutes. My understanding is due

01:34to problems with the Google memory as

01:37well as reviewing the uh recorded August

01:41meeting that the minutes for the August

01:43meeting are incomplete. But do we have

01:46the July uh meeting minutes? Mike,

01:48>> we do not.

01:49>> We do not. Neither of them.

01:51>> Okay. All right. We'll skip that item

01:54and do it next month. Uh re review and

01:58approval of bills and expenses. Uh

02:00treasure Maddie.

02:01>> Uh no new bills or

02:02>> that's correct.

02:03>> The report.

02:04>> Oh, we're moving fast. Uh

02:09public participation.

02:11Is there any members or any of the

02:14public here for public participation?

02:16Mike,

02:17>> I had no no express interest.

02:20>> Okay. no interest for public

02:21participation.

02:24>> Let's go on to the commissioner's

02:25reports then. Why don't we start at the

02:28uh one end of the table and work our way

02:30down.

02:31>> Uh Shbury Conservation Commission. We're

02:34dealing with uh several properties on

02:36the lake that are in violation of their

02:38orders. We're working working on with

02:42the um owners of the properties to get

02:45them into compliance. It's been a

02:48difficult path, but we're going to be

02:50persistent to get them back where they

02:52need to be.

02:54>> Other than that, there's nothing else to

02:56report.

02:58>> Okay. Thank you, Ken. Dean,

02:59>> no report to me.

03:00>> No report, Emma.

03:02>> Uh, nothing to report,

03:04>> Mike. Thank you.

03:06Um,

03:07well, I I've noticed I don't know if

03:10it's the offspring of the nesting pair

03:13of eagles that used to nest on Drake

03:17Island or what, but uh, and being out on

03:20the lake, I've noticed that some eagles

03:22are sitting on a tree near the previous

03:26nest on Drake Island as to whether

03:29they're eye eyeing it in terms of a

03:31future nesting or just looking at the

03:34whole old homestead. I'm not sure, but

03:37the eagles are still flying about the

03:38lake besides hawks and Canada geese and

03:42swans and ducks and the like. Um, the

03:45grasses have matured uh and floated to

03:48the surface and floated to the windwood

03:51shores. Uh, this is an annual event, a

03:53weed that grows and when it matures, it

03:56floats to the surface and

03:59when it goes on the shore, it dries up

04:02to weighing virtually nothing. But other

04:04than that, can be a kind of a bit of a

04:06nuisance to clean up, but it's an annual

04:08event. Um,

04:12uh, the last few days, everybody's aware

04:15of the, um, pretty significant nor

04:18easter we had. It, uh, one report I had

04:21from an butter on the lake, it dropped

04:23about four and a half inches to 5 inches

04:25of rain. The lake went up. Uh the

04:27commission uh

04:30uh determined that consequently to

04:34not have damage otherwise happen to a

04:38butter's properties um that we would

04:41have a no wake zone throughout the lake

04:44for the last couple of days. Um, if we

04:48talk about this later, I I'll I would

04:50like to propose that we rescend it as of

04:537 a.m. tomorrow in that the lake has

04:56gone down uh since the event. Um, and we

05:00also have a scheduled regata, uh, the

05:03snake race this Saturday, but it looks

05:05like the lake has effectively gone down.

05:09So, it's probably not as potentially,

05:11uh, injurious to properties as u boats

05:16creating a wake might

05:20impact the abuters. Uh again, the lake's

05:23gone down. Um

05:27uh to the at the moment, Mr. Chair,

05:29that's it. I understand we have another

05:30issue we're going to talk about. I'll

05:32wait and hold off on my comments till

05:34such time as we discuss that issue.

05:35Thank you.

05:36>> Okay. Thank you. I reserve my comments

05:38to the end. Maddie.

05:40>> All right. So, we did have uh an

05:42enforcement order, well, an amended

05:44enforcement order for project

05:46construction of a residential unit on

05:50Lake A. uh and they're next to a brook

05:53that runs to Lake Quincig. So, we did

05:56amend their enforcement order since they

05:58have not installed their erosion

05:59control. So, we're working with them to

06:01get them back into compliance and

06:03hopefully not impact Lakewood Quincig in

06:05any way. Um what else? Uh Lake AB North

06:09docks. uh we have uh or DPW has sent out

06:14their license agreements to most of the

06:16property owners that have gone through

06:17the uh process with conservation and

06:20with Lakewood Sig Commission making sure

06:23that they had their stock uh plates and

06:27everything all set. So they have been

06:30issued license agreements at this point.

06:31Um there are a couple docks that seem to

06:34have been amended. So we will be

06:36discussing on what to do about these

06:38docs, how to pull these docks out. um in

06:40the next coming weeks with DPW.

06:44>> Thank you, Maddie.

06:44>> Yep.

06:45>> Uh Matt,

06:47>> being the newest member, I have nothing

06:49to report, but want to say thank you for

06:52allowing me on sport. I'm looking

06:53forward to working with everybody.

06:54>> Oh, we're glad to have you. Uh Shuy

06:58Police,

06:58>> uh I'm Officer Charlotte for those who

07:00don't know. Uh Shrey Police Marine Unit.

07:04Um the only thing to report is our

07:06staffing uh for the lake. Um we're

07:08starting to dwindle down due to the

07:10temperatures, but um we're still keeping

07:12it staffed for weekends, I believe, and

07:15for warmer weather events. Um just

07:18yesterday, we started to remove some of

07:19the buoys for the riata races that are

07:22coming up. Uh the remaining buoys will

07:25be uh removed in the coming days or next

07:28week as well. Um

07:34believe that's it for that. Our our boat

07:36will remain in the water until

07:38approximately November 1st um when

07:40whenever the last riata races usually

07:42are our our jet ski is available but

07:44it's out of the water at the moment. Um

07:47and then the only other thing that I do

07:49have is I'm u putting in a request for a

07:52um trespass order against an individual

07:55and his vessels um due to numerous

07:58amounts of criminal um citations and

08:02civil citations that are going on with

08:04him. Um I do have the formal request

08:06here. I'll just pass down to the chair

08:09um for a hearing request at whatever

08:11date you decide

08:28all the information and supporting

08:30report are there along with the two

08:32documentations of the vessels that he

08:34was using. Are there any time

08:36constraints? Would next month's meeting

08:38be appropriate?

08:39>> There are no time constraints.

08:41>> Okay.

08:44So,

08:46do we need to act on this now or can we

08:48just put it on next month's agenda?

08:51>> Yes, we can put it on uh whatever needs

08:53to be done per protocol for you guys. If

08:55you need to send them out a notice uh

08:57for his uh rebuttal, that's perfectly

08:59fine.

09:00>> Okay. Does this need to be a public

09:02meeting or a regular meeting? It can be

09:03a regular meeting just with him. Um it's

09:06uh I don't know if you want me to go

09:08over the issues now or go over them at

09:10next meeting, but they they are pretty

09:12substantial. I I'm not an expert in

09:14this, but I think it'll be more

09:15appropriate to go over when it happens.

09:18Uh couple of questions I have. Uh

09:21there's no immediate issue that you'd

09:23want to have a special meeting to be

09:24done in a week or so.

09:25>> No.

09:26>> Okay. So the most convenient to all

09:30amendments on the commission then will

09:31be just to schedule as part of uh next

09:33month's meeting.

09:34>> Correct.

09:35>> Okay. Uh Mr. Chairman,

09:37>> I'll get clarification, but I I'll have

09:39to check the last time we did that. I

09:41think we have a hearing

09:43>> uh for that as opposed to a public

09:44meeting which would require um public

09:47notification twice in the paper. Uh just

09:50to see if that procedure needs to be

09:51followed, but just like we did for the

09:54wake boat hearing. Yes. Similar to that

09:56process.

09:57Okay. So, there is the the the long

10:00>> but I'll two week.

10:01>> Yeah. I'll get let you know. But either

10:02way,

10:02>> but we have time to do it if we're going

10:04to do it next month.

10:05>> Yep.

10:06>> This is primarily for next season.

10:08>> Yeah.

10:09>> Right. Exactly.

10:10>> Yeah.

10:11>> Okay. Uh I don't see any problems. Do

10:15any of the commissioners see any

10:16problems?

10:17>> No.

10:20>> Uh do we put it on the agenda? I don't

10:23believe we need a vote. So, we'll just

10:26put it on the agenda. Thank you.

10:29>> And Worester law enforcement.

10:32>> Good evening. My name is Michael Gerard.

10:33I'm a lieutenant with Police Department.

10:36I'm taking over this spot from Sergeant

10:38Jeremy Smith. Um, at the moment, I'm

10:41just kind of beginning to learn what's

10:43going on here and I don't have anything

10:45to report at this time.

10:47>> Welcome to the Lake Commission and we're

10:49glad you could join us.

10:50>> Thank you.

10:51>> Okay. uh I reserve myself at the end. Uh

10:54I don't want to take too much time, but

10:56there is one important item I want to

10:58talk about and I'm going to limit myself

11:00to that and that is an update on the

11:03local politicians response to the lake

11:05commission's suggested additions to the

11:08mass Senate's wake surfing bill S3099

11:13uh when the Senate uh reopens in 2027.

11:17Uh uh the 2026 bill's two restrictions

11:22were that white boats must operate in

11:24greater than 300 ft from shore and in

11:27water greater than 20 ft deep. The lake

11:31commission responded to that and pointed

11:33out that Lakewin Sigamin is long and

11:35narrow with an average width around 600

11:38ft. Thus in many places leaving no wake

11:42free space for small boat users not

11:44wanting to get swamped. The the uh

11:47Conigament Commission received five

11:50responses from various politicians

11:52agreeing that this was a serious safety

11:54issue for small boat users and also a

11:57fanish issue for them i.e. both leaving

12:00no wake-free lake for them to use and

12:03putting them at risk of swamping and

12:05drowning within 600 ft circle around

12:08each moving wakebo. Thus, the 2027 bill

12:12requires modifications dependent on the

12:15lake size and shape for Lakewigan and

12:18any other lake that has got an unusual

12:20shape. The five uh responses we got, the

12:24bill sponsor, Senator Ryan Fasten's

12:26chief of staff responded agreeing to

12:29work with the Lakeland Sigman Commission

12:31uh when the Senate opens in beginning of

12:332027. Shrewsbury's representative Hannah

12:36Kaine responded extremely positively.

12:40She followed up a week again later

12:43telling us she's contacted Senator

12:45Fatman to support this issue and she'll

12:47work with him on supporting it. Uh

12:50Worcester representative Daniel

12:52Donahghue responded positively as well

12:55and Worcester representative James O's

12:58Day's legislative director responded for

13:01him claiming he wants to respond

13:03positively again because Lake Sigman is

13:07at a unique position concerning the

13:10existing 2026 uh uh wake surfing bill.

13:15So I that's it. I just wanted to give as

13:17brief a summary as possible that the

13:19local political establishment is

13:22responding to what I consider pretty

13:24positively to our requests. Uh I could

13:27answer any more questions. I might not

13:29have that much more information if any

13:30commissioner wants to ask anything about

13:32it.

13:37>> Um Mr. Chair, when might this be

13:39actually taken up and um

13:43promugated as a new law?

13:46>> Uh that's the purpose I understand from

13:49uh Senator Fat uh Senator Ryan Fatman.

13:54Um but uh it nothing can be taken up

13:57until uh the mass legislature reconvenes

14:00the beginning of 2027 and uh that's when

14:04uh this will become an act.

14:08Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

14:09>> Okay. All right. That's my last comment.

14:13And so, we are now finished with the

14:16commissioner's reports. Uh, and it's

14:18time to review and possibly take action

14:21on the removal of a 30 foot four 34 foot

14:26long house boat located on Lake

14:28Quincigan. Uh,

14:33is the owner of the house of boat Paulo

14:35Martins?

14:36>> Yes.

14:37>> Yes.

14:37>> Yes, I'm here.

14:39>> Am I allowed to share my screen?

14:42>> Can you hear us clearly? We can hear

14:43you.

14:44>> Yes, I can hear you very well, sir.

14:46>> Okay. I I since you have not been at a

14:50Lakeland Sigin Commission meeting, I I I

14:52want to say a few brief housekeeping

14:54remarks. the the normal way the

14:57commission works um because we're

15:00required by Massachusetts law is the

15:03chair has two duties. The first is to

15:06ensure and this is the most important

15:08one that only one person at a time

15:10speaks. So each person who wants to

15:13speak has to ask the chairman to speak

15:15and uh when he's finished the next

15:18person who wants to speak can ask the

15:20chair and the chair just ensures that we

15:22don't have a large number of people

15:24speaking at one time. Also the chair

15:27makes up the agenda uh and the chair

15:31only votes when there's a tie vote. uh

15:35the rest of the commissioners, the other

15:37eight commissioners on the commission,

15:40uh they make the motions to go forward

15:44and they vote on the motions and if it's

15:46not a tie vote, I do not vote. Uh that's

15:50just a little bit of housekeeping I

15:51wanted to mention. Now for all of those

15:54people who are attending and those

15:56people who are uh watching in Musta,

15:59Shrewsbury and Grafton and other

16:00surrounding towns on uh our TV uh feed.

16:05I just want to again very very quickly

16:08uh mention four points on the brief

16:11history of what we're this is all about.

16:15First point, residents began informing

16:17the lake commission of a housebo on the

16:20lake around August 20th and 21st,

16:23including pictures, most of them

16:25claiming it was over 33 30 feet long.

16:29The pictures were posted on the Lake

16:30Quinc Sigman Commission website several

16:32hours later on Friday, August 21st,

16:362026. So that is basically an effective

16:38date, August 21st, 2026,

16:41uh when this issue came up. Second

16:44point, the Lakewin Sigaman Commission

16:46naively requested the law enforcement to

16:49measure the length of the boat to find

16:51out indeed if it was over 30 ft. But

16:54being professionals, law enforcement

16:57once they got a closer look at the boat,

16:59seeing its registration number, they

17:01simply checked out that out ofstate

17:03registration on that number and

17:06discovered that it was a Trojan model

17:08boat with a registered length of 34

17:11feet. So, we thank law enforcement for

17:13getting a definitive answer uh to the

17:15question of the length of the vote. The

17:17third point, at the Wednesday, August

17:2026, 2026, Lakewin Sigman commission

17:23meeting, a commissioner, I won't mention

17:26the name, made a motion which was passed

17:29to put an item on the September Lakewin

17:31Sigman commission meeting to vote on

17:33removing this house vote under the Lake

17:36Quincigan Commission rule number 31.

17:39That was done last month. Finally,

17:41fourth, the 50 pages of correspondence

17:45the owner of the houseboat sent the

17:46Lakewin Sigman commission over the past

17:49month, according to his insistence, have

17:52been shared with all the commissioners

17:54and are included in the meeting packet.

17:58all 50 pages. But due to time

18:00limitations, all of the owner's

18:02correspondents sent to the Lakeland

18:04Sigman Commission this afternoon arrived

18:07too late to be included in the meeting

18:09packet, but copies were emailed to all

18:11the commissioners. That is an extremely

18:14brief summary of the situation now.

18:18So I think it's probably reasonable

18:20since we now have uh Paulo Martins the

18:24owner of the house folk attending

18:26remotely to hear from him. Paulo can you

18:29speak now?

18:31>> Yes I can speak and I was not able to

18:35share my screen because when I tried to

18:37share my screen it I could not hear you.

18:41So first of all um good evening Mr.

18:43chairman, commissioners and everyone and

18:47thanks for the opportunity for me to be

18:49here today. Um um I am first I would

18:53like to introduce myself. I'm a small

18:56business owner real estate business and

18:59I own seven lakefront properties at Lake

19:02Migammon in all in Shrewsbury.

19:06Although I'm not currently living there,

19:08I live there for 13 years and I plan to

19:11return to Shrewsbury. All my investments

19:14are in Shrewsbury and I preferentially

19:16invest in Shrewsberry. I'm significantly

19:19contributing to the Shrewsbury community

19:21generating jobs promoting tourism to

19:23Lake Conigamon and I significantly

19:26contribute to the preservation of the

19:28lake. My seven properties generate a

19:30significant property tax. In addition to

19:33income tax, my rental properties pay 6%

19:35occupancy

19:37um tax to Shbury and 5.6% to

19:40Massachusetts.

19:42In addition, I pay annual uh dog fees uh

19:45for those properties. And I'm saying

19:48that because I believe that part of this

19:50money I assume that contributes to the

19:53protection of the lake. And I'm here to

19:55respectfully request the commission's

19:57consideration of a special permission to

20:00maintain this 34 uh foot boat that

20:04actually after removing uh 2 ft of

20:07platform on the back it will be uh 32 uh

20:11feet and we are talking about 2 feet

20:14over the limit of what is in in that um

20:20uh commission's rule. So this house

20:25boat, it's going to be used as a

20:27stationary floating p platform like a

20:30lounge adjacent to my property at one

20:32Sergeant Island.

20:35Before buying this structure, the house

20:37boat, I contacted the Lake Quincigammon

20:40Commission on August 4th and I asked if

20:44there was any jurisdiction against the

20:47presence of a housebo and a lake

20:50commissioner did not say anything about

20:53being prohibited or any size limitation

20:55that I should follow.

20:57He also CC to another commissioner in

21:00the email make him aware because there

21:03was something about the conservation

21:05commission as well and I received no

21:07response. I contacted again on August

21:1012th by email and I didn't get a

21:14followup a response. So I also tried to

21:17call the lake commissioner commission

21:20without success and because of time

21:23constraint by the seller I end up buying

21:25the boat about two weeks later in

21:28Connecticut and transported to my dog to

21:30the lake. A few days later, I had the

21:33police at my property and um later I was

21:37informed that the lake commission

21:40regulation prohibit motorized boats or

21:42vessels exceeding 30 ft in length and I

21:46therefore I'm seeking commission's

21:48consideration of this particular

21:50circumstance and the proposed use of

21:53this structure not as a boat but as a

21:57platform since it's not motorized. Uh

22:00the proposed uh 34 foot house boat is

22:04fundamentally different from a

22:06conventional recreational motorboat. It

22:09will be stationary and will not be used

22:12for navigation. This is an old boat and

22:16the engines are not

22:18operable. There's no fuel and I do not

22:22intend to use the vessel as a motorized

22:25boat on Lake Quincigamon. Its intended

22:27function is primarily as a floating dock

22:29platform as an outdoor lounge associated

22:33with my property.

22:35The characteristics of my property are

22:38also relevant and particularly relevant

22:41for this request because one sergent

22:43island is approximately 5 acres property

22:47with approximately 2,000 ft of

22:50waterfront in the most remote location

22:52of the lake at Flint Pond which has very

22:56low house density and navigation

22:58traffic. It's very wild, sorry, wide.

23:02And the property therefore has unusual

23:06large waterfront area relative to a

23:09typical residential property at Lake

23:11Quincigamon.

23:13And the proposed structure would occupy

23:16only a very small portion of this

23:18extensive shoreline and it would be

23:21positioned so as to minimize any impact

23:24on navigation, neighboring properties

23:27and other lake users. It's located in a

23:30very wide area of Flame Pond and

23:33therefore it would not uh cause any any

23:36problem and I believe the rule 31 is to

23:39prevent that large boats produce wake

23:44or large wake that can cause erosion to

23:47the shore and it can cause problems with

23:50traffic since since Lake Sigamon is

23:53quite narrow. So this does not apply to

23:56to this boat. And the location that I

23:59would propose to place the boat would be

24:02either in front of my dock or on the

24:05shore inside my property. There is a

24:08small cove and that would be far from

24:10any traffic. This property has two

24:14parcels. One it's the island itself and

24:18there is a second one. There is a small

24:20cove that I will try to show um in if I

24:24I'm able to share my screen. So this

24:28what I'm suggesting to place this this

24:30boat you can see that would not affect

24:34any way traffic or would be close to any

24:37house. It's very far away. It's over 500

24:41ft feet from any property. You can see

24:45uh the official property lines in the

24:48attached document that I sent and I will

24:50try to uh to show you and I believe that

24:54the environmental impact would be

24:56minimal. I'm extremely conscientious

24:59about protecting the natural environment

25:01and preserving the character of the

25:04lake. In fact, my business interest

25:07depends on the preservation of the

25:09nature and environmental stewardship is

25:12something that I take seriously. I would

25:15therefore be committed to maintain this

25:16structure in a manner that protects

25:18water quality, shoreline and

25:23I understand your concern about

25:25sanitation and that lakeon has been

25:29suffering a lot of persistent sewage

25:31spills. As a matter of fact, over six

25:33million gallons of sewage have leaked in

25:37to Lake Quincigamon in the last decade.

25:40So I would like to emphasize that the

25:42toilet of this housebo is not

25:44operational and would not be used. I can

25:46even remove it. There will be no

25:49discharge of sewage into Lake

25:50Quincigamon and the structure would

25:53essentially function as a stationary

25:56recreational platform rather than a

25:58conventional um liver aboard vessel. My

26:02request is the therefore not intended to

26:05circumvent the commission's regulation,

26:07but rather to ask the commission to

26:09consider whether a stationary

26:12non-navigating floating platform should

26:15be treated differently from a 34 foot

26:17motorized boat used for navigation. I

26:21fully appreciated the commission's

26:22responsibility to protect Lake Quincigon

26:25and to ensure safe and responsible use

26:27of its water. I share those objectives

26:30and would welcome the opportunity to

26:32work with the commission to establish

26:34appropriate conditions that would allow

26:36this unique property to make reasonable

26:39recreational use of its water front

26:42while preserving the lakes's

26:44environmental and recreational

26:46character. And according to the rule 31,

26:49the language that is written there is

26:52very ambiguous. It says motorized boats

26:55or vessels of any nature exceeding 30 ft

26:59in length are prohibited on Lake

27:01Quincigamon.

27:02And this does not have any comments or

27:06brackets either. So the phrase is very

27:09ambiguous because if you wanted to say

27:12all boats, you could have said just all

27:15vessels over 30 ft are prohibited. You

27:18would not need to mention motorized. And

27:20I asked several people about this and

27:24most people interpret the same way as I

27:27did. I also asked a chat GPT AI with the

27:31following prompt prompt. I copy and

27:34paste the exact wording of the rule 31

27:39and it says it answer

27:42um that the I when I prompted that I

27:46asked it does it mean all boats that are

27:49bigger than 30 ft are prohibited or only

27:52the boats that are motorized and bigger

27:54than 30 feet. So the answer from chat

27:56dpt was the wording means only boats

28:01vessels that are both motorized and

28:03longer than 30 ft are prohibited.

28:06Grammatically the structure is motorized

28:10exceeding 30 ft in length are

28:12prohibited. So the two conditions are

28:15the vessels is motorized and it exceeds

28:1830 feet. The phrase of any nature

28:21modified boats or vessels. It does not

28:24eliminate the word motorized. If the

28:26intent were to prohibit all vessels over

28:3030 ft, clear language would be something

28:34like boats or vessels of any nature

28:36exceeding 30 ft in length are

28:38prohibited. So based strictly on the

28:41wording you provided, a non-motorized

28:44boat over 30 feet is not covered by this

28:47particular prohibition. So I would

28:50kindly ask the Lake Quincigamon

28:52Commission to wave this requirement and

28:55grant me a special permit to keep my

28:57boat. It's we are talking about just two

29:00feet over the limit.

29:03It is something that for a boat that is

29:06not going to be moving around that is

29:08not going to be um blocking and causing

29:12wake. I think it's a very reasonable

29:15request and I really really appreciate

29:17it if you could grant me this special

29:20permit and I could even keep inside uh

29:25my property line as I shared with you

29:28would be I I have two parcels and and I

29:32could put the boat inside the the uh

29:36parcel K from the document that you

29:39have. I will try to share my screen but

29:41I will not be able to hear you at the

29:43same time. I will just share quickly.

29:50Can you see my screen?

29:54>> Yes.

29:56So the the boat currently is is right

30:00here

30:01and other potential locations

30:04that the committee could assess and and

30:08decide would be this here or this year.

30:11This area here

30:14it's it belongs to to my property

30:18and you can see the distance from other

30:20nearby structures. You know, it's the

30:24closest house would be 344t

30:28away

30:30if we put it here. And and as you can

30:34see, this belongs to to my property. You

30:37see, these are the two parcels that I

30:40was talking about. This actually goes

30:42over here. It's all this area here. So

30:45if I put the boat here at the property

30:47line would not

30:51interfere with any navigation would not

30:53cause any wake it would not cause any

30:56trouble would be sitting here at the at

30:59the u shoreline and this it's inside my

31:04property so I'm requesting permission to

31:07put my boat inside my property basically

31:10and as you can see this is an old deed

31:13or title thing and you can see that

31:16belongs to to the property and I share

31:19that with the commission as well. So,

31:21thank you so much for the attention and

31:23I hope that we can um find an agreement

31:27um and I would be able to try everything

31:30possible to adjust if you think I could

31:34keep somewhere in my property I could

31:37place whatever you think it's more

31:39appropriate.

31:42>> Thank you Mr. Martins for your

31:43presentation.

31:47>> Uh before I open the meeting to the

31:49commissioners to ask you questions, uh I

31:52would like to point out three points and

31:54these are just facts of Massachusetts

31:56law. Each one of them is relevant to a

31:59different thing you brought up. The

32:01first fact is concerning the rule 31.

32:05There seems to be a logical

32:07inconsistency in here in that you only

32:10presented the first half of the law.

32:12This uh the lake commission was goes

32:15back to 1916. It was actually created

32:19because of the problem of all the large

32:21steamboats on the lake quigamin due to

32:24the fact that uh two new trolley lines

32:28were built into the lake from Worcester

32:30to supply people on weekends to the new

32:34theme parks that opened up in the shores

32:36of Lake Wiggamin. And so uh the lake

32:40commission has had a long history over a

32:42hundred years dealing with

32:45large boats on lakewigan. Now if you

32:48read the full part of rule of rule 31 it

32:52says motorized boats or vessels of any

32:56nature exceeding 30 feet in length are

32:59prohibited on Lake Quinn Sigman. The

33:02second part which was not presented says

33:06does not apply to crew boats. Crew boats

33:09thin shells that if they hold eight

33:11people and used in racing are almost 60

33:14feet long obviously have no motors.

33:17They're propelled by oes. Four people

33:20can pick one up. It's made of a thin

33:22shell of fiberglass and and epoxy and

33:25carry it up to the boat house and and

33:27put it away. The reason that second

33:30statement crew boats are excluded was

33:33included was for the logical reason that

33:36obviously crew boats do not have motors.

33:40It was to point out that you had to have

33:43a special rule to exclude a boat that

33:46was longer than 30 ft that did not have

33:49a motor. So this has been addressed

33:52historically before and the issue of

33:56that you're presenting that somehow the

33:59grammar say says that it must be a

34:01motorized boat has been addressed by the

34:04ex historical extension that crew boats

34:09are excluded from the under 30foot rule.

34:12I just wanted to bring that fact up. The

34:15second fact is uh

34:19Massachusetts

34:22chapter 91 the public waterfront act

34:26standard residential docks and peers and

34:29excessive residential structures are

34:32generally expected to be open aired and

34:35unenclosed in particular on inland great

34:38pawns chapter 91 jurisdiction operates

34:43jointly with the Massachusetts its

34:44wetland protection act. Local municipal

34:47conservation commissions inspect docks

34:49for wildlife habitat disruption. A roof

34:52alters rainfall distribution and

34:54restricts sunlight penetration to the

34:57lake bed underneath, causing local

34:59boards to reject design during mandatory

35:02notice of intent phase. Now

35:07standard open docks are classified as

35:09water dependent structures meant

35:11strictly for mooring access and

35:13navigation.

35:15Prohibition of enclosed structures.

35:17Adding a roof, walls or fully enclosed

35:19cabanas over a residential dock

35:22transforms that structure into a

35:24nonwaterd dependent or enclosed

35:26footprint which is heavily restricted or

35:28prohibited under mass DP waterways

35:32regulations 310 CMR 9.00 00 unless

35:37specifically authorized for unique large

35:41commercial properties or for public

35:44purposes i.e. public.

35:47Under Massachusetts chapter 91, the

35:50regulations governing an inland great

35:52pawn, any natural pawn 10 acres or

35:55larger are even more restrictive

35:58regarding overhead coverage than coastal

36:00islands. I want to uh coastal Thailands.

36:04I want to add there's a reason for that.

36:06In Massachusetts, all of the bottom of a

36:10great pond is owned by the state, not by

36:13the residents. It's not like it's under

36:15literal law rather than repetiterian law

36:17or tidelands law. So now under

36:21Massachusetts chapter 91, the

36:23regulations governing an inland great

36:25pawn

36:26are even more restrictive regarding

36:29overhead covering than coastal inlands.

36:32The rule, a roof does not require water

36:35access to function. Adding a roof,

36:38permanent canopy, or secondstory deck

36:40over a dock changes its footprint to a

36:42nonwater dependent use. The penalty,

36:45nonwater dependent structures on a great

36:47pawn face an incredibly high regulatory

36:50bar. They require a more intensive,

36:53expensive review process, must prove a

36:56substantial net public benefit, which

36:58your private residential roof cannot do,

37:01and are almost universally denied for

37:04private homes. Now, the problem with

37:07this is, of course, it's you're asking

37:09your boat with the motor removed, you

37:12said, to be essentially a residential

37:15dock. But the problem is it has a roof.

37:18The question we probably should be

37:20asking you is if you're willing to

37:22remove the top half of the uh boat house

37:25down to just a single floating dock, but

37:29that we can address later. Third, what I

37:32want to mention, and I'll get over this

37:33one much more quickly, is Massachusetts

37:36has intensive environmental regulations

37:39concern concerning the shoreline and all

37:42of the aquatic plants on it. Your small

37:46I looked at the map ahead of time. your

37:48small segment K uh which you say is very

37:50shallow and full of mud. I know I've

37:52driven down the road next dirt road next

37:54to it. This is intensively covered by a

37:58whole collection not worth getting into

38:00the long list of environmental

38:02regulations that having a permanent

38:04floating structure on it would clearly

38:07again uh run into the Massachusetts

38:09Wetland Protection Act for protecting

38:12the native fauna. Uh, so I just wanted

38:15to bring those three points up so the

38:18commissioners and you, Mr. Martins, were

38:20aware of them. And now I want to open

38:22the meeting to the commissioners asking

38:24any questions of you.

38:28>> Yes, Ken. Uh, Mr. Martins, uh, I rep I'm

38:32on this uh, commission as a

38:33representative from the Shbury

38:35Conservation Commission. Um, did you how

38:38did you, uh, put this vessel into the

38:41lake? Where was it? Where was it

38:43launched?

38:46>> Uh the Flintpond public ramp.

38:50>> Okay. Um

38:56did you do any modifications to your

38:58shoreline to accommodate this boat?

39:06Is it um something about the boat or

39:09>> did you do any modifications to your

39:12shoreline to accommodate this vessel?

39:16>> No, we I tried to put the the boat in

39:19this cove and there was some rocks and

39:22then we removed to somewhere else.

39:24>> So you you removed rocks from the

39:26>> No, I I tried but I didn't.

39:30>> So you didn't didn't remove rocks. You

39:33didn't do any modifications to your

39:34shore to to accommodate this. So,

39:36there's no dock that this is attached

39:38to. There's nothing. It's just loading

39:40in the water.

39:42>> Oh, we we had a dock. Uh but the dock is

39:46it's I moved the dock from one place to

39:49another.

39:50>> And did that dock come before this

39:53commission for a permit?

39:55>> It had already permit. The dock had

39:57permit already.

39:59>> Okay.

40:01I'm tosset for now.

40:04>> Okay. Any other commissioner with a

40:06question?

40:12>> Question. No.

40:14>> No.

40:14>> All right. None of the commissioners

40:16have questions. Then I believe we should

40:18move forward. Any of the commissioners

40:20want to make a motion?

40:22>> U Mr. Chairman? Yes. I would like to

40:24make a motion, but I I I want to know

40:26how to word it because if we make a

40:28motion to remove this boat. Um it should

40:31be through a mechanism other than just

40:33us, public safety or or the should issue

40:36a citation um to have it rem since we

40:40say it's in violation. Police department

40:43should issue a citation to back that up

40:46to make sure it's removed.

40:48>> Okay. If if I understand what you just

40:49said, uh, we make a motion just to

40:51remove the boat and then the police

40:53department,

40:55excuse me, I I I made the same mistake

40:57in my language. We just make a motion

40:59that the boat needs to be removed

41:01according to rule 31 and then the actual

41:05law enforcement will be done by the law

41:07enforcement agency

41:09>> within 30 days.

41:10>> Well, I would say as soon I I didn't say

41:12it. It should be done immediately, but I

41:15want to make sure it's it's worded

41:17properly so that gives law enforcement

41:18the authority to to issue that citation.

41:21>> I it's an important point and I thank

41:22you for Yes. You should separate the the

41:25law enforcement aspects from the the

41:28decision by the lake commission which

41:29has authority over the water surface up

41:32to the high tide line of lakement that

41:35uh this boat does not satisfy the rules

41:39of the lake particular rule 31 and needs

41:42to be removed. Can I make a can I can I

41:44can I make that motion that we uh have

41:48this bill removed in accordance with

41:50rule 31

41:53immediately and that um

41:57it be a citation also be issued for its

42:00said removal.

42:01>> That's very explicit, very very

42:03straightforward.

42:05>> May I

42:07>> may I speak?

42:08>> No.

42:09>> No.

42:10>> We're there's a motion we need to vote

42:11on.

42:11>> Motion now. I'll second the motion, Mr.

42:14Chair.

42:14>> Does anybody want to add anything else

42:17to the motion?

42:20>> No. All right. Then I ask the uh

42:24commissioners to take a vote. Uh and

42:27we'll do it in the normal. I'll ask for

42:29I votes first, uh nay vote second, and

42:32abstensions third. Uh who wants to vote

42:35I on this motion? I

42:43I abstain.

42:44>> Okay. One second.

42:46>> I

42:50>> I don't speak on behalf of the

42:52department, so I can't answer that at

42:54this point. The chief would have to have

42:55make his decision.

42:56>> Okay.

42:58>> Okay.

42:58>> Um I

43:01fin.

43:02>> So we have

43:05two abstensions,

43:07six eyes.

43:09any we've already counted the exemptions

43:13to we had no may

43:17so uh it appears that the majority has

43:21ruled that we should uh approve uh the

43:25motion made by Ken and that should be in

43:27the minutes. Michael

43:33>> Mr. Martins, did you follow and

43:35understand what just took place?

43:38Yes. Would the commission consider the

43:43fact that I I raised the question in

43:45advance that I contacted the commission

43:48about this boat before I bought the boat

43:51and no information was given to me about

43:54any jurisdiction or sharing um the the

44:00rules. And the fact that I asked that

44:04would you would you by any moment

44:07consider that to be

44:10evaluated or taken into consideration

44:13for for your decision.

44:20We have voted and made our uh

44:22conclusion. The only thing I can add in

44:25the vein you're sort of asking uh I just

44:28listened to you explain that you if I

44:32understand right uh and also from the

44:34all of those 50 pages of written

44:37material that is in the record here that

44:41you uh essentially lived in Shrewsbury

44:44for 13 years. You mentioned again you

44:46own seven structures on the uh on the

44:48lake, seven residential properties you

44:50rent. um you have applied according to

44:53our records for dock permits for most of

44:55them for most of the years. You have uh

44:58followed all the rules and regulations

45:00for that which are found on our web page

45:02which in our web page right next to it

45:05has the rules and regulations such as

45:07rule 31 side by side. So I I just

45:11personally speaking now find it very

45:14hard to to believe that this was an

45:17issue of uh ignorance and not more of uh

45:21trying to move for forward and seek uh

45:25permission afterwards.

45:27Uh that's just a personal opinion. Uh

45:30you're welcome to take it whichever way

45:32you want, but the commission has voted

45:34on this and uh we are going to go ahead

45:38with our vote to contact law

45:41enforcement. Thank you for attending and

45:43presenting your viewpoint.

45:50Okay, let's move on to the next uh item

45:53on the agenda.

45:55review and possibly take action on

45:57adding a brief cover letter to next

45:59year's dock applications reminding

46:02applicants that both docks and boats

46:04must have the same owner and only

46:06Shrewsbury residents need uh Newton Pond

46:09uh dock and boat permits

46:17>> questions from

46:18>> what how did what was that again? I

46:21missed it.

46:22>> Do you have a copy of the agenda?

46:23>> I do. I I I just don't understand what

46:26am I missing.

46:27>> Okay. Uh well, there were a number of

46:31letters from uh

46:34uh people uh on Newton Pawn this past

46:39year uh understanding trying to

46:42understand who uh needed uh Newton Pond

46:45dock and boat permits. Uh so we added

46:48that to the this to the the letter whose

46:51main point was the the past several

46:54years there have been numerous

46:57applications for dock permits and uh by

47:01owners of the docks and then

47:03applications for bolts on those docks by

47:06other than the owners of the docks.

47:09apparently people renting those uh uh

47:13residents that the owner uh put the

47:16application in for the uh the dock. And

47:18so uh it was been asked by our secretary

47:21and also um the previous years by the

47:24town of Shrewsbury that if somehow we

47:27could simply include a uh cover letter

47:30explaining to them that the rules are

47:33such that docks and boats must have the

47:35same owner. And it has been fixed now

47:38and then by having to call them up or

47:40contact them by email to u please uh you

47:44know contact the other party and have

47:45them send an email or write a letter

47:48saying that both parties agree to this

47:51and we just wanted it to be on the rule

47:54page or everybody reminded before the

47:57dock permits were ex uh sent in next

48:00year to reduce the workload for the

48:03Lakeland Sigman commission secretary.

48:05>> Understood perfectly. Thank you.

48:08>> Do we need to make a motion on that?

48:14>> We have someone who wants to make a

48:15motion.

48:16>> Do Do we need one?

48:17>> Yeah.

48:17>> Make a motion that we accept that which

48:19you uh annunciated, Mr. Chair,

48:22>> in terms of the cover letter.

48:24>> All right. Anybody you spend second?

48:27Let's take a vote on it. I

48:30>> I

48:31>> I

48:31>> I

48:32>> I

48:33>> I

48:35declare it's been carried unanimously,

48:38so there's no need to ask for the nays

48:40and the uh ab extensions,

48:45Mr. Secretary.

48:48>> Okay. Item eight, review and possibly

48:51take action on a new dock permit

48:52application for Paulo Martins located at

48:56262 Southwin Sigma and add Shrewsbury. I

48:59assume this is one of his seven

49:01properties. Is that true, Mr. Martins?

49:07>> He left the call.

49:09>> He's not on the call. Uh

49:12my understanding Mike and I'm just

49:14asking to see if the it's correct is

49:17that he has submitted the the fee and

49:19all of the paperwork and it is proper.

49:21Is that correct?

49:22>> This is what we've received.

49:24>> Okay.

49:24>> We received a check as well but the

49:27check was absent the payable didn't

49:30wasn't filled in who was payable to

49:32which we could straighten out. Um but it

49:35was confirmed that he is the land owning

49:36about us through the through the town

49:38records.

49:39>> Okay. So, so is there still a problem

49:42with the the check not being payable?

49:44>> Well, I am not a I just I assume with

49:47the permission of of Mr. Martin said we

49:50could fail on the lake commission on the

49:51check, but I would do that in writing,

49:54you know, with him if this got approved.

49:56>> Okay. We will approve it and then you

49:57can do that by writing.

49:58>> Yeah.

49:59>> Mr. Chairman,

50:01>> I have a question with regards to this.

50:03I'm just looking at the the sketch that

50:06um Mr. Martin sent and I I don't know if

50:09he's doing any work along the shoreline

50:11and I don't know um if this would

50:13require a a notice of intent or an RDA.

50:18Um I think those questions need to be

50:20answered first before we vote on this

50:22and he the Mr. Martin should contact uh

50:26the Shersbury Conservation Commission

50:28and present us with something a sketch

50:32or something to show what exactly he's

50:34doing. If he's not doing any work on the

50:35shoreline and it's just something that

50:37he's that he's putting in the lake, well

50:38then that's a lake commission thing. But

50:40I just want to be sure that there's

50:41nothing going on on the shore.

50:46>> Any other comments from the

50:48commissioners?

50:52I would agree with uh Commissioner Pledo

50:55that uh you should clear up

50:59any concerns in terms of the Shbury Con

51:02with uh impacting a shoreline uh before

51:06we proceed otherwise then to give

51:08approval.

51:11>> Okay. So, do we want to just leave it at

51:15that or do we want to make a motion that

51:17this uh proceeds uh with clearing up uh

51:22these necessary issues before we uh

51:24issue the document?

51:26>> I mean, you you could just hold it over

51:28maybe for next meeting and if Mr.

51:32Martins comes be comes into the

51:34conservation agents or send something to

51:36the conservation agent where we could

51:38clear up any questions then maybe next

51:40uh meeting this could be voted on. It

51:42could be simple. Um but okay,

51:44>> we just need to know exactly.

51:46>> Could you send a uh a simple shot email

51:48to uh to the chair and the and the

51:51secretary uh just listing uh detail, no

51:55more than a couple of sentences what you

51:57just said and then we'll forward that

51:59letter to Mr. Martin.

52:00>> Yep.

52:01Okay. Thank you.

52:02>> I'll have the conservation agent do

52:04that.

52:05>> All right.

52:06Any further comments on that item?

52:11>> Uh, do we need to make a motion to

52:13continue the hearing or I guess it's not

52:16here, right? So, I guess it doesn't

52:18matter.

52:25>> I do not have an answer to that

52:27question. I I would make

52:30I make a motion.

52:31>> I think that's to say yes. Do we have a

52:33motion?

52:34>> Yeah, I make a motion to continue the

52:36review of the new dock permit

52:38application for 262 South Sigman at

52:41Shrewsbury to the October Lake

52:44Commission meeting.

52:45>> We have a second.

52:46>> Second.

52:47>> Can we have a vote on that?

52:50>> I I

52:51>> I

52:52>> I

52:52>> I

52:53>> I

52:55>> Okay. I declared to the secretary that

52:58was passed unanimously. So there were no

53:01uh abstensions and no nays. Now we can

53:04legally move on.

53:07Item

53:09nine, update on the completion of the

53:112026 weed treatments in weed mapping

53:14studies.

53:23Okay, I'm I'll try to make this brief.

53:26Uh I I want to mention on this, of

53:29course, all of these reports that I'm

53:31going to mention that we've received

53:32from the completed studies to the three

53:35uh commissioners for uh representing the

53:37the two towns and the city's uh

53:39conservation commissions. You can all

53:42get copies of these reports which of

53:44course you'll need uh and you have to

53:47issue the uh under the wetlands

53:50protection act the concom uh order of

53:53conditions for the next five years but

53:55uh we'll the commission will supply you

53:58with all of the copies of the of these

54:00reports as well as the more important

54:02one which I'll say a little bit more

54:04about from the national heritage and

54:05endangered species program. Okay. Uh

54:08first item, Mass Fish and Wildlife

54:11Natural Heritage and Endangered Species

54:132-year permit for weed treatment on Lake

54:15Quin Sigman completed early spring 2026

54:19and approval arrived on May 28, 2026 was

54:22used for the following eight items I'm

54:25going to mention. Uh

54:28uh okay, the first item number two,

54:30water and wetland summerlong herbicide

54:32treatment or fan wart in the east basin

54:34of Flint Pond has been completed. uh

54:37water and wetlands has issued a final

54:39report to the Lakewood Sigman commission

54:42and uh we will supply that report to the

54:44three conservation commissions. Item

54:46three, the mapping of the endangered

54:49species Vassy's pawned in Lake Conig

54:53Consigamin's middle basin Bon Padet

54:56completed. A final report was received

54:59by Lakewin Commission. Again that final

55:02report will be uh sent to the three uh

55:06conservation commissions. Four mapping

55:09of intensive weeds in Lakewood Sigman

55:11middle basin B by TRC companies. Final

55:15report received by Lakewood Sigman

55:17commission and that report will be

55:18forwarded to the three conservation

55:20commissions. Now, this was the important

55:23one because I have to mention this

55:26report includes also the input from Dawn

55:29Patchet's Vassy's pawned study. This is

55:32required input for the National Heritage

55:35and Endangered Species Program approval

55:37of the next five-year weed treatment

55:40plan for Lakewin Sigma. Now, the old

55:442018 five-year plan plus the two

55:49consecutive two-year extensions due to

55:52CO expires this October 24th, 2026. So

55:58tomorrow's the first 24 days from now

56:00that expires and we do not have the

56:04permission to do anything for the next

56:06five years on Lake Quinn segment except

56:09I have been in contact uh with Missy an

56:12at the natural heritage endangered

56:14species program and uh this Monday

56:18morning she confirmed that by this

56:22coming Saturday three days from now the

56:25October 3rd 2026 6 they will deliver the

56:30approval to us unless they find some

56:33problem in that report from TRC which

56:37she expects they will not. So apparently

56:40we're not going to have any period when

56:42the lake sigamin is not covered by

56:45national heritage and endangered species

56:47programs approval for nuisance weed

56:50treatments on the waters and I was

56:52expecting it to come today. It hasn't.

56:54I'll carefully look for it tomorrow and

56:57Friday. Number five, the dash treatment

57:00of Fanwart in Old Faith Bay due to the

57:02presence of ASI's pawned there that

57:05requires this special treatment called

57:07dash that we've talked about a number of

57:08times has been completed. It was managed

57:11and paid for by Worester Lakes and

57:13Pawns. My understanding, we'll hear from

57:15them later on about the details. Number

57:17six, Solitude Lake Management's

57:20herbicide treatment of the sacred lotus

57:22in Flint Pond has been completed.

57:25Number seven, two volunteer water chief

57:28treatment water chestment poles

57:31completed this summer in northern in the

57:33northern inlet to Lakewin Sigmanaged by

57:36the Lakewin Sigman wershed association

57:38and worester lakes and ponds have uh

57:41been done and were successful. Number

57:44eight, the mapping of invasive weeds in

57:46Newton Pond by TRC companies have been

57:49completed. A final report has been

57:51received by the Lakewin Sigman

57:53Commission. And since Newton Pond is

57:56totally in Shrewsbury, the conservation

57:58commission will get a report of that as

58:00well. And finally, not last, item number

58:04nine, TRC's company, hydro raking of

58:07sacred lotus root structure in flint

58:09pawn is scheduled for the first two

58:11weeks of October, next week and the week

58:14after. It'll only take one week, but

58:16they wanted two weeks in case there were

58:17complications due to weather. The reason

58:20that is so late is the earlier mentioned

58:23herbicide treatment of the sacred lotus.

58:26We wanted to give it the longest chance

58:27to kill as much of the weeds before the

58:29roots were uh ripped up. Uh that is a

58:33complete summary. If there are any

58:35questions by any of the commission

58:37members, I'll try to provide any more

58:39information if they want them.

58:44No. Okay, we'll move on. Item 10.

58:48Update from Worester Lakes and Ponds.

58:50Katie Lyman.

58:52>> Mr. Champ, she's uh Katie's traveling,

58:54but she had sent an email in with a

58:56statement as to the update of what

58:58they're working on. Unfortunately, it

59:00does not include uh the the dash

59:03treatment that was done in Old Faith.

59:05So, I assume next month she'll present

59:08on that, but if you want me to read it

59:10all out, I I can do so.

59:13>> Brief. Is it Can you make it a brief

59:14sub?

59:15Not that uh mix and ponds program uh has

59:19been working on project blue, a planning

59:21initiative to take action on the impact

59:23of nutrient pollution impacting Lakewood

59:25segment. We are grateful for the

59:27community contributions so far into the

59:29project. A public meeting will be held

59:31to present findings and incorporate

59:33public input prior to finalizing the

59:35plan. The meeting date and location will

59:38be announced to the commission and

59:39shared through the Wor uh city of

59:41Worester social media accounts and the

59:43lakes and ponds program newsletter. Just

59:45an upcoming uh thing that she's going to

59:47be presenting and that's that was all

59:50she had.

59:51>> Okay. Thank you very much for that. I'm

59:54sure we'll hear from her uh now that you

59:56mentioned it. Yes. I I sent her an email

59:59uh early this week and I got the return

1:00:01message that she was traveling. I

1:00:03forgotten about it. Do we have any

1:00:05correspondence to review for item number

1:00:0711?

1:00:09>> Well, I have um I did include those in

1:00:12the packet.

1:00:14>> Um

1:00:16I can give you the

1:00:18>> I there were four if I recall. Yeah,

1:00:20>> the first three included my letter of

1:00:23response to answering each of the first

1:00:25three. The fourth one I also uh

1:00:29responded and answered and uh but that

1:00:32response letter from me to the the the

1:00:34person asking the question was not

1:00:36included in the packet. I assume it's

1:00:38just an irrelevant mistake. Uh two of

1:00:41them uh sent thank you notes. The other

1:00:43two I haven't heard from.

1:00:46>> Yes, there were four.

1:00:49And again that's in the uh

1:00:50commissioner's packets if they want

1:00:52further detail on it.

1:00:53I believe all of those the commissioner

1:00:55the commission or has responded to the

1:00:58chair.

1:00:59>> Yes. And and they were more or less uh

1:01:01private questions concerning some aspect

1:01:03about the problem or something and there

1:01:06was nothing no violations or anything

1:01:09just warning information.

1:01:11Uh, okay. Item 12 and we are supposed to

1:01:14set the next meeting date. Meeting date

1:01:16by CR Secretary has October 28th at 7 PM

1:01:20in the uh S Shbury Police Department

1:01:23training room which we're sitting in.

1:01:24The room has been booked and reserved. I

1:01:27assume the any there are no objections

1:01:30from the commission members.

1:01:32>> No.

1:01:33>> No. Okay, we'll accept that. It's done.

1:01:36Now there's just one thing left to do.

1:01:38We need a motion and vote to adjurnn.

1:01:42>> Motion to adjurnn.

1:01:43>> Second a motion, Mr. Chair.

1:01:45>> Okay, let us take a vote on it.

1:01:47>> I

1:01:47>> I

1:01:49>> I

1:01:51>> I think I did not hear any nays or

1:01:53abstensions, so I declare that one

1:01:55unanimous as well.

1:01:57>> Okay. Thank you everybody. The meeting

1:02:00surprisingly uh did get through in just

1:02:02one minute over an hour. I appreciate

1:02:05everybody's help in trying to get it

1:02:07done efficiently. Thank you.

1:02:09>> Thank you.