 |
NRAB Minutes December 3, 2002
Present: Glenn Shields, Doug Franklin, John Riehl, Paul Conor, and Lezli Rowell.
The meeting was called to order at 7 pm, noting uncertainty whether the chair, G. Shields, would be attending. D. Franklin. proposed the temporary chairing for this meeting by P. Conor, with the stipulation that format should be kept to discussion; no motions or votes should be entertained without full complement of the advisory board in attendance. This was agreed upon.
G. Shields arrived at 7:12. Discussion regarding notice for the meeting pursued; Shields and Riehl protested being unavailable to attempts to notify them of meeting posting. L. Rowell also expressed displeasure with lack of notice given to her regarding previous meetings, and P. Conor explained his diligent attempts to reach both by phone numbers provided to the HPG by Asst. TA, Rex Peterson. Shields and Riehl inquired as to the purpose of the meeting; Rowell responded that the purpose, as posted, was the general business of attending to outstanding minutes (Aug. 19 and Sept. 5, 2002) as well as the interest, as expressed by a quorum of the board, to have opportunity to discuss process. Rowell distributed and made available to the audience an agenda, with discussion materials.
Rowell introduced the minutes of Aug. 19,2002, noting her inability to vote acceptance for them as she had not attended that meeting. She inquired of the accuracy of a statement that an advantage of State-certified process "might lead to a better chance of getting state funding for harbor projects" when the CZM representative, Truman Henson, had explicitly told the Board of Selectmen' a Public Hearing (Sept. 9, 2002) that there is not a correlation between funding and State certification. Riehl recalled that his impression of Henson's response was that the State is non-committal, but the advisory board did feel at the Aug. 19th meeting that this stated advantage did exist. Conor reminded the board that Henson's only point of commitment to be gained through State certification process was the local
opportunity to amplify the Chapter 91 regulations.
D. Franklin moved to accept the minutes as presented of Aug. 19, 2002; motion was seconded by G. Shields. Vote accepted minutes, 2 - 0 - 3.
Rowell introduced the minutes of Sept. 5, 2002, reading from prepared notes for the board to follow. She reminded the board of the presentation by Beach Administrator, Suzanne Thomas, regarding concerns of impact to the Gull Pond sluiceway, and recalled her own response, and preferred that the minutes reflect the discussion to a summary. Rowell moved two amendments, adding the language, "Lezli Rowell advised the NRAB that under its enacted Town Meeting article, section 3 mandates the identification of natural resources within the Town of significant importance ... to take appropriate action as necessary to protect those resources, and that any Pond management intended to mitigate environmental impact to the sluiceway between Gull and Higgins ponds need also address entire shoreline.
L. Rowell discussed the impacts created by pondshore property owners which privately store and moor canoes, kayaks, and sailboats with a footprint of use at least equal to that of the lease rental, the impacts of such property owners clearing aquatic and pondshore wetland vegetation to create 'curb-cuts' and the many unpermitted docks and structures around the ponds" and "The NRAB's Spring, 2002 draft 'Natural Resource Information' pamphlet, intended as public education and for distribution through the Beach Sticker program, was given as suggested language to S. Thomas". D. Franklin seconded this motion. Vote to accept amendment passed, 4 - 0 - 1.
Rowell made a motion to strike from the minutes 'The NRAB voted 4 -1 to give an equal vote to all members of the HPG and to ask the BOS to confirm this decision" recalling that such discussion arose from her own inquiry as to the significance in the Aug. 19th minutes of the creation of the HPG, and her specific questioning of the board as to whether that creation vote conferred voting status equally. She recalled chairman Shields stating that the vote to create HPG did not define the voting status, the this definition would come from the BOS. Rowell recalled the Shellfish Constable speaking to the table in support of staff HPG voting, and that the generalized discussion revealed a probable preference by the NRAB to grant HPG voting; however, no motion was made or voted as reported by the statement in the minutes.
Riehl stated that since the HPG has been formed, the NRAB has a redefined role; he thought that the Shellfish Constable's comments were in the context of a HPG meeting. Rowell reminded the board that the HPG had not yet convened, the Sept. 5th meeting was of the NRAB. Riehl wished to check his notes, as the secretary of that meeting, to clarify whether a vote had been taken. Conor expressed that he recalled the discussion only. D. Franklin expressed thinking that the previous vote (Aug. 19, creating HPG) had clarified the voting issue. No second was made to Rowell's amendment to strike the language; it was agreed that that issue should be tabled to allow for review of notes.
Riehl questioned as to what difference there was whether the minutes reflect discussion or a vote taken; Rowell responded that minutes represent the public record of events, and it is a matter of public trust to report accurately. From the audience, Selectmen Mike May inquired of the record of past NRAB meetings, noting the need for the board to produce timely minutes, to which Rowell agreed. From the audience, FinCom member Arlene Kirsch noted that her husband, Hugh Guilderson, had formerly served on the NRAB, and acted as secretary.
Rowell then read from the minutes of Sept. 5th the paragraph beginning 'The HPG noted that a draft Shellfish Management Plan has been issued by the Shellfish Constable ..." and recalled that it had been a meeting of the NRAB. D. Franklin moved to accept the proposed amendment of the minutes of Sept. 5 by replacing HPG throughout the text of the paragraph to NRAB; Rowell seconded, Motion voted to amend 4 - 0 - 1. Rowell moved to defer acceptance of Sept. 5, 2002 minutes until such time as clarification of reported vote / discussion could be considered; Conor seconded. Motion to table minutes voted 2 - 2 - 0.
Rowell introduced discussion regarding the accuracy of providing minutes as a public record, noting the difficulty faced by advisory boards to handle record-keeping while involved in discussion, as contrasted to the regulatory boards being provided with a committee secretary. There was consensus that both the NRAB and the HPG may be better served if secretarial support is available. D. Franklin moved to authorize chairman G. Shields to inquire of the availability of a committee secretary to support the NRAB, while congratulating John Riehl on his fine job; Riehl stated willingness to relinquish role in favor of secretarial support; Rowell seconded the motion. Motion carried by vote of 5-0.
Rowell introduced discussion of process, reading from notes prepared and supplied to the board, and audience. Riehl and Shields questioned whether the NRAB was the venue to discuss the process of Harbor Management Plan, as opposed to discussion at the Harbor Planning Group. Rowell, reading into the record the 1987 ATM Article enacting the NRAB and giving charge to produce and update HMP and SMPs, asserted that it was an appropriate venue for the NRAB to discuss and consider process as pertains to the HMP. Conor acknowledged the Town Meeting
mandate and noted that the State certification process regulation calls for the inclusion of a Planing board member; he took this as expectation that process should include such scope as shoreline land use and water quality issues. Conor recalled that the origin of the HPG- process was a meeting held without NRAB involvement, between CZM representative Henson, Shellfish Constable B. Walton and Health/Conservation Agent, E. Beebe - and he protested that such a meeting has defined a scope of for Harbor Management Planning that is just Marina, Shellfish and Public Access. Conor concluded with statement that he has no problem with working on those topics with HPG but is troubled by the process. Franklin expressed concerns about the process, stated that there needs to be priorities. lie felt that while the HPG holds
a vote of accepting substance, submissions should return to the NRAB for voting approval, and that only through consensus will material be accepted. Franklin noted that state agencies look at different concerns than the town will, but he felt it still in the Town's interest to do a certified plan.
Conor stated that he is troubled by difficulty discussing process in the larger HPG context, in that chair R. Peterson does not permit consideration of scoping beyond the voted Marina, Shellfish, Public Access content, and that the NRAB remains a venue to capture the 'loopholes' such as water quality and shoreline land use. Shields expressed his consideration that the topics, especially water quality, are, 'fuzzy' and that a HMP should stick to what is 'concrete'. Franklin confirmed his perception that any HPG generated HW returns to the NRAB for its consideration. Shields stated that it has taken a long time to get where we are presently, and that the HPG needs to get factual information from the staff, that he views
consideration of process as obstructionism. He did not see grouping resource issues under an ACEC Plan to be later developed as a problem.
Conor reiterated that his process concerns lie not with the HPG and its scope, but that such process was initiated by the meeting of town employees to define scope without the NRAB's interest in any Harbor Management or natural resource issues represented. Conor stated that there is nothing 'fuzzy' in the consideration of water quality, he reminded newer members of the advisory board written for the 1995 Plan with guidance by County Health Agent, George Heufelder for clarity, intended to stand alone for distribution as public education for the layperson - and that the water quality chapter had since been reviewed with material for updating supplied by technical consultant to the NRAB, Sterns and Wheeler. From the audience, Selectmen Mike May inquired whether the board had paid for the technical services or received a
report, and where he could find a copy of it. Conor stated that the support had been funded through a block grant administered for the Town by Alice Boyd, which also covered cultching and other services, and that a report had been produced by the consultant. A figure expressing its cost is not known to the NRAB, and copies of the report are assumed to be available at Town Hall. L. Rowell offered the Selectman a copy of the Water Quality chapter of the 1995 HMP, into which she has introduced material derived from the Sterns and Wheeler report, but Mr. May declined acceptance of it.
Riehl read from the accepted minutes of Aug., 19, 2002 in confirmation that a vote had been taken instituting the Harbor Planning Group. Conor stated that the vote only defined the membership of the HPG, not its parameters, and he expressed for the newer NRAB members the history of Public Hearings have always entailed discussion and concern expressed regarding water quality. Conor thought that the NRAB could give its recommendation to support Water Quality content to the HPG.
Comments from the audience were received. Tom Flynn, of the Coastal / Pond Access Committee said that he understands the problems facing any advisory group, agreed that important issues are being ignored, recommended having confidence in this group, that frustration with BOS or Town Meeting ignoring the efforts is the nature of serving on a board. Bob Costa recommended that the NRAB review a copy of "Handbook for Committees" available at Town Hall; that there is no good reason for an advisory board not to produce its minutes; that it is common for any board or committee to "get locked into" its own venue, become insulated and overwhelmed, and boards need to reach outside for help and input. Costa stated that it is the frustration of waiting since 1987, through various memberships of the NRAB
and the BOS for a "completed" HMP which led
to the poor choice of the current process, but he suggests getting all the problems out for discussion, document of all requests for help and input, and that the HPG and NRAB cannot compete over content. Conor replied that he has spent three years asking the BOS to commit (by vote) to state certified process in response to BOS comment that any upgrading of 1995 HMIP would be thrown back to the board, and he shares the frustration of lack of progress. Costa expressed that while he is not in favor of using the state certification process for his own reasons of objection to it, the board should go forward, and send written inquiry to the BOS, with expectation of response, as to whether they intend to honor the Town Meeting vote creating the NRAB. Costa advised that failing a BOS response, the board could always
petition an article to Town Meeting to bring its own HMP forward.
Joel Fox, of the Shellfish Advisory Committee, recalled that the 1995 HMP received written commentary from Truman Henson that should be simple to redress (marina and dredging) to update HMP. Fox asserted that good work went into producing the Water Quality chapter, as he served the NRAB at that time, and there is no reason to rediscover the wheel - water quality is everything to Wellfleet harbor. Fox stated that the enacting Town Meeting vote is clear, that the NRAB should be assisted by the Harbon Master, H/C Agent and the Shellfish Warden, and it now appears that process has been bent out of shape in the staff taking a lead role, cutting the Plan in half. Glenn Shields replied that trying to take everything that is in the 1995 HMP is too much, that
he favors core issues and investigating water quality issues through an ACEC Plan. Rowell expressed agreement with J. Fox's suggestion that it is not difficult to take existing work, research the comments it received and update - and further agreed with Costa's remark that a board can become bogged down in its work, needing outside input. Rowell contended that this is the usefulness of Public Hearing process - that it finds the loopholes and helps to flesh out the work needed to represent the community; it is her recommendation (as expressed through the suggestion of five motions provided in the written agenda notes) that the process be defined by the NRAB, that all HPG-generated work return to the NRAB for endorsement, and that any SMP or HMP crafted needs Town Meeting vote to be accepted. She felt it was
definition of process that could
separate the staff contributors from the perception of both writing and then implementing policies.
Arlene Kirsch commented on what she saw as an ineffective struggle to define process, observed that the groups existed because the people shared concern about the outcome. She recommended setting past the internal struggles to concentrate on the subject, to review the Henson comments from the past and the Water Quality - and to be willing, as the NRAB, to put those subjects before
Town Meeting if not to be included by the HPG. Arlene agreed with some of the process points raised, but encouraged the board to "get down to it." Rowell responded that her interpretation of the NRAB process is that the NRAB should be the final stop, accepting harbor Management Plans or not, and bringing a whole project to Town Meeting. Conor observed that the NRAB's charge is deliberately broad in that they are meant to represent all of Town, the various users of the harbor and resources, and that is a good balance to management by departmental interests. He would prefer to proceed without the politics, work with the HPG and the shellfishermen and land owners and all interests, as is the charge. He felt the current process "puts a sword to shellfishers" without a look at water
quality, and the State reg. calling for a planning board member implies expectation of land use issues in the scope of process. Conor did not like hearing that the Shellfish Constable is taking his draft through Public Hearing process with no expectation to heed the comments and concerns, that he expressed at HPG meetings that he will not change his recommendations. Conor reported that inquiry at the HPG meetings included how to use State certification process to prevent the Board of Selectmen from changing the policies.
Bob Costa reiterated that the HPG is a "bull-dog" approach, perhaps an unwise decision, and that it is conceivable that two HMPs come before town Meeting. D. Franklin stated that while things look messy, he had faith that it could all work out. Riehl complimented Harbormaster Mike Flanagan for his presentation to the HPG regarding Marina issues, and commented that the group did not define a process for progressing on the marina portion of the plan; Riehl stated that he had e-mailed Rex Peterson suggested motions to be considered at the next HPG meeting, and saw that dialogue being the venue to address the overall issues of process. Riehl asked Rowell if she would present her suggestions to the HPG; she responded that she is unavailable for 4 pm meetings, will not attend to offer process suggestions,
nor has she sworn in to serve the HPG. Riehl offered to express concerns of defining process at the next HPG meeting. There was a consensus that the issue of process could be ongoing, that if the HPG would not adequately address water quality or other aspects that the NRAB deems "have fallen through the cracks" then the NRAB, in its independent meetings, could handle the subjects.
Doug Franklin wished to definitely continue having NRAB meetings as an opportunity to comment on the HPG process. Glenn shields noted that members have been caught up in the HPG pace, could come back to the NRAB table to clarify any views that may be different than the HPG; he stated that water quality concerns have not been ignored as ongoing program monitor the water and Wellfleet has good resource quality. Tom Flynn inquired who was in charge of what groups, to which it was answered that Rex Peterson chairs the HPG and that H/C Agent Emily Beebe would be developing a group for the ACEC Plan. Paul Conor shared with newer board members how the Coastal and Pond Access Committee originated from the 1995 HMP recommendation to form such a committee, that the NRAB has previously met with C/P Access to take their
inventory as submission to update the shoreline land use, and it seems odd now to have a Marina/Shellfish
Public Access HMP being developed without the committee's involvement.
D. Franklin saw opportunity to use NRAB to "flesh out" content, and moved to table discussion of process and chapters from 1995 Plan to a next NRAB meeting. The motion was seconded by John Riehl. Lezli Rowell asked members to read her submission of the Water Quality chapter with suggested amendments and included material from the Sterns and Wheeler Report for the next meeting. The vote on motion passed 5 - 0. A tentative scheduling of January 7, 2003 at 7 pm, unless in conflict with a HPG meeting, was agreed upon. John Riehl moved for adjournment,
Lezli Rowell seconded the motion; motion passed with vote of 5 - 0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:18 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Lezli Rowell
| |
