 Good evening everyone and welcome to the August 19, 2019 Town of Essex Select Board meeting. Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. And thank you everyone for being here this evening. It's going to be a warm evening. Our apologies for the lack of ventilation. The agendas can be converted into fans in their dual purpose. All right. First order of business, agenda additions and changes. Greg, what do you have for us? Two items and apologize for adding them now. We had the day off on Friday, so packets went out a little bit earlier than normal on Thursday. A couple things. The energy committee is seeking approval of a resolution in support of the Vermont Energy Investment Corporation's electric school bus pilot program participation. And also there's a reading file item for letter going out to Tanglewood Drive residents with some information about paving. And we have a public hearing scheduled to begin at 7.45 because that's already been warned for that time. We can't start that portion of the meeting any earlier. So what we're going to do is go through our business items and then when we get to 7.45 we'll transition over to our public hearing. So thank you for your patience with that. Can I get a motion from a select board member for the amended agenda? We amend the agenda to add business item 6G which is a resolution in support of the VEIC electric school bus pilot program. Second? Second. All those in favor? Oh, excuse me. Discussion. Andy? Is there a second thing that needs to be added? The 8-H? Right. Thank you. Can I amend that to say and item 8-H which is a Tanglewood Drive information. Any? Are you acceptable to that? Accept it and keep my second. Any other discussion? All those in favor with the amended agenda? Please say aye. Aye. Opposed? All right. Now we have public to be heard. This is the portion of the meeting where public members can speak to the board about items that are not on the agenda. Is there anyone here this evening who has something to say or share that is not on our agenda this evening? Sir, would you mind coming up to, there's a mic in the middle of the room? Thank you. Nils Giddens from Whitcombe Meadows Lane. This is in the category of safe pedestrian friendly community. As you know there's been considerable expense done to create three controlled pedestrian crossings of Allen Martin Road near Route 15. As it stands those are now the very safest, most smooth areas of pedestrian walkway in that corridor. Allen Martin pedestrian trail along there is in a sad state of affairs. There is increasing business along Allen Martin off into both Corporate Drive and Thompson Drive. Green Mountain Transit has provided two bus stops for the commuter line at Allen Martin and Route 15. And so my question for the select board and I don't need an answer tonight but I hope they will receive some consideration is with the expense on the pedestrian walkways, crossways. Can we expect better maintenance of the trail alongside as well as all season use as in snow clearance as well? Thank you. We'll look into that. Does anyone else have anything they want to share or say that is not on the agenda? All right, we're going to move on. Our first business item is an interview with Elizabeth Coleman who wishes to be appointed to the Conservation and Trails Committee. Elizabeth are you here? Would you mind coming up to the table or if you feel better standing at the mic, whichever you prefer? I don't know if this will help or not. That would be helpful here a little further. I'll lean forward. Thank you. So you're interested in becoming a member of the Conservation and Trails Committee. Can you tell us a little bit about yourself and why you'd like to do that? Well, I've been a resident here off and on for six years and I use all the trails and parks frequently. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thanks. Thank you. I've had an interest for a while. At one point I was going to do the Trail Caretakers program but I had a problem with my knee so I had to bow out. I just want to contribute to the community. It's a little intimidating. We're all neighbors here. It's okay. I guess that's mostly why. That's great. And now I'm a retired nurse so I have more free time and I just thought it's a good way to contribute and get to know people. Absolutely. Does anybody else have any questions for Elizabeth? Hi Elizabeth, thank you for volunteering 74 like this in our community. So you have prior experience in Cambridge? I was on the, yes. Are there things that you saw that worked well there that you're hoping to be able to bring to Essex's committee? It's been, I was on the conservation commission there I think in early 2000 and we were involved in creating a trail from the town center up to part way up to smugglers. It was a 6.2 mile trail. So that was mainly what our focus was during that time. I did become a little bit familiar with just how things in a smaller community work but it's very different in Essex. I am interested in the idea of linking all the parks, the park system and the trail system because I think we have a really incredible resource here. And I'm hoping that whatever I do can help support people becoming more aware of it, taking better care of it and having more respect for our resources. That's really why. Any other board members have a question for Elizabeth? Pat? So Elizabeth, what's your favorite trail to walk in town? Thompson. Good recommendation for me. I have a kid who's going to be bringing a dog along with her. What's the best in your recommendation? I often walk on Foster Trail, you know the Foster Park Trail behind the school. But I've been mostly walking in Thompson off Thompson Road trails this whole summer. I like them because they're flat. But you have to be very respectful and careful of the bikers. And I do walk my dog here. But I'm somebody who always picks up after my dog. Thank you for that. So first of all, there's a lot of ways you could spend your time as a retiree and we're very grateful to you that you chose to apply to be a member of one of our committees. So thank you for that. Greg, are there any other applicants for this position? Sometimes when we have more than one applicant, we go into executive session and we have a discussion. But we don't have a second applicant. And if it's the board's pleasure, perhaps we could move forward and take care of appointing someone to the committee today. Would that be acceptable to all of you? Would anyone like to make a motion? Andy, was that a hand up? No, you were grabbing your pen. I'd move that the select board appoint Elizabeth Coleman to the conservation and trails committee. Is there a second? Any second? Any discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Congratulations. You're our newest member. Thank you for allowing me to be nervous. You did well. I haven't come to any meetings. I will now. And keep in touch. Thank you so much. Okay, yes. What needs to happen next. Okay. Thank you so much. Thank you. Stay cool. Hey, thanks. Our next item of business. May I take a moment? I'm having trouble with Wi-Fi and I would like to use my, I'd like to turn my personal Wi-Fi on to connect. But I don't want anyone to think I'm on my phone for a reason. Oh, of course. You just need the password. I don't know. I can't get online and I'm super nervous that all these forms that are right in front of me. Do you mind if I move on while you do? No, as long as you all understand that I'm not disrespecting the process that's happening here. Thanks, Annie. So we're going to move on to 6B, which is the Class 4 Road Maintenance Policy. Dennis Lutz is here to walk us through. Dennis Lutz, come on down. This is a carryover from the meeting before where you adopted the road standards. As you know, when you adopted those road standards, there were some changes that the state had made to include in some elements that deal with Class 4 roads. And I think at that meeting, one of the questions that came up and I wanted to answer that first before I get into it and hopefully this is a short answer. But there was a question about how many hydrologically connected road segments do we actually have? And if you include them all for gravel roads, Class 4 roads, paved roads, curved roads, there's 799 hydrologically connected road segments. This is from Annie and I trust this explicitly. The total number on gravel and Class 4 roads is 370. Well, that's about half, give or take some. When we went through and did an evaluation, started two years ago, went into last summer. We worked at the Regional Planning Commission and a consultant to try to identify which ones did we agree with the state's analysis and which ones disagree. So how many met the standard and how many did not? And essentially of that 370 gravel and Class 4 road segments, 80 segments did not. That's about 20%, 21%. Over time as part of our stormwater, state stormwater permit for the community, we've got to bring those up to standard. Now some of those are outfalls, some of those are ditches, some of those might be culverts and ditches, culverts, ditches and outfalls. Last year we've got some money from the Regional Planning Commission, a grant, about $38,000 to do a portion and we did a portion of Bringham Hill Road that needed it. We've got another $38,000 this year, which we'll be working on this fall to utilize that money. And we have about a 20-year window to correct these segments. The dangerous thing about gravel roads is you look at it today and you look at it 20 years from now, you may have a totally different list because they change. They're not like gravel roads that are kind of fixed in place. You have storms, you have events that occur. Culverts get damaged. So it's kind of a moving target but it gives us an idea of how many we have to do each year. Some of these are going to do with road crews, try to get them off that way. This does not include the village. The village doesn't have gravel roads but they still have hydrologically connected segments on paved roads. I did not bring that with me because the discussion tonight is gravel roads and class 4 roads. So that's kind of background. The other question might be in the eyes of the select board. How many class 4 roads do we actually have? And we used to have 8. Now we have 7. At one point in time we considered the landfill access road a class 4 road. But since it's gated, the state no longer considers it as a class 4 road. It's just class 3 up to the gate and beyond that it's just access to the landfill. So it's no longer a class 4 roadway. But of those roads, there's only a couple that have any significant length. And most of them, the real small ones bring them hill lane. There's .1 miles, .15. Extension of Saxon Hill Road, .08 miles. Water Tank Road, there's actually a class 4 road that leads to the CWD. Used to be town, now CWD Water Tank off of Bixby Hill Road. That we may be at some point be able to get rid of just by working an arrangement with CWD since it's their access, deed the land to them, get it off our class 4 roads. At that point it's their road. Those roads have really never been issues. The larger ones that we've had issues with in the past has been Hanley Lane, the extension of Hanley Lane. West Sleepy Hollow Road, which actually goes from Old Pump Road all the way over to Route 128. And that's long, that's 1.95 miles. It's in three segments. There's an eastern portion of West Sleepy Hollow Road which has two houses on it and which is essentially a driveway within a class 4 roadway. There's a section that's still Pucker Brush. You might be able to get a motorcycle through going real slow or an ATV, but you're not going to drive a vehicle through. And then there's where most of the housing is developed, the West Sleepy Hollow Road portion that comes off of 128. So it's connected by virtue of right away, but you can't drive it one end to the other. And then the other one that we've dealt with occasionally is McGee Road. McGee Road is kind of a backdoor road that comes in to the backside of the park. And so it's an emergency access for us. So that's maybe a little longer-winded than I wanted to be, but that gives you the background. So in our ordinance on class 4 roads, the town has some statements in there which are consistent with state law. And 19VSA basically says class 4 roads are maintained only to the extent required by the necessity of the town, the public good, and the convenience of the inhabitants of the town. Essentially, we do not get any state aid for class 4 roads, and we can maintain them to the degree under state law that we want to maintain them, what the board wants to do. But in our municipal code, it states it's the policy of the town that no improvements or maintenance will be made by the town to any class 4 road, not currently being maintained as the date of adoption of the ordinance. That was 1992. This chapter is to ensure that the expense of upgrading these roads to accommodate additional development is not borne by the residents. So the policy that was established in 1992 was we're not going to maintain class 4 roads. Now we have the road standards that said, well, there are some conditions that you have to do certain things on class 4 roads. And so to clarify this for the future, we're not going to get into any and all issues on class 4 roads. And I know there's someone with sleepy hollow that residents have brought up. That's not the point of this. The point of this is to establish what do we mean when we say maintenance on a class 4 road from the town's perspective? And I didn't mention it, but I noticed on the agenda it says adoption. I think the plan of the board is it's not an adoption tonight. It's a presentation, discussion, and adoption comes at a subsequent meeting to allow people to have input. That's the general procedure. But the way the policy is written, and I think you all have copies. You should have a couple of in the beginning. We just explained McGee road was preexisting. We've done some maintenance up there. There's a reason for it. It's a backdoor entrance to the park. It's an emergency access. We've done that to keep that backdoor access open. We don't do a lot of maintenance on it. We might go up there once every couple of years, make sure it's still passable, and that's about it. But that predates the 1992 ordinance. And that prior to 1992. The landfill access road, although I've got it in here, is technically at this point, having checked the state maps, is probably no longer a class full road. So we may want to just take that whole thing out. But we do plow that for access to the solid waste district. We have storage behind it that we use. Solid waste district uses it for the drop off center. So we continue to do that. West Sleepy Hollow Road. We tried to define the situation on the major roads. Basically the class four portion, and that's the west side of West Sleepy Hollow Road. We feel it's sufficiently constructed that we'll continue to maintain winter plowing services. We've done that as the density of people has increased, along with all the other roads that we do plow. But we did put a condition in the policy that says, provided that class four portion of the road is maintained to the extent that it is perversible by plow trucks, school buses, and emergency vehicles without damage to those vehicles caused by lack of road maintenance. We want to be able to get up there and do our job and get back out. And then there's no denier about excluding the eastern portion, which I explained earlier. So the way we said that, the town's position is this, given the new road standards. And this is a change for what we've done in the past. And it could be over the long run, costly for the town, but we've decided to go this step. The town will accept responsibility for replacing culverts and correcting erosion damage, as required by the road and bridge standards. Provided there's been supporting documentation that the road and the ditches have been maintained in accordance with those standards. What the standards talk about is if there's gulley erosion, it's really washed out. And what that really boils down to is, you know, a few years ago we had a major storm up there and there was a lot of stuff out. In that timeframe, Max might have been on the board, I'm not sure, but the decision was made that we would not put town funds into that road because there were policy and the residents had to fix it. This essentially is a get out of jail card that basically says if that were to occur again, we would fix it. But we also want to make sure that before we get to that point, the road is actually maintained by the people who live there, which they should be doing. So we wouldn't fix the culverts for both or replace them cross road culverts and driveway culverts. We'll bring available, we'll use available funds because there's some hydrologically connected segments on different portions of class 4 roads. If they don't meet the gravel road standards, we will use some of the money that we've been getting on our own resources to bring them up to that standard. We're not holding the associations or people who live on that road to a standard that doesn't exist. We want to bring them to a standard that says we now meet the town and road standard. That means putting stone in the ditch line, if it means ditching it, if it means replacing a broken culvert. We will do that as part of our cost to set up a beginning standard. That also is consistent with what's the board adopted last meeting at the road standards. So it's not only to meet the environmental requirements, but we want to better protect the road so that if a storm does come, that we don't have a huge expense in having to go out there and fix it, because we've already done the work ahead of storm events. And we found where we've done the stone lining and done the ditching, places like Brigham Hill Road, places that are far into Brigham Hill Road. We've done enough work out there. We've gone through some pretty nasty storm events where other roads in town have washed out. Those have not. So it's pretty clear if you do the work ahead of time, you can probably prevent a whole lot of problems and a whole lot of costs later on. And then the last one is we'll require all new development on Class 4 roads to meet the adopted road standards as well as the public work specifications. And we usually do that to determine what we need to have done. From the property owner's perspective, and then we tried to define that so that it's a little better defined, the standard for maintenance should be that required to meet the town adopted state road and bridge standards and the town public's worst construction specifications, with the exception being width of road. The next paragraph is really it. We're going to form road grading, gravel addition, and maintenance of ditch lines. Those are three basic things to keep that, you know, once we brought them up to standard, the people who live along those roads and the association, wherever they may be, have responsibility to basically clean the ditches, add gravel if it needs it, and grade it. So that kind of sets the standard for what our expectations are of them and what we're going to do. We're also, like I say right now, our plan on West Sleepy Hollow Road is to go in and do some of those stone drainage work at a cost of somewhere between $25,000 and $30,000, so I know there's been questions about equity and inequity along that roadway, but we're going to dump a lot of money into bringing that road up to standard. It's the longest one we've got, and that's a significant contribution by the town to include culverts and to include that fail-safe in case everything goes wrong down the road. What we do want them to do also is report to the town any evidence or problems, gully erosion, culverts that are bad, because if we don't know about it, we can't fix it. Or they can't fix it if it's a problem they've created. So we want to know what's going on there. And then what we asked is that every year, around October 1st, we picked an arbitrary date. It could be any date, but before winter starts, some indication back from either the, by us traveling it and looking at it or the association comes back to us and saying, yes, we went out there, we graded it twice, we pitched 200 feet of road line and we added four loads of gravel. We'll look at it, and that's fine. We want to just make sure that there's a joint effort on those class four roads that we're picking up the underlying problems, the greater responsibility, but we're not relieving, we're not advocating all the responsibility under ordinance to say everybody else is homescot free, because that's not what they said in the beginning. So it's kind of that middle ground to try to find a balance between what we can do, what we should do under our permit and what the residents need to do. And that's essentially it in a nutshell. Maybe that's longer than you wanted to get me to go, but I wanted to summarize that because I think it's important that it is a delicate balance between the original document said no maintenance, now we've got drainage issues that we have to maintain in the attempt to do that. Questions or comments for Dennis? Dennis, is there any training that the town provides to the residents or the association so they know what to look for and when it's time to grade it or do the ditch work? Yeah, we've already done that and we'd be willing to do that again. We did it on West Sleepy Hollow, we walked that whole roadway with the association president. I did it to a certain degree and pointed out where the road had to be fixed, where some ditching ought to be done. We looked at a bad culvert. It's not a mutually exclusive just go do your thing. But again, if people call up and ask for assistance to have us come out and look, if they feel, hey, there's a culvert that's a problem, give us a call, we'll go out and look at it and then we'll make a judgment as to whether it's good or not it's not good. So that offer is always there to help people. In fact, we'd rather have them do that and step off and do something and find they've done it wrong. Dennis, apologies if I'm misremembering this. I'm trying to remember from some of the documentation from our previous meeting. There was an email in there that you had sent seeking some clarification about FEMA funds that we might be able to get. By doing this, would that bring us in compliance so that if there was an event that we would be able to get those funds to address some of those roads? Or again, apologies, I remembered. It's a good question. It's a question for which there's no good answer. VTRANS was not going to step off and give us an answer and say, oh yeah, now you're going to be covered. What's going to happen on all those is going to have to be a judgment at the time and one of the questions that FEMA might have would be a road washes out and that they've changed a little bit from the past because now they've been providing funds for remedies and for all kinds of things. So now the question that FEMA raises initially on is what's the town done prior to the event? If we have, for example, taken the money from the Regional Planning Commission, stone lined ditches and do the best we can and it washes out, that's at least evidence you can provide to FEMA to say we've taken grants, town money and put it into the Class 4 road. So therefore, if that major event occurs or even on any other gravel road, there's evidence that we've done it and that's financial evidence, that's pictures we take and we get done. You know, you store those things away and hope you don't have a FEMA event but you would have to make the case to FEMA that the town has actively participated in making sure that road didn't wash out. Then you might get funds. FEMA nationally is hurting for money and if they can find a way to not fund this and not fund that, I'm not faulting them, it's just the way it is. And if there's a gray area, they may not fund it. All right, thank you. Andy. Is there a path to full citizenship, becoming a Class 3 road or is that not really the intent? No, that's a difficult part of the ordinance and I know that's come up a lot of times. West Sleepy Hill is a good example because there's a lot more houses than originally. Originally there's a couple and now there's more. And there may be more. I mean, there may be a few more houses that develop up there. So it's a very good question. The policy basically says the town is not going to accept any new gravel roads. I shouldn't say policy, that's in the ordinance. So the question really becomes one of, if you look at our Class 4 roads, you would almost have to go back and either amend the ordinance. I don't think that the intent of the town is to allow development to come off those gravel roads. It's more gravel roads. That's always been my concern, is we've already got 23 miles. We do not have the funds to go out and pave them. They're about a million plus dollars a mile if you're going to reconstruct and pave them. We don't have 23 million dollars to go out and pave all our gravel roads. Over time, you could pick away at the ones that have the most traffic and maybe do that, but you're just not going to do that. So why in the world would the town say, we're going to allow developers to come in and add 10 more houses and put it on a gravel road. And now we go to 24, 25, 26. You bury yourself. So I think there's that provision of not enabling or allowing more gravel roads needs to remain. The question is, is there something unique about these old Class 4 roads that at some point you could say the density is enough to make them, take them over short of paving them. We've kind of gone under the position that if you want to take them, you want us to take them over to pave them. That may not be practical for the future. And I think you almost have to deal with each road on a case by case basis. And the truth of the matter is when you look at the list, there may be only, at this particular point, one that falls into that category, which is let's sleep at home. In terms of density. But you'd have to look at that in terms of, this is one, there may be two others down the road. Hanley Lane and McGee Road, if they were to develop, more people lived on, other things happened. Are you going to, again, wave the policy and say, we'll take them over? Wesley Bihal is in great shape. It's a good road. In fact, it's narrow, probably in better shape than some of the Class 3 roads we have. So it's a good discussion. But I don't think it's part of this discussion. This discussion should be, I think, established for the maintenance between residents and town. And that should be the limit of it. And those other discussions, I think, should come back another day. That's just my opinion. Any other questions for Dennis? Dennis, the documents you gave us for this topic refer to section 9.02.030. So are you asking us to adopt policy without changing the ordinance? So we're not changing... The ordinance, I think, the way it's worded, says we are not going to perform maintenance on gravel roads. And I think, again, you go back to the statute, I think we're allowed to do that. But we've now got the road standards that I think we have to, the question really becomes, what do you mean by maintenance? It's really the definition of how much maintenance you're actually going to do. I think it's a better way to go at this point than to go back in and change the ordinance and take that out and try and explain the ordinance, which you mean by maintenance. And we've done that once before. We had a policy change of the policy back probably 10 years ago. Not on this topic, but on another part of it. Do you feel that the ordinance in its entirety is solid? And does it need to look at? Because we're just talking about this one portion of it and tweaking policy to support it. But when was the last time the public works looked at? The ordinance? The ordinance itself and decided whether there might need to be updates. And has the select board, I'm sorry? Probably 20 years. Is that something that? We can go back. I don't think there's a lot in it that changes that would need to change. But it could and it may be, I mean I'd like to get this on the ground so that if a month from now we have a storm event, everybody knows kind of what the ground rules are. And also to help the residents who live along the road, because this is a, in my view, it's a good policy to be honest. But I think that if we get this done, then I think we can review the ordinance. And if at some point in time there's some other things in there, we take this and wrap it into it in some way, shape, or form. So I think unless, Greg, or Ed, what we usually do with this kind of thing is we accept your description and we adopt at a future meeting. So I do see one hand from the audience. If you have some brief, very brief comments to make, I'd be happy to invite you to the microphone, but please keep them very brief. Dennis, thank you. Hi, I'm Lisa LaBerge. I live on West Sleepy Hollow Road. Just a couple of things. I would like some, there's some things I like clarified in here from the documentation. The McGee, Dennis mentioned the McGee and landfill roads. That was going to be one of my questions because I couldn't find any documentation that the town was maintaining those, but he specified that one is a Class III road now. A paragraph one of this states that the Indian Brook Road is heavily used. The McGee Road to Indian Brook is heavily used. It's an emergency access is warranted and that's why they're maintaining that road. And I just want to make a statement that there are 17 people that live on West Sleepy Hollow Road and I think emergency access is warranted for all the people that live on that road also. And I think moving forward that this will help with that. That's a great idea. One thing I'd like to, I'm a little concerned about is the emergency access and if a fire truck can currently get up the road right now. A section of this mentions that if emergency vehicles are damaged getting up the road, but I watched a school bus and a truck that was doing some work on the road try to pass each other and they weren't able to. And then the truck had the guide to get up because it was damaged the trees at the top of it. And I don't believe it's as tall as one of the fire trucks. And I think it'd be great if we could address that before we say that the residents are responsible for any damage to emergency vehicles just to make sure that right now they can go up there because I'm not sure that they can without having issues because of the height of the road. And that was a really interesting thing to see. I'd like some clarification about the publicly owned section of the road and how that's going to work. The town owns around 600 feet of footage on the road. So who maintains that? I spoke into some contractors and they say well you only want me to do half the road. They kind of look at me like really? That's a really weird request. And how do we manage that? When we're doing the public section of the road and are we asking the residents to maintain the public road? And I think that's not on here. And it was, there was something about public on the last version of this. I mentioned that and I think it was removed and somehow that needs to be clarified. Who's going to maintain the town road frontage in here? And how do we manage that? Question about some of the documentation requirements. The residents of the road are required to provide documentation to make a report. And the question I got from someone else who's in the business was what legal authority and does the select board have the legal authority to require the residents on the road to provide documentation on whether the road's maintained on a regular basis? Like this is a public road. Can you do that? We weren't sure that was possible after looking at the Vermont state statutes and the Constitution. So what is the authority you have to ask us to provide reporting on a public road? And then what happens when someone doesn't do it? So there's, all of these requirements are in here but there's very little about what happens when someone doesn't do their share on the road. Who's responsible? What's the consequence? What's supposed to happen with that? Also I'd like to have, it'd be really clear when we're talking about the standards, what standards we're referring to because the class four standards from the stormwater permit are just gullies. It does not have the same standards as a class three road and it's very different. And so I would like to be really clear if I have to be responsible for maintaining the road exactly what standard, what is that called, what is that policy so I can know what I'm doing. And I will say that Dennis did walk me up and down the road to look at the road but I'm going to tell you I am not an expert and that didn't make me an expert on gullies and ditches and the requirements necessary. It was great that he walked me up but you have a town engineer, someone with a degree that does that and I think more training would absolutely be necessary to determine what is deficient and what is not. I don't think I'm qualified to do that. There's also some confusion about who is responsible for maintenance on the road and it doesn't address this. In the past, some residents on the road have said we don't have to do it because of a Burnett town highway agreement. Well, I got a copy of that and that agreement does state that they're responsible for maintenance and so what happens if those individuals further down the road choose not to maintain their section of the road and do their part and make their report. How do we as residents that live further up the road what's our process for making sure that they do their part so that we can have the school buses reach the children that live at the other end of the road. I know this is about the maintenance but I'm thinking what do we do and how do we make sure that we get the road at the beginning done because those people have not been doing their share and so that's a challenge. I'd like if we adopt a policy like this that we have some type of inspection of the road. Dennis says it's in good shape and I think it is but the mailman told me it's the worst road on his route and that it was worse than Osgoode Hill Road. Now that's, you know, not evidence of anything but I'm not sure that it's at standard right now. So if it's not quite at standard are we responsible for bringing it up to standard? I know that there's 17 homes on the road and it never got improved or developed to the level because of a lot of issues that happened over the years. We can't fix that. I just want to say that I've been working on getting the road maintained. I'd like to express the challenge it is. Right now I've got, I've made 15 calls to different contractors to maintain the road. Finding someone who can come up and grade a mile long road is challenging because they need a big grader and I've had five people with a grader that size say I can't do it. It's not worth my time. And now who's looking into bringing more gravel into the road who says you can't find the gravel that meets the town's standards because they're very specific. And so that's a challenge. So even if we, when we make our best efforts to have someone come in and do the work it's actually pretty hard to have someone come and maintain a mile long road because usually class four roads are short and you can find someone to come into a short section of the road. It's pretty hard and I spend a lot of time trying to work with contractors to do that work. So I'd like you to take that into consideration when you're thinking about rewriting this policy. Thank you very much for the comments. We really appreciate it. It's okay. Yes, thank you. So we've gotten through two business items but we are now at 745 which is the warned time for the start of our public hearing on the firearms discharge ordinance. We're going to just do a motion on that. Yes. Yeah, we'll wrap that up. We are looking for a motion to accept the revised policy on class four roads. Would anyone like to make a motion? Andy. I make a motion that the select board accept the recommended policy on maintenance of class four roads with any changes as modified after public input for adoption at a future meeting. There's a second. Second. Is there any further discussion? All right, all those in favor please say aye. Opposed? All right, thank you. Okay. We're going to transition now to talk about the firearms discharge ordinance. Every time this topic comes up, there are new faces in the audience. So I appreciate everyone's willingness to be here. Those of you who have been here through the whole time and those of you who are joining us for the first or second time tonight and for those of you who are watching at home. This is a public hearing and so the select board will listen to public comment and the public comment will be on the amended ordinance in its entirety including the discussions about the locations of the discharge allowed discharge, the dates of allowable discharge and the proposed shooting range regulations. So I'm going to just give a quick overview of where we've been for those of you who haven't joined us before. This is a continuation and the final step in the select board's process on revising our public excuse me, our firearms discharge ordinance. We have received so much input from the community and we thank you for that. We've had multiple public forums. We had a facilitator work with the community on providing input. We had an online forum where we received input. We had meetings where dozens of people have come and provided their feedback. We have all received multiple emails. We've taken private meetings with individual residents. We've had a lot of outreach and we really appreciate the intensity and the engagement, the level of engagement we've gotten from the community on this and we have been listening. We have heard you. We also have conversations from three different Essex police chiefs and legal opinions from the town attorney. We realize that this is a topic that emotions run very deep on in our community and we know that this whole conversation is appreciating for people to watch in terms of watching the select board grapple with the topics and what seems like obvious solutions and what seems like obvious things we shouldn't be doing. We are balancing a lot of needs, a lot of traditions, and a lot of personal philosophies. We are above all trying to do the best we can for the safety of the community while protecting the traditions of the community as well. So we are going to have a hearing now once the public has spoken, we will close the public hearing portion. At that point, the conversation will come back to the board and we will discuss amongst ourselves the amended ordinance. If we choose to make changes to the amended ordinance as it stands today, then we cannot pass it today. If we do choose to make changes to the ordinance, we will have to start the public hearing process over and I believe it would be September 23rd would be the next select board meeting where it would come back up. We would warn it again as another public hearing of the amended ordinance. But if the board decides tonight that they do not wish to make any further changes to the ordinance, then we will vote on its passage and its implementation tonight. Therefore, and after on our agenda, we also have a business item to discuss the notification form for shooting ranges that we're proposing. The notification form itself is not part of the ordinance. The ordinance dictates that there would be a form, but the contents are not part of the ordinance. So we can continue to discuss that separately from the vote on the ordinance. So I want everyone to realize that there's two different discussions that are going to happen this evening. So I would like to ask all of you before we get started for a show of hands who wishes to speak and keep your hands up. Okay, there's quite a few and we really appreciate that and we're going to try to get everyone in. We're going to have to time you so everyone can have a minute 30 seconds to share what they need to share. When you come to the microphone, state your name and when you have something to say, please try to keep it to information that we have not already heard. There's a lot of information we have talked about over and over again. If you agree with someone who has already spoken instead of restating what they've said for time's sake, we will time you and we will let you know if your time is up and you might have seen it before I'm going to be strict with you. If your time is up and you keep going, I'm cutting you off. We have a lot of people in the audience. It's very warm in here. Please be respectful of your neighbor's opinions and let's get started with discussions. If you want to come talk, the microphone is at the center of the room. I'm going to give you an opportunity to speak with the speaker. Folks, there are so many people who want to speak. You're going to get to speak one time. At the end of the line, I'm going to give you an option. Anybody else who hasn't spoken yet, I'm going to give you one last chance. I appreciate your patience with this process. You're up. Hello, Eric Bailey, Wilkinson Drive Essex. Currently, November 1. Starting in the autumn of 2020, the firearms rules, the hunting rules will change where the youth season will always be in late October, as early as 20 October. And the early muzzle loader season, which is targeting the antlerless deer, which is how you manage the herd will be as early as 24 October. I implore the board to consider moving that date to 20 October to cover both the youth season, which is any deer and is good for management, and the season is set out for management. The Ethan Trapper, who did the forest management plan for Indian Brook, was very clear about the detriment the deer have on the understory. I could read his full quote, but I think you've seen it. The northern heritage element inventory assessment for the town also emphasizes that the hunting in the forest and Essex being a valued asset. 20 seconds. That's the key of what I wanted to do is get those hunting seasons into it because the deer are taking away the, I mean, we're getting a monocultural forest because they're eating the small oaks and maples and such, and we have a monoculture of the less valuable trees. Thank you. Before I start, I have a procedural question. Can I give you a prepared statement? If I run out of time, you'll have it in your possession. Absolutely. Thank you. Just for the audience, we don't start the clock while you're doing your name and your address. That's official, but you don't get to use that time to... Thank you. Thank you. But please state your name and address clearly. Hello. My name is Mike Pelletier. I live on 69 Greenfield Road in Essex. I moved to Essex in 89. I moved to Heinsberg and I moved back. I've seen a lot of changes in Essex and I understand that this town's firearms ordinance is emotional and I think it's good to have a formal plan, but I have concerns about what you didn't include in the plan. Specifically about certifying that each shooting facility is designed to contain the bullet shot or other firearms. It is unclear what the criteria or basis is for certifying this facility in this regard. Previous meetings have referenced the NRA range manual. I've read the manual almost an entirety and that is for American Trap Association Fields, National Skeet, Shooting Fields, and many other organizations that are represented in there, too. These are for sanctions national or Olympic level events. It's out of character to compare them against a backyard facility. It's not appropriate. They have standards for distances for equipment, which fling the clay pigeons, the level of flatness. It's all automated equipment requiring a local homeowner to comply with. Those standards is onerous. It's really not fair. OSHA allows sole proprietors from their rules if conditions are met, including not being a general contractor, not having subs, employees, or whatnot. Can the town follow the precedent set by OSHA, a safety organization that allows common sense rules for commercial enterprises versus a different individual or mom-and-pop rule? I encourage you to delay and amend this ordinance to remove any ambiguity. Thank you, Mr. Pelletier. Hi. My name is Mia Watson. I live at 8th South Street in the village. I'm the granddaughter of John Rice and for the few here who don't know, my grandfather died 11 years ago when his neighbor shot a bullet through my grandparents' window. Well, he was target shooting with an SKS SMA at a rifle. My grandfather died at his own dining room table while my grandmother watched it happen to him. On behalf of my entire family, I'd like to extend our thanks to the select board for working towards these basic safety reforms. I know this was a really difficult decision. It really did take a lot of courage to move forward in the face of opposition. But this action is long overdue. I was 18 years old and starting my first year of college when my grandfather died. I'm now 29 and weren't just now doing something to try to prevent this tragedy from happening again. The reforms proposed by the select board are extremely moderate. It's not unreasonable for the town to manage basic safety concerns in backyard firing ranges. It's not unreasonable joggers and hikers to be able to use our parks in Woodlands without worrying that they will be shot. These proposals are less sweeping than what former police chief Brad LaRose recommended. For anyone who is here tonight to oppose this measure, you are benefitting from a compromise. I and many other Essex residents wish that the select board had gone further. I doubt what I am saying tonight is going to change anyone's mind. If you're opposed to moderate gun control you can easily dismiss my arguments as the emotional perspective of someone who is grieving. But to the select board and everyone else here I and many other residents of this town have rights as well and we believe that we deserve the chance to live here without worrying that we will be shot by a stray bullet. Thank you. Hi, Mike, Katie on Lost Nation Road and I want to specifically address just the registration or public listing of ranges. Unfortunately in today's world it doesn't take much information to increase one's risk to a whole host of bad things. And I've seen that firsthand a lot just with my job. The specific listing of people's names addresses and tying that to a specific hobby or thing they do in this case shooting ranges potentially opens them up to increased risk to them, their family and the property that they have and in no way am I trying to unfortunately ma'am I'm following you and I'm sorry about this, not trying to save that kind of risk but what that does open up to is targeted theft people in those firearms in the house it opens it up to maybe anti-gun vandalism or attacks etc. Take this one step further what if we're talking about making people register to have dirt bikes on their land same thing, people now know they have dirt bikes at their house etc. And it could be even just anti-dirt bike behavior because there's people that don't like motorized vehicles on the land. The point is that's not any of your intention and I know that but to ignore that increased risk to those people is to also be naive to the reality of the world we live in. We're all about safety tonight and we're all about safety but let's consider everybody's safety in this fact and consider is there a way to maybe not have this publicly available information to make it harder for those people who wish to do others harm and violate the law to hurt people. Thanks. Darrell Stoltz 11 Seneca Avenue Asks Junction. I am just here to express support for the ordinance changes as written. Thank you. Sarah Michelle Stoltz 11 Seneca Avenue I am here to express my support for these measures especially based on our changes of density and population and I want to thank you for your courage to address these issues. Thank you. My name is Ron Redmond I live at 18 Veil Drive in Essex Junction I want to thank you for your courage for doing this. I love that you have respected hunters and during hunting season I spend a lot of time at Indian Brook hunting season I just don't go far away. But I want to go all the other times I spend a lot of time there winter spring summer fall it's a great resource my three children have enjoyed it and I think what you have there's a great compromise and I encourage you to steam ahead. Thank you. Ed Wilbur Browns River Road I would just like to point out that the tragic death of Professor Reese in 2008 was compounded by an even more tragic outcome of the trial in which total jail time for the two convicted total less than two and a quarter years less time than you'd get for a second offense for drugs in Arkansas. I'd also like to point out that in that same time since the tragedy rather than making an effort to educate residents about gun safety and encourage people to have civil discourse we continue to spend tax dollars on surveys and focus groups which is doing absolutely nothing towards educating the general public. I'd also like to point out that in the case of Brian Murphy where his neighbor negligently discharges weapons towards his home I find it sad that the only thing that the police can do is recommend that we take all of our gun rights away. I'd say in a free society until we commit an act of violence against someone else it's basic common sense that gets lost in a frightened democracy. I'd also like to point out that the two ordinances which you guys have cited and used as your staff has looked into specifically are for businesses they are for profit and strictly say so in them the ordinances specifically say that they are for outdoor shooting ranges for shooting for a fee remuneration and the second ordinance that you guys cite it also says that it specifically does not apply to casual target shooting of private property. Nils Giddens, Whitcombe Meadows Lane town of Essex thank you for the emailed answers to my questions about proposed shooting in the Saxon Hill school parcel posed at the last meeting I note that is duly recorded in this meetings background materials despite the fact you are committed to appropriate signage during the six weeks in question I remain concerned about the safety of this policy we've heard it all the shooting needs to know their backstop and in the various nooks and crannies adjacent to this particular parcel the deer crossing neighborhood and the recreational Saxon Hill forest lands I would submit this is quite difficult if you're committed to seasonal signage you could also choose to be committed to permanent signage in fact likely reducing the shooting in the entire immediate area this is not extending the restricted area to private property that I believe should be the select board's primary goal now I know the problems that expanding deer populations pose to forest management but whether these additional 90 acres for recreational hunting would make a significant difference is debatable especially when professional programs may need consideration for truly effective control in closing I must also raise the subject of more general signage namely the lack of any mention how those entering the firearms restricted areas would know it this was an area that the firearms discharge ordinance committee of which I was a member felt had been sorely lacking and one that needs to be addressed no matter what final policy is adopted thank you very much thank you I'm Bruce post resident of one Cindy Lane I was elected the select board in 2009 and one of the first things I did was ask Brad Rose to take me up to the rice residents to see what happened John Rice just sat down for a cheeseburger when that tumbling bullet ricocheting off a rock came in the last words he said were oh no when we took up the ordinance or at least our research I think in 2009 and commissioned a committee I looked at some of the discussion threads and somebody said a gunshot is the sound of freedom well the John and Sheila Rice that night it wasn't the sound of freedom that they might have heard it was the sound of death and that's the reality so even if you're taking baby steps towards this goal can take them do something it has been too long thank you Richard smiles Locust Lane Essex Junction I want to thank you select board for the work you've done I know it's been hard work I appreciate the compromise I speak simply in support of the revisions that you are proposing thank you very much one point of clarification just quickly so this isn't the time to address the form the notification form that'll be after this okay that changes what I'm going to say but okay so Ben bro my family owns land on Lost Nation Road first of all I think it's very irresponsible to put in an ordinance referencing a form and then not have decided what the form's going to be because that can change what people feel about the ordinance so my family owns land and it's no dwelling on it it's legally posted we've always allowed anyone that asked to come across it to you know do any kind of recreation that they want the snowmobiles can go through it biking hiking I've also been sitting in my tree stand and have people come through walking dogs and bicycles during hunting season and I've never you know prosecuted against them or anything because posting isn't just for hunters it's against trespassing on your land and we do that because our recreation is shooting and hunting there and we want to know who's on it and I just feel like what other form of recreation on your own personal property does this municipality require people to jump through these hoops and have to fill out notification forms and liability insurance and I think that that's unfair just because my form of recreation deals with firearms and if this goes through then we are probably not allowing any any recreation on our land because we can't do the recreation we want to do Brad Kenneson Bixby Hill wrote the discussion over firearms usage has been educational for all involved in this process shooting sports enthusiasts we need to embrace safety at all times and be mindful of neighbors rights on the flip side for those who do not shoot nor understand guns we need to understand our rights and that a gunshot does not equal not equate to danger shooting can be done anywhere as long as it is done safely last fall the former chair revealed his agenda to infringe on residence tax taxpayer property rights justifying its necessity under the guise to protect the public welfare at that point it became very clear this was an anti-gun personal bias aimed at minimizing the use of firearms in our community this is further evidenced by the notification form and its honorous restrictions isn't it ironic that guns the select board is attempting to minimize the use of it at a private range can be used to hunt with on the same property once again we as residence taxpayers in shooting sports enthusiasts calling the select board to abandon this misguided agenda vote to eliminate the notification form and its restrictions and adopt an ordinance with shooting restrictions in the town park and a voluntary notification this would be a show of wisdom and restraint it's time to cease creating division in our community and instead bring people together excuse me the town charter allows for voters to force an Australian ballot vote by petition the petition to obtain those signatures will begin tonight we'll meet in a lobby after this meeting if the board votes affirmatory Gene White Jr. Maplewood Lane and the village I'm here to voice my support for the changes that you're proposed that have been proposed to the firearms issue for the sake of public safety thank you Sean McEwen 21 Turnberry red Jessica I was on the an alternate on that board and it's interesting that one thing that we said was an issue and nobody cares about it now even was signage you got places where you can't shoot now people that don't live in this town don't even know where those are the other thing is we got property that's been in my family since 1920s I have a hard time having to take out extra insurance so that I can target shoot to get my gun ready for the seasons test some ammo out that I loaded that's not palatable to me when it's not arranged and I'm there shooting out every day and I don't know if it's palatable anybody the other thing is we got signs up on the property that say no trespassing and I'll have people come on I like that idea of signing signage around where we're going to have that kind of change because I can't keep the people off anyway and then when I ask them did you see the sign I get a comment from the lady oh what are you hiding that doesn't sit well with me I don't know maybe the only thing is to keep everybody off snowmobilers everything and then I don't have to worry about anybody being on the property and if somebody hears a shot I don't know where it came from it wasn't me I'm lost nation road many of us in town like myself moved here over 40 years ago from Burlington area specifically to have land that we can enjoy when we pay taxes on and I've done that for I personally have done that for 40 something years in my yard I picked a lot with 100 yard 100 foot high background there hasn't been an incident in that period a lot of this fear is being driven by the media hype and just agitating the public who really is not familiar with firearms and shooting in reality accidental shootings and crime both have fallen at least by half in the last 25 years if you listen to the media you think it's accelerating increasing and getting worse not the case 30 seconds 30 seconds I just I fear that having licenses and registering your backyard especially just for casual use occasional use opens up if you have to do that you might as well say all of Essex has closed the shooting for private recreation recreation because will the fees increase and the requirements get out of hand your time is up thank you John de Merit 58 Brigham Hill Road here in opposition to newly changes of the ordinance things have gone through the hunting season since 76 we bought land in Essex and we are backed up to Indian Brook Reservoir property and in fact as a kid as children myself and my friends built most of those trail systems that are now currently used we've put no trespassing signs and posted signs on our property people blatantly disregard that and I'm not sure that if this ordinance gets passed that anybody is going to respect any firearm or trespassing signs as well as they don't respect any trespassing signs or no trespassing signs there are safety signs safety zone signs that have been effect for I don't know how many years in this particular case of this young lady I'm very sorry that was a blatant disregard of proper adequate shooting range situation it should have never happened and I'm very apologetic for that as owners of property owners I'm not sure that we pay a bunch of tax in Essex and I'm not sure that it's fair that somebody can control what we do on privately owned property when we own that much acreage I understand a shooting zone around parks I can get that but I think it's a little overboard the rest of what you're trying to pass through that's it, thanks Betsy Dunn to Cindy Lane I appreciate the work you're doing and I agree that with anything that's around a recreational area should have tighter rules around guns but I also agree that we should have signage around because I think that it brings it forward people see that and they remember it you know please listen to that, thank you I'm Jim Weston from 175 towers road extension the reason I'm here tonight is because you guys got a very important decision to make and I believe there was some misleading information that I have shot toward the neighbor's Murphy's house directly from mine and I just want to clarify that I have never shot toward his house I've been there since 1979 and my grandson and I sight our guns in every year, we shoot into a dirt pile that's 250 to 500 yards not even remotely close to the angle of shooting toward the Murphy's and I would like to invite the board or the you folks up to look at the property so you can see that it is a safe because I think such an important decision should be made on true facts not things that were misled a little bit and if I had done something wrong I would have thought that to please so the select board or somebody would have come and said I'm doing something wrong and I've never heard it I have had discussions with the neighbors with Mr. Murphy and with one of the other gentlemen and because of that I'm mutually bringing more material in and I'm moving where I shoot further down the road so it won't even be near anybody and I just want to know that everything is safe and we've done nothing wrong now, thank you Hello, I'm John Bourbon I live on 348 Browns River Road otherwise known as Route 128 my house is pursed on the edge of a flood plain there's never going to be any development back there I've been shooting there successfully and safely since 1988 I got a backstop I got no issues and I'm unequivocally opposed to this ordinance and all of the requirements for range that you folks have laid out as being the desirable attributes so thank you Good evening, my name is Chris Adams I also live on Browns River Road as has been mentioned I'm very concerned I oppose these proposed changes I'm very concerned about unintended consequences my wife and I enjoy the shooting sports we shoot on our property in a safe and respectful manner to our neighbors we do so infrequently and requiring us to identify document with the town that we now have a shooting range on our property I believe could have significant unintended consequences and I encourage the board to think through that very very clearly you don't know what sort of chain reaction those sorts of lists could generate thank you My name is Brian Sheldon I have 115 Jericho Road One of the things I like to say is that Essex has everything you know we have the biggest tech employer in the country some of the smallest tech employers in the state so similarly so therefore I support this in ordinance because you can't do everything everywhere so it limits where you can and where you can't use firearm I'm especially encouraged by giving my work on the Saxon Hill Advisor Committee that the school district owned portion was extended to be the no shooting zone we heard a lot about that there's one thing that I have heard tonight from both sides which is how do you know where the different portions start so I think whether you support or don't support this ordinance I think we could do with some better signage so not just for firearms as well as for Saxon Hill so thank you for your time I live in the village so I don't have a range I can't have a range but one thing that does concern me is that the information that you've taken as a basis or it appears that you've taken a basis for the ordinance seems to be coming from a document or documents that refer to shooting range facilities and those are I've looked at 26 different ordinances from North Carolina Texas, Montana Maine, Virginia all of them talk about the facility being a commercial facility and 24 of the 26 specifically say does not include incidental target practice on private property the other two if you look in the notes to the whatever their equivalent is of a slept board talk about specifically excluding firing ranges on or shooting ranges on private property and I'd like you to consider that that you seem to be comparing apples and oranges or taking coordinates that is for a commercial property and trying to put it into private property thank you Brian Murphy 187 Towers Road the first thing I'm going to say is in 90 seconds I'm not going to have any discussion about my particular property I will simply say to Jim who I have a lot of respect for and we talk it's all on tape that's the beauty of these meetings you can listen to everything I said and I'll stand behind everything I said what I will indicate to you I have a neighborly discussion here but sometimes the landowner is not there and that was one of the things on the notification form is you have guests on your property you're not even aware of what's going on when you're gone and that was one of the incidents when there was an AR-15 and there was no there were guests there and that's why there's problems so I encourage anyone to talk to me sidebar on this and go over it I think all my statements have been entirely accurate and they're all on the record Mark Redmond 11 Marion Avenue I want to thank the select board for taking this difficult as you are I'm in favor of the ordinance as it is I wish it was stronger in some respects but I can live with it as it is it's kind of inconceivable that 11 years ago somebody died and nothing's changed we're past the point of saying I'm sorry that happened we're past the point of saying we'll talk to this person about changing what they're doing we need an ordinance we need to put this into law and now's the time to do it thank you good evening my name is Elizabeth Adams I'm from 178 Browns River Road I live in the Blue Zone and have a fairly large parcel of property one of the unintended consequences of the shooting range portion of this ordinance I'm wondering if individuals decide to move forward and create the range as needed according to whatever form ends up being created might they use that range more frequently than they might have otherwise so for example if my husband shoots just to site in his rifle right before hunting season and we want to continue to do that safely on our property and we create the shooting range in accordance with the ordinance might we then choose to shoot more frequently resulting in more noise, pollution in the area and bothering more of our neighbors that is not our intention but it is one of the unintended consequences that might happen as a result of requiring people to invest significant amounts of money into creating their own shooting ranges thank you Kendall Chamberlain, Old Pump Road I want the record to show I am opposed I want no change to the ordinance I'm participating to maintain my right to appeal the statute that you refer to the sport shooting ranges it actually specifies that any area created for the operation use of rifles archery, pistol, shotguns, traps, key, black powder or any other shooting sport is included that means that the target practicing that I do once a year twice a year to site in my rifles is covered I think it's a bad precedent only the people that are owners of the property which butt the range and bring any claim of nuisance against that range there was an article written that you're going down a path where you're going to have some problems in the future we've maintained the same level at my place as long as I've been there we've been there since 1948 I think the town is going to run into some problems when you try to regulate them you should note the firearms laws pit many citizens' sense of personal independence and safety against many other citizens sense of collective peace and security and it goes to the heart of the balance of power between a government and a citizenry and that notification form is a bad idea with article 7 you're going down the path of trying to single out a selected group of residents under the Laurent constitution no one person, family or group is to be singled out for more benefits of government over another you guys are painting a red scarlet letter on my back as a target shooter thanks I'm Helen Donahoe, I live at 3 Walnut Lane I just want to thank you all for this I support the proposed changes I think public safety is important, thank you Randy Draper 184 Towers Road extension I am the unnamed neighbor to Jim Weston and indeed I stare at this large pile of unconsolidated material that he and his excavating crews have dumped across the road from us into which he shot for a while my sense everything that Brian has shared with you before is absolutely on the mark and that I as a on the tangent from that pile of dirt have still some concerns about driving my lawn tractor when there's firing going on in our neighborhood we are in the blue zone we back up to a large parcel of land that is contiguous with Indian Brook and hudders come and go we hear their gunshots it doesn't really bother me especially if they've checked with us if they're crossing through our property we have a safety zone because our house happens to be in the corner of the property I just say that I don't think we should be in the blue zone because Towers Road itself isn't in the blue zone but whatever I've said this before this is a public access not a tax issue not a constitutional issue and I totally support what you've done so far and encourage you to do more thank you is there anyone else who has not had a chance to speak who would like to speak during this public hearing sir are you preparing to come forward I want to shoot your gun you have to have insurance speak up tell them you own the property for 40 years I moved in here about my property forced to ride Indian Brook Road I bought my property when I put my property when I put the house I put up a shooting bank and the only time I shoot down there is when the hunting season comes and I go out and shoot my rifle and target it in what's going to happen with this you've got to have insurance I mean it isn't right it's my property and that's what I shoot on trying to tell you he's got dialysis through sir thank you he's very clear are you coming forward sir to speak yes good evening my name is Evan Hughes I'm a vice president of Vermont Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs almost every range in this state belongs to a club is a member of the federation you're requiring the property owner where shooting takes place to certify that their property meets the guidelines of the NRA range source book this is the NRA range source book this is not set up for somebody plinking in their backyard you're also saying it's unsafe to fire a .22 rifle for the purposes of target shooting yet at the same time at that same location you can fire a .30-odd 6 for deer hunting that's illogical you could have looked at what Colchester did in their town over there which abuts Essex which worked for everybody and nobody's had a problem with it you've got an insurance requirement on there based on North Carolina and the North Carolina statute says it shall not apply to private ownership properties where shooting takes place but only to substantial ranges so be frank with these people and tell them exactly what you're putting forward because I think very few of them have any idea that this is what you're expecting them to comply with my name's Ashton McEwen St. Essex I am diametrically opposed to the proposed changes to require insurance you know what you're doing you know very well what you're doing and I just want you to think about that come election day we all know where Irene Renner is not here anyone else who has not spoken would like to come speak during the hearing going once thank you everyone for taking the time to speak with us this is a very emotional conversation thank you for being respectful to your neighbors thank you for being respectful to the board we're going to close the public hearing and the conversation will turn to the board and we will be deliberating amongst ourselves and if the board so desires we will then vote so I would like to receive a motion from a board member to close the public hearing so moved is there a second second any further discussion all those in favor of closing the public hearing please signify by saying aye aye opposed okay so right so according to the agenda this is something that I wish we had adjusted at the beginning of the meeting I would rather not skip ahead to additional items of business that don't have something to do with this topic and I'd like to continue the deliberation and move to 6e final passage so that we can continue the conversation would the board be favorable of amending the agenda out of order everybody okay with that can I have a motion to amend the agenda to move 6e to become 6c so moved I have a second all in favor please say aye aye okay okay so we have before us an amended ordinance based on our many many many months of discussion our hearing the materials that we've reviewed would any of the board members wish the amended ordinance further Andy I have concerns about the registration of shooting ranges because the the only thing that we're going to do with it is check to see if the forms complete it will not I don't see any way that it improves safety and I have concerns that if an accident were to occur at a shooting range where we had information about the location and configuration of the shooting range that in a civil lawsuit a jury would find us liable since we had information about the range and chose not to act on it so I'm not in favor of the ordinance I'm in favor of the changes to the parks but not the registration if they were separate I would vote differently on each of them I heard tonight about the need for better year round signage I'd like to suggest that we do that so that it's clear where it's allowed where it's not I've also been giving thought about the insurance liability piece and I've heard a lot of good discussion about that and I'm wondering if it could be on this notification form it talks about frequent basis for target practice or rare occasions such as citing a rifle in deer season and that's two or three shots I've learned to cite it or something similar very low I'm wondering if the insurance requirement in this sense to say it's for those that are identified as frequent basis use and perhaps not require it for those that are doing it on rare occasion depending on which box they check and if they check the infrequent box and it turns out it's frequent then that's an issue that have to be dealt with but perhaps that's one way to deal with the insurance concerns that I've heard Andy I'm confused which agenda item we're on I'm sorry yes but we had that discussion tonight and I thought we were going to vet these we are going to vet the form but we need to vote on the ordinance first so hold that thought does anybody have anything to say in addition about the ordinance Annie I agree strongly that permanent signage is an important thing for reasons from both sides of the discussion that if you see a sign constantly you will make yourself more aware Pat you had your hand up I did I'm not sure where this falls but I'll say it now because why not as far as the notification form itself not specifics to the notification form but if we have that on file I realize that there's a lot with open meeting law and the amount of information that's publicly accessible to people now I don't know where the line is but there's clearly information that gets submitted to governmental agencies that is not accessible to the public you can't go into the DMV and ask to see XYZ's driver's license even though it's a publicly available document would this fall into something that someone could request from the town or would this fall into something where a person's or an individual's privacy outweighs the public good of a notification to me this doesn't seem like this is something that would be accessible if someone submitted a public information request because it contains so much personal information in the same way that I couldn't walk into the DMV and say there's an accident with John down the street can I see his driver's license they're not going to let me do that I look at this in a similar way that someone applies for a burn permit they give their street address they say when they're going to do the burning and it's on file we're not collecting a social security number we're not collecting anything that is any different than what's already on a parcel map for an individual's property so I would not say that this is something that is protected by privacy law but I would defer to staff if you have any opinion on that or that perhaps we should find out I think you're in the right place to think that this would be subject to open or to public records I see it as similar to a building permit those types of things that do contain property information that I think this would be a public document yeah, certainly not to poo poo, Greg I agree with you completely I think you're probably right but I would like to get legal information just because there is so much potential private information contained within the document I would just like to have an idea I thought I saw I was looking for you and I was like great great the Vermont Supreme Court over the years and it's likely to be public record but I'm not going to give you a definitive answer it's fine, I just want an idea it explicitly states in the ordinance that the information will be for neighbors and future residents. So it's explicitly states in here that it's public information. It does. Yeah. Great, thanks. That's an awesome catch. Any other comments or questions? So the question before us is, should the board approve the ordinance as amended? And if you do not have any further questions or comments or discussion, then if you are ready to vote, we should do so. Annie, do you have any more questions or comments? Eric Bailey is the first person speaking about the dates. I'm struggling to, in this moment, understand. I understand what he said. I'm trying to find that. The dates? The date, can I say? Absolutely. The dates are November 1st through December 15. In the ordinance. That's line 62. Thank you. Mr. Bailey informed us that he believes there's changes forthcoming in 2020 regarding the dates. I don't know whether those are official yet, whether they've been posted, whether the state has ruled on that. That is something that can be changed if we decide to vote tonight and then the dates come out. And we wanted to discuss whether to expand the timing. We can discuss it at that point. Hesitant to make the change now, not knowing for sure whether that's going to happen. The discussion is now further. I appreciate that. Our staff will take care of doing the research needed to answer the question. Thank you, Mr. Bailey. So thank you. Were there any other questions? I would just like to clarify that my question was simply that I needed to find the date on the thing I understood. Mr. Bailey, and I understand you. No, no, no. I just want to make sure that we're all clear that I, of course. I'm struggling a little bit with the language that's in here, understanding what triggers and offense that would lead to the fines that are listed here. Is it the existence of a shooting range that's not registered, or is it the use of a shooting range that's not registered? So maybe the language is here somewhere, but I'm not sure how we intend to enforce this. Because it has a start date of the January 1, and when somebody doesn't register until later and is discovered they have a shooting range, are they subject to fines back dated to the beginning of the ordinance? Or is it only on days that they actually pull a trigger in the cause of violation? It's not clear then. You had asked that question earlier, and I think Greg provided an answer. Greg, would you be willing to repeat your answer that you sent privately? Sure, the police would make an interpretation about that if they honestly need some more consideration of how you want to handle it. The police could handle it if it's a use thing, or they could handle it when you pull the trigger, or they could handle it of how long it's been there, and if it's not registered on a day-to-day basis. So the ordinance says $50 a day? First offense. So if someone is discovered, somebody has a target on a tree in their property or on a dirt pile, but they haven't shot on it for six months, are they subject to six months worth of $50 a day when it's discovered? Or how is this? I'm just trying to understand what we're intending to enforce. It would take some more discussion on what the police. Chief, may we ask you to weigh in on this particular question? It was great. You could do it either way. You could do it if it's a discharge of the incident, or you could do it when the range wasn't. I think I commented back. I don't know if you guys got that. Greg, is that forwarded? I think it was at the end of the day. Yes. Greg, do you have a microphone on? The problem we have is if you do it by the time that a shot is fired and you get a discrepancy about whether or not that shot actually occurred, then whether or not can you enforce. It's actually easier to force to say there is a range there and it's happening to say you haven't registered it so you were in violation. Otherwise, you're having to do it on a shot by shot basis of did it occur or didn't occur. You can do it either way and we will force it whatever way that you tell us to do it. But as I said to Greg, we would like clarity. So whatever you tell us you want to happen, we can enforce it equally and fairly to everybody. So we would like a definition and we're happy to help you with that, but we would like to know is it when it is fired or is it when the rate, when we get a complaint that there's a range there, we go there, there's a range there and we find out it's not registered. Does it start at that point? Does that answer your question? It does and in my opinion, that latter explanation feels like the more reasonable approach. So it would be day of discovery of the day that we learn. I would say it would be the day that we learn that there's a range there and it is not registered per the ordinance. Cause that's what the ordinance is. It's a registration ordinance. It's not a discharge, right? It's saying that you have to register your range and at that point we learn that it's not done. Not having to prove whether a shot or not occurred. If we can say, yes, there's a range there and it's not registered, that's a lot easier than a neighbor saying, I did fire that shot and the person saying, no, I didn't fire that shot. Prove it. You're not gonna take their guns away and do forensics? Correct. Well, it clarifies to me that this is, I don't think this is enforceable. I don't know how we prove that somebody has a range on their property. Ladies and gentlemen, the conversation is at the board level. Please keep your comments to yourselves. Thank you. I'm struggling with it still. You had other questions earlier over the weekend. You sent some questions in. Do you want to discuss those here? Let me look at my list. The other one, I think most of the questions of them have been addressed. You talked about the question of, right, you can have somebody denies that they fired their gun, but if the intent is to base it on a discovery of an unregistered shooting range and then the fine of $50 a day starts until they have insurance. I guess that sounds like that's the intent, but we haven't really said that. I don't think the intent was to make them, the intent was to register the range in the ordinance. I have another question. There's nothing in the ordinance that prevents someone from target shooting on public land. Is that our intent to allow or to, there's no restriction there in the ordinance? We do have a restriction that the only time firearms discharge is appropriate on public land is during the window of November 1st. There's no specific parks. There's the Regansworth parcel. There's the Horton property. There are other town-owned properties that are considered public properties that are not covered by this ordinance where anybody can go in target practice without having to have insurance without registering a shooting range. I see where you're going. I see what you're saying. I think what we're trying to address is shooting ranges on private property and we were addressing hunting on public property, but parcels like the Unsworth parcel, for example, we had an audience member asking if we were going to regulate on that property and we said no at the time. And I think we still stand by that. We're being very particular about those public parcels where we want to limit the dates. So I think this might, Greg or Evan. Excuse me, Craig. Ask if you'd like to say something. Absolutely. Because it's, is your question, can someone hunt on, say, the Unsworth property? Or could they establish something like a firing range? Could I take my 22 onto the Unsworth property, put a target on a tree, ensure that there's nobody behind in the background and shoot at that target all day long. And I'm not committing any offense anymore because I'm shooting a gun on public property. The ordinance does not cover target shooting on public property. I thank you for your question. I don't have an answer for you. I would say legally no. The way the outdoor shooting range condition is defined, I think we could go to those properties and hunt. The outdoor shooting range talks about shooting range, firing range, or other property where people may discharge a firearm for purposes other than hunting. It goes on to say that it may be allowed where discharge of firearms is permitted, provided that any property owner who has an outdoor range on their property shall submit to the clerk's office completed notification form. Unless the town is putting together a shooting range notification form on public land, I think that any target shooting on public property would not be allowed. I think we need to clarify that then because the language here says that, if you, it says that the definition of a shooting range is something that you've done on your own property. If you do it on public property it's not defined as shooting range according to the language that's in here. Bill, are you catching that? I hear you, I'll look at it. I'm not, I'm not. We're talking about posting say Saxon Hill or Indian Hill. And these are the times you can shoot. These are the times you can hunt on this property. Would we then be required, would we be covered if we put up the same sign that says this is the only time you can discharge Johnny's properties? What's the difference? If you come to the property at any other time and you are doing target shooting or whatever you're not actually hunting, you're just firing a weapon. That's the only difference I have. And the public is not expecting you there. We can talk about that. I don't think this is the forum to start bringing up these issues and ask me to start, sorry, all pining. Yeah. Any other? I think that addresses all of my questions until we get to the forum. Okay. I'd like to get a sense of the board at this point in time, whether you feel you have enough information to vote on passing this ordinance as amended. Pat? I would like more time, actually. I have some, I think I have heard some things that I would like to get some real specific clarification about. I know that we've kind of leaned one way or another. But the will of board, if we're going to vote, then I will absolutely vote. But I think there are enough open-ended questions that we may want to go back and take a look at. I don't want to say unintended consequences, but it did bring up some points that I think are salient right now. So my preference would be to get those addressed and then take a look at it in September. Thank you. Andy? I think we need to have the discussion about how we intend to enforce and also answer the question about whether shooting ranges are allowed on public property owners. A question first, please, Elaine. How long did we say this discussion has been at this table? Oh. You mean today? No, not today. We have had this board in various memberships. Right. It's been 10 years. So a 10-year discussion is a long time. And while I'm sitting here, what would be really easy to do is to find a way to put it off longer. That would be easy. That would be less frightening and a little simpler. I can breathe easier a little bit longer, right? But I could do that for three years. I could do that till the next person takes the seat. And so that doesn't feel comfortable to me. It feels to me like I need to be more courageous than that. However, I do think September feels slightly better to me, not as a place to put it off for more years, but as a place to put it, to clarify, tweak, and define more clearly these details that would make us all more comfortable to be confident. And I do understand that that puts all of us in a revisiting position. And I do apologize about that because this is a very passionate discussion. People are bringing themselves in their time here. And I don't mean to make it that we're all waffling and wondering. I mean to make it that we're all fewer, more defined, and more resolute, and more confident so that we can best serve our public. Okay. Well said. Max? I admit this is not perfect. Come September, it won't be perfect then, and it won't be perfect in a year from then. I've been on this board for a long time. I've been in many of these discussions for those 10 years. And I think somebody, I think it was Bruce, who said it's a baby step. I think it's a step in the right direction. I know that hearing we've gone too far, we didn't go far enough. We're doing it just right. I admit it's not perfect and I don't think we're ever gonna make it perfect. So waiting to me is just a delay tactic that is unwarranted and I'm ready to go tonight. So I'm in between the two of you. I am very conscious of not throwing out the baby with the bathwater and letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. We need to do something. We need to stop waiting. We need to stop postponing. However, out of respect to specific questions that certain board members have, I feel we do need to answer them. And so what I would like to ask is that we table this conversation, this vote, until September, at which time we will vote. We will get as much information as we possibly can. And at that time, this board needs to do what it needs to do. Andy? Just to clarify in questions. We have, there is a select board meeting between now and whatever the second meeting in September. Will we have a discussion about the details of the ordinance at that one so that we can actually approve it? Because if we change it at the next meeting in September, the second meeting in September. And we have to do that. We still have to have another public hearing. That's correct. So I'm assuming at the next select board meeting we'll see a revision based on. So you can warn another public hearing based on changes that you make tonight. If you're comfortable to make changes to clarify target shooting is or is not allowed on public lands, we can make that change and present it. And I think you can warn the public hearing and adopt it at the next meeting if you want to. If you want a clarification of what's gonna be the violation and how we decide that. As the chief said, what's your direction? We can clarify that and put it into the language and go forward. I think if you wanna have more information and more discussion at a future meeting, then it will take two steps. I guess it's a question of how comfortable you are tonight. I was gonna ask questions about what do you want us to work on? Those are the two things that I have. Four changes. The next meeting in September, September 9th, it's a joint meeting with the trustees. It's already packed full. I would not recommend having this discussion on the 9th. So it's, and that's the case, if you wanna have more in-depth discussion, then it would be the 23rd of September for more of a workshop and then warn a public hearing for October at some point. At this point, I would like to, I don't think we're ready to verbally instruct the staff to make specific changes to the ordinance. So that says to me, we have to give them the questions we have, get the answers back and receive a revised ordinance based on that. Are you willing or okay with having that happen and then that material being part of our packet for the September 9th meeting as part of the reading file at the very least? And if we have time, we could pull it out and discuss it. At this point, we are down to two issues about the ordinance that I can, so how we enforce an unregulated shooting ranges on public property. So if we have the answers that we're looking for, I'm not, I don't want this to go into October. This is, it's getting to be a bit much. So we need to do our job and there's always going to be more information that we would like to have to make a more fully informed decision. And we do know that ordinances have an amendment process. So if we do approve at some point in the very near future and we see down the road once it's implemented that there's something that needs to be fixed, we know how to fix it. I really don't want to keep going after all of the work that we've done so far. So would that be a sufficient compromise in terms of getting the answers and having that stuff be in our packet for the 9th? As long as it satisfies the requirements of the process. It can be in the reading file. I have a packed crowd tonight. I don't know if we're gonna be able to. Well, so if it's in the reading file and we approve the final, it can't be in the reading file. It has to be on the agenda. It has to be on the agenda. So. Special meeting? The other option is a special meeting. And knowing how difficult it is to schedule that, I'm still willing to do it. I am too. We could call a special meeting solely on that topic so that we're not putting other agenda items on it and everybody knows exactly what we're gonna talk about and that's all we're gonna talk about. Would that be acceptable? I like that a lot. I feel good about the specifically honing, cleaning, clearing, deciding, and then agreeing that we have a document and wording that feels really correct so that when we sit down again on purpose to vote, I mean, not that we didn't tonight, I'm sorry, I'm just using too many words, that we have already dug through and been really clear. Okay. So today is August 19th, somewhere between now and when is, if we go to September 23rd as a hearing, that we have to back up a week as the warning date, is that correct? I'm just trying to think, the ordinance, the charter to change an ordinance, if you make changes based on the warning, you need to warn it three days ahead of time. I think you can do it the 16th and if you have a special meeting on the 16th of September, which is a Monday, I think you can have it the following Monday the 23rd, but I wanna double check that. So then we should have our special meeting on the topic between now and the 16th of September? Okay. Can I ask board members after the meeting to go home and check their calendars and provide Greg with all of the evenings that they're available between tomorrow and September 15th? And we will hold a special meeting for the purpose of approving a final amended version of the ordinance and then approving another warning for the hearing. We're gonna vote on it. You're saying that we're gonna approve it. What we're gonna do is we're gonna vote on it. I think we'll discuss it and then if we're happy with it, we'll vote on it. And I think so that special meeting will be a vote in order to, and then if it's warranted, a subsequent vote on a warning for another public hearing to happen on the 23rd. Annie? Just to be clear for public, people who maybe don't know how that a special meeting is also something that public can come sit and be able to do it. Absolutely, 100% open to the public just like this. We'll probably do it here. Just wanna make sure that we're clear on the questions that need to be answered. You mentioned the target shooting on public land. Is that constituted shooting range? What's the intent for enforcement? Will it be enforced based on discovery of an undocumented or use of an undocumented shooting range? And then the third thing that I brought up earlier and I'll bring up again during the discussion of the forum is the liability associated with having knowledge of the location and configuration of the shooting and a statement about its safety and whether a Vermont jury would find the town liable in the case where if an accident were to occur and criminal activity were to be, somebody were to be convicted of a crime and then a civil lawsuit came afterward for compensation that the town would not be liable. And I think it would, I didn't ask this question earlier, but I don't know, I mean, I know Vermont League of Cities and Towns is our insurer. I'd like, I just wanna make sure that they're okay with the fact that we have this information in our possession, in our choosing not to act on it with the risk that it could lead to liability. I'm just sorry, just trying to look out for everybody in the town. Absolutely, I wanna give a scenario to see if you feel the same way about this scenario. We require all of our residents to license their dogs. And when a dog incident occurs, we know that the dog lives at that property and we know that they could be a dog, maybe it's a pit ball or a doberman or something. And we know that it's a potentially dangerous breed, something happens. Is the town liable for that dog's behavior even though we knew it lived there? The dog licensing is a state function, I believe, isn't it? So you're saying the town has zero liability because it's a state statute? So, yeah, and another example is my neighbor has a tree that fell on my house. They didn't have to register that tree and it fell off and it came out of their property, out of the my property, it's causing. Okay, do you guys have those three things? I'll follow up with you after this. Okay. So, all right, so we're going to table the vote on this ordinance and would anybody like to make a motion to do so? I move that the select board table the vote on the shooting ordinance until later date. I want to specify the date. Well, right, to be determined. May I have a second? All those in favor, any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Nay. All right, we will be tabling the discussion. As I asked, please submit to Greg your availability for a special meeting between tomorrow and September 15th. Okay, yes, Amy. So everyone, thank you very much for being here this evening and we have another business item. Yes. We have another business item to discuss the notification form for outdoor shooting range. I think because it's all related, we should move right on to that. So item 60. I think that they're not aware. So with your indulgence, we'll go to item 60, the notification form. Everybody who's leaving, we're about to talk about the notification form if you're still interested in hearing about that. If you could keep it down a little, we still have a long way to go. Thank you. We're being asked if we wanna take a break. Excuse me. No, we're gonna keep moving. Okay, so the form that is mentioned in the ordinance is not something that is part of the ordinance. So the reason for that is because if over time there are necessary changes to the form, we don't have to go through a whole hearing process of revising the ordinance because the form will not be part of the ordinance. It's a common practice in legislation. So we have a modified form here that staff has edited for us at the top of the form. Andy, your request of a notification that the property would be added to the E911 database has been accommodated. And we need to approve the form unless the board has any other questions or edits. We have discussed this form at great length. So I know, Max, you had a comment earlier in the meeting. Yes. That would be the time to bring it up. So, and again, I apologize for bringing that up at the inappropriate time. But based on what I heard from the public tonight, something resonated with me about the liability insurance that if it's for target practice that is rare occasion, such as citing a rifle before gear season where very few shots are fired in order to get the rifle sighted. I'd like us to perhaps think about not needing liability insurance for that. We don't require it for hunting where you shoot maybe the same number. However, if it's going to be one that's done on a frequent basis, then I think it would be more appropriate to have it on that one. So I'd like us to at least consider that. So, and thank you, Max. And Pat, you had questions at the previous meeting when we discussed this topic about coverage and cost. And the staff did in research based on your request. Did you have any feedback or quite further questions regarding the information the staff collected? Yeah, I mean, I don't have any further questions. This is actually exactly the information that I was looking for. And just to be clear, my concern about this was always the financial impact. I did not want to create a barrier based on how much money you make as to whether or not you can afford to have a shooting range that the town determines. And most of what's in there is simple safety requirements. So if you're going to be using a shooting range actively, like those make sense, I just didn't want to attach specific dollar signs that may have been insurmountable to some people and not to others. The information that the town found were in a few cases, I think larger amounts, but in multiple instances, either no additional increase a year or an increase of year that amounted to less than $10 a month. So in my opinion, those are more than reasonable. And in this case, that was my primary concern about it, not creating a barrier. And it doesn't seem like there is one from the information that we were presented. There seems to be a variety of options that are affordable to not. Yes, and if it doesn't work with the insurance you have, there are lists of multiple insurance agencies who will provide it. Okay. Anybody else have questions or comments regarding liability insurance? Andy. I think the discussion about how we're gonna enforce this comes into play given that if it's a complaint-based, you know, we're not gonna have officers driving around on roads listening for gunshots, trying to find undocumented shooting ranges. And so if a property owner shoots on their property and they're comfortable that none of their neighbors are gonna complain, they may be able to get away with not having insurance. Or they may find that, okay, I'm gonna shoot once a year and I'll just send in my $50 for the fine. I'm just, I need to understand how we're gonna enforce it to figure out where's the, how much is the fine gonna be versus how much you're gonna pay for insurance. You know, you might- A little bit like not having Obamacare. You might choose to take the risk and not get the insurance and hope your neighbors don't turn you in. So that's why I think I need to have the question of how we're gonna enforce it before I, I mean- I mean, that's- And to be blunt, I guess I'm against putting a requirement of liability insurance on a recreational activity and we don't do that for any other recreational activity as people do on their private property. In the example I said before, like my neighbor's tree could fall in my house and damage my house or damage me. We don't require people to register their tall trees that are within range of their neighbor's house, which is another, you know, probably happens more often than stray bullets, but I'm not in favor of the insurance. I would say that the interior argument that a person has as to whether or not to go with the fine versus go with the insurance is up to them. It's not something that we have any control over nor should we try to account for it. And in terms of the risk of a, you know, for your example, a tree falling on your property, everyone who has a mortgage has to have homeowner's insurance. And I know that a town does not impose homeowner's insurance on people. There's no requirement that the amount of liability is personal decision. Yes, that's correct, but the insurance does need to be there. And considering the fact that we are trying to ensure safety of surrounding properties, as well as the people who live on the properties, I don't think it's unreasonable to have liability insurance. You have to have it if you have a car. You have to have it if you have a house. I understand that a municipality is not imposing that rule, but we are trying to perhaps break some new ground here and do something that guarantees or at least helps to ensure that a person who endures an injury as a result of a shooting range accident is able to be made whole in some way. I don't think it's unreasonable. The steer that comes around the trail and runs into the other guy. Is that cross-country steer because that's a recreational slide? Thank you for your comments. Do you know how to have insurance? We are not entertaining public comment at the moment. Thank you for your feedback. So, and the other comment I have about Max's recommendation, I think we either have it or we don't. I don't think we should be saying, well, you're only shooting twice a year. You're shooting more than twice a year. It's too much for us to determine. It's too much to enforce. It's too much to ask the police to keep track of. I think we either have it or we don't. So, we should probably wrap up this conversation about liability before we move on to any other aspects of the form. Does anybody else have any feedback or thoughts? You want to keep it in? I'd like to keep it in. I was hoping we could stage it where the rare ones don't need it, but that just seems like an added level of competition. If it's too difficult for the police to enforce that kind of thing, then. Pat, where are you? Yeah, I mean, otherwise I'm fine with the form. I don't see anything here that's terribly onerous. I mean, I see what Andy is saying, but I mean, I think that argument is the case with anyone who's doing anything illegal. I mean, of course you need to, if a neighbor's house is broken into, the neighbor is probably going to need to call the police to let them know that something bad has happened. The police don't necessarily drive around in the people's backyard to see whether or not a window has been smashed out or not. Not to say they're necessarily the same, but the parallel is there. So. So you're saying that the liability should be required or not? Yeah, the liability should be required. It is not financially onerous, as far as I'm concerned. It seems fine to me. What are your thoughts? I'm just trying to get the sense of the board on this particular subject. Yeah, it's something that I need to mull over longer, which isn't very healthy for what you're trying to ask of us now about moving past this piece. I feel that my mulling would be, not that, I don't know that I would be, I don't know that I'm on either side enough that I'm going to be troublesome. I don't know. Okay. I know I'm being very waffly about this piece. I'm sorry. Not only about the liability insurance. I guess what I'm trying to decide, excuse me, what I'm trying to decide is, as it be, step where are we going, and what and why. And so I feel a little bit as though the liability insurance is, I hear you, you're saying that it's a backup scenario for what a use of such a thing on a property could bring about. I'm going to stop my statements and leave it at that for the moment. Okay. Andy, can I just get a sense of where you are? I think I know, but I want to be sure. Are you interested in keeping the liability requirement or? No, I think it's, I think liability is a personal decision that the property owner should make. I mean, there are some properties that don't have homes on them. So they may or may not have any liability insurance on that property to begin with. This would be a new policy for them. I think for those folks, it would be much more than an additional writer. I mean, I checked my policy today. I had 300,000, probably wouldn't be that much to add on another 200,000 if I chose to, but someone who has no structure on their property has no, may not have any insurance on that property. It's a bigger pill for them as well. Max, you are in favor of the liability insurance. Yeah, I'd rather, again, stage it, but if it's in or out, I'd like to see it in. Okay. Any other comments regarding the rest of the form? Are we happy with the rest of the form? Andy? I'm not, I want to do away with it, but. Got it. Okay. So, if there are no other comments or questions about the content of the form, am I, does that do, Evan or Greg, do you have any information or stuff that you need to share in addition, or can we continue? All right, so we need to vote on the notification form. Is this honest to the public? So, early on it was told that there would be discussion about this particular piece of me and you have not allowed people to publicly speak. Thank you for reminding me of that. This has been a long day and a contentious conversation. Are we ready to open this part to the public? Okay. We're going to repeat the process. One minute, 30 seconds. You get to speak once. Please come to the mic. State your name and street, and thank you again. Ben Bro, my family owns Land on Lost Nation Road. First, I want to address the insurance. If you look at the August 1st email from the town manager, it says, if they ask what it's for, just say personal liability. If you tell them gun range on property, they may not give you info. So all this is just liability insurance. No one has actually gotten a quote to say if you have a range on your property. I fall under the family that owns Just Land with no dwelling on it. This is going to be a substantial cost if I can even get it covered. So you're putting me out of, I'm either going to break your ordinance or I'm going to have to pay through the roof or something like that. I also think that you're missing the point. This whole form is in my, I'm sorry to say, it's garbage. Everything on here is copied from either North Carolina or Texas. If you look at North Carolina, Pitt County, North Carolina, where liability insurance and the exact copy of the site plan is, it tells you that this is intended for shooting range facilities, which if you look at a shooting range facility does not include target practice area on private land. Texas, you exact copy of construction standards. Again, this is on property that you pay a fee for. It's all commercial ranges. You're making us, you're making us on these private ranges do what a commercial range would have to be. That's what it wasn't intended for. And I think that's the point that's being missed here. You're, there's a reason you had to go to other states to find examples that you can't find anything in Vermont. Thank you, Mr. Brough. I'm Lee Beauregard. I did call my insurance agent and asked her, told her I don't have a range and asked her to look for an umbrella policy. Once I said shooting range, the cost went up three to five times. Once I looked at, for my homeowner's insurance, it got dropped by three of the four policies. So it's not easy unless you remember the NRA and go through their insurance somehow. It's not easy. So far as a shooting range on my property, if I buy land out in the center or the town, sorry, and I buy acreage, there may be somebody who uses my land as some of these people have said, I don't know if they've put up a range. They may have just put up a target on a tree. Am I gonna get nailed if somebody's using that from the date that somebody heard a shot and I don't know about that? 30 seconds. And as Mr. Brough said, you're using commercial property things. The last thing, please think about having these FOIA requests and things like that. My mom died. It was an unattended death. A police officer went through the house to make sure there wasn't anything. He told me, I see a firearm. It looks like maybe your dad's old hunting rifle. Do not put anything in the obituary that said anybody in the family is a hunter because somebody could come into your house while you're at the funeral, break in and take that weapon and use it to commit a crime. Please, you're doing the same thing with registering. Thank you, Ranges. Thanks. So she's right about that because there was a guy that we used to play softball on this field, Sean McEwen. Thank you, John. And that happened at a funeral. Somebody broke in, stole all the guys' rifles from probably somebody they knew. Anyway, what I wanted to say quickly is I really think you gotta think about enforcement even if you go with this because say I'm like, I don't know if I want to spend the money to do the liability even though I've had a range there. I don't know if I want to spend the money. So I haven't shot and I've been thinking about it. And then they're doing construction across the street and the neighbors hear the tailgate bang against the truck and they go, they're shooting. And SXPD come and they go, hey, the neighbors say you're shooting. I'm going, no, I haven't shot. Well, they say you were shooting. Who's the burden of proof on and what is the burden of proof? And are they going to try to start finding me 50 bucks a day for a tailgate banging? Because it's obvious that we did have a range there at one point and we still got the burn. But so that's something you gotta think about too. They talked about it easier to prove it but isn't what you always see is what it is. Thank you. Ed Wilbur, Browns River Road. Again, I would like to point out the very bottom of your form would force every one of us to perjure ourselves by stating that we certified that our range follows NRA guidelines. I'd again like to point out section 2.0.1. Sourcebook is in no way to be used as a substitute for or in lieu of consultation with architects, engineers and attorneys who shall be called upon to make specific recommendations for individual range design construction and use of shooting ranges. Section 2.0.1.4, neither the reader of this sourcebook or anyone else is to rely on any representation, drawing or statement made in this sourcebook. Rely on this sourcebook to design, build, construct or operate a range, rely on any claim that a particular range is in compliance with or designed, built, constructed or operated according to or pursuant to this sourcebook when visiting, attending or taking part in activities such as a range. 30 seconds. So again, I would like to point out that the thing you're forcing us to do is that range handbook, which is over 600 pages long, by the way, and I've read through almost all of it at this point, very little of it applies to home ranges on private property. As a matter of fact, none of it does. So by asking us to sign that and certify, it's an impossible thing to do and I'm not willing to sign a form like that. And I will go to court for it. Hi, I'm Mike Pelleture, I gave you my letter. Yes. When you read it, I hope you do. It says, hopefully the town is not inadvertently applying a commercial standard requirement for NRA range compliance to a mom and pop occasional limited use range. I believe that there exists some safe locations to practice shooting in Essex without huge expenditures for an NRA compliant range. You didn't say when you were looking at the amendment for the items that you're gonna discuss and I think Andy asked to have that summarized, you're not even gonna talk about whether there's an exemption for a commercial range or not. You're just, you're blatantly ignoring that. Are you gonna talk about that? Are you gonna review that or is your mind already closed? Could I have an answer? All of the materials that we've been talking about are what we're talking about. We wanna be talking about all ranges because the safety of the community doesn't depend on what kind of range it is. So you will only accept NRA range guides for all installations, is that what your position is? At the moment that's what the form says. John Bourbon, 348 Browns River Road. In reading this document right here, the one thing that stands out in my mind, this is like your plan B or backdoor approach to stop all shooting in Essex. There's just no way in hell that this is doable for a private landowner. We can't do this. I've been shooting 31 years in my house with no problems. I'm respectful of my neighbors. I don't shoot when they're home. This is just a way to try and put people out of business for shooting, thank you. Elizabeth Adams, 178 Browns River Road. So my question is related to the comment about ensuring the safety of surrounding properties related to the shooting ranges. My concern would be that if this is required, individuals would choose not to register a shooting range because they don't do it very frequently and therefore would not have safe precautions to shoot safely. For example, dirt, a pile to block the bullet from traveling because as someone mentioned, if there's an appearance of a range, that's when there's the potential for violating the ordinance if it's passed. So if I didn't want to register my property to shoot infrequently, I might shoot in an unsafe manner because I don't want there to be an appearance of a range. Does that make sense? Yes, so that's my concern. And I think most of us who have spots on their property where they shoot, I think we all shoot in a safe manner. I think we know how to do that. My other just comment here is why do we need to identify frequent basis versus rare occasions? Rifle, citing a rifle before deer season, if I'm a terrible shot, I'm not, but if I was, it might be frequent even though on the farm it says it's infrequent because I'm shooting a lot more because I'm not a very good shot to get my rifle sighted in, thank you. Brian Murphy, 187 Towers Road. Regarding the standards, I have no objection to someone that says that we can't meet a particular standard, but the question I have for those is what is the replacement standard? Because it seems to be that there is the NRA standard or no standard, if there's an alternative standard, I like people to propose with that because all we're hearing is that we can't have a standard, but I think any common sense knows there's safety and I think a group of people could get together and indicate down range, there's no house or something like that. So instead of just entirely eviscerating the NRA standard, propose the standard. Separately, I wrote it's in the board packet. I'd like the notification form to ask the landowner to certify that children under the age of 18 are supervised and also that the landowner or the tenant is on the premises because you've got to have someone to talk to if things aren't going well. And I don't want to call the police, I want to call the landowner to rectify and be a good neighbor, but if people are off for the weekend and then their friends who they can't supervise or there are kids there, that's a problem. Thank you. 58 Brigham Hill Road. I got a question on who determines what a frequent shooter may be. You may choose to go to the market six times a day to get popcorn. I may choose to go 12 times a day to get popcorn because I got 12 kids coming home at different times of the day. I think setting a guideline vaguely of whom is now a frequent shooter and whom is not. I think getting the police force to run to everybody's pieces of woods all over Essex is absolutely ludicrous when Jimmy Joe's got a motorcycle that backfires every five minutes. Are you kind of infringing on this guy by banging on his door saying, did you shoot? Did you shoot? Maybe I just want to watch TV on a Sunday night with my kid, not have the cops banging on my door asking me if I'm shooting. Furthermore, my neighbor doesn't like me. He shoots all the time. I just heard him shoot. You're going to spend so much money in police force running around constantly to try to regulate who's shooting who's not. How about the M80 is a kid's shoot. It's ludicrous. This is complete ludicracy. Jeff Kirschner, 247 Brigham Hill Road. First off, I got some privacy concerns with providing detailed maps of private property containing the information that you're asking for there. They've spoke about people knowing that you have guns there and you all know me. You all know that I do have privacy concerns which is why individually you guys came to the house as opposed to open to the public. Number two, if a range was in existence before 2006, I want to know if you got to fill out this form. I'm not sure that you do by state statute. Liability insurance, I'm totally against requiring this. If you mandate insurance for activities on private property that's applicable only to the group of people who submit this notification form, that sounds a lot like discrimination and is financially burdensome for some people. I don't think that's right. And finally, talking about the NRA range book. On one of the very first pages, it's section 1.02.4. This source book may not be utilized to establish design standards or criteria for ranges. Period. It doesn't apply to what you guys are trying to do. It is a big book. It's made for commercial ranges and it says it. If you guys read the first two pages of it, you'll see that it does not apply to what you're trying to apply it to. Thank you. Brad Kenneson, Bixby Hill Road. I've also done my research on liability insurance. And in canvassing those insurance companies and asking the question, if I have a range on my property and there's an incident, would you pay the liability claim? Yes, we would. And then we would cancel your policy. They would not renew the policy. So where are you gonna go and get insurance? Second question. Greg, could you bring up on the ordinance about the shooting range restrictions, if you would please? You warned a public hearing on a firearms ordinance of which the notification form and its restrictions are a part thereof and should be part of the discussion and a vote on the ordinance which includes the notification form. It should not be separate. So when you have the meeting the next time, it all should be together, lumped together, not separate discussions. Thank you. Kendall Chamberlain, Old Pump Road. You're starting to get a taste of that scarlet leather that's right on my back right now. There's one thing that I see with this board that is very surprising. There's a lot of people, a lot of my neighbors and everything in this room that obviously know a lot more about this rule that you're looking to impose on us than I do and then you do. Why aren't you using our neighbors as your resource? Why aren't you practicing Vermont's freedom and unity and working with your neighbors and with your whole society that you have? Get somebody from that side, get somebody from this side, get them together, get it all down, do your ordinance, do all this stuff where you have time, not a minute and a half to talk about it. This isn't good board policy to come here in front of people that there's a lot of people here that are very concerned about this. And then you guys just sit up here and you don't have the answers. I have a lot of respect for Mr. Watts. He brings up very good questions. Do you have any more comments about the form itself and not personally? Well, this form is really about all that because this is showing you right there. Use the resources you have. Good challenge, Lost Nation Road. We know you're under a lot of pressure to do something and you admit that it's not a perfect ordinance. As it is. I agree with that. There are the provisions that are very unpalatable to a good portion of our town. The people who favor it are the people who have nothing to lose. They're not shooters, gun owners, et cetera. So they have nothing to lose. The burden is placed on the people who do enjoy that. The biggest stumbling block here is a registration. How does that enhance safety? What does it do? I know you've got to do something, but doing something wrong is worse. It does not do anything to enhance safety. Insurance does nothing to do to enhance safety. How would that prevent somebody from getting reckless and careless? They figure they've got insurance. Don't worry. I'd say throw out. The registration business, because that's just rife with the possibilities of being abused down the road. Thank you. This gentleman is coming to speak at the mic, and we are speaking about a different business item. Once again, Evan Hughes from our Federation of Sportsman's Clubs. You're having a meeting, a discussion about a form on an ordinance do tabled. That's completely illogical. The discussion of the form should take place after you've resolved the issue of the ordinance. You could have done what Colchester did, worked for them, wasn't all this, but you turned your back on doing what Colchester did. This municipality abuts Colchester. Why did they do the public safety perspective without all these problems? Because they didn't choose to go forward the way you are. Also with regard to insurance, you're not required to have insurance in your home. If you don't have a mortgage on your home, you're not required to have insurance. You're not required to have an insurance on a car if you don't drive it on the road. If you've gotten a car in your garage, you're not required to have insurance on it. This whole thing that's caused this Donnie Brook of public forum that you're seeing here could have been avoided had Essex Junction, Essex gone the way of Colchester. Work for them, you don't hear all this fighting, and it could have worked for you. Anybody else, sir? Okay. Chris Adams, Browns River Road. I just want to say really quickly that the words that we use are sometimes they're just semantics, but if I decide to fill one of these out, put my name on it, sign it, and my wife's information as well. We make a transformation from occasionally, infrequently, safely shooting weapons on our land to having a shooting range on our property. And there's a huge dichotomy there, good dichotomy there, and I think there's no gradation here. There's no spectrum, there's nothing. It's either you do not fire weapons on your land other than hunting, or you have a shooting range on your property. And some people do have ranges, but other people really don't. And it seems like you're creating a bit of a monster here that it's kind of taking on a life of its own. I really would encourage you to take a step back and try not to fall into the hole of just doing something even though that something may not be moving you in the direction you really want to go. I really would encourage you, this is messy stuff, and I do give you credit for tackling it because the pressure's there, I get it, but please really think about it. And many of these points made here tonight are from people that are very passionate, but they're really saying a lot of things that are very, very truthful, and I encourage you to really think about it. Thank you. Thank you. I'm assuming you know who I am, but my name's Darryl Monoghue, Pat and Gil. I'm gonna simply ask you to remember one thing. It's called the kiss principle. Keep it stupidly simple. Okay. I'm gonna reiterate everything Evan did in the effort of time mentioned. No, and keep in mind, you're home, what you are, what's on you, it's private domain. What you do on there is up to you. It's already illegal to be shooting on your property and have the bullets leave your property. That's already illegal. That's already dangerous, okay? We all of us that have a backyard range or a front yard range or whatever it might be, already know that. It's the responsibility of the person that's doing it to keep it on the range on the thing. If they're dangerous with it, that's its own issue. If the bullets are leaving the property, that's there. Insurance, whether, and again, you don't have to have your home insured. You don't have, why should I have the land insured? Okay. Insurance is a personal thing, not a thing. Keep it simple, stupid. Logan, Ashton McEwen, 20 upper main. Again, I'm unequivocally opposed to having liability insurance. But I think one of the things you need to realize as this gentleman pointed out is, you know, one of the things we do on our property is be conscientious of one-year shooting. And I know other people have talked about that today. We don't shoot on a weekend, nice day. People might be out walking. You try and keep it during the day, during the week. Kids are at school, people are at work. But like this gentleman pointed out, if I have a range that's registered and has liability, those nice days on Saturdays, I'm gonna be shooting. As opposed to going down to LaBerge's Shelburne. Because I'm not paying all that money to not shoot. Think about that, please. You've already spoken, I wanna give everyone a chance. Oh sir, I need to give everyone a chance who hasn't spoken yet. Is there anybody else who has not spoken on the topic yet? Okay, thank you. And we're well aware of the possible changes on the hunting schedule, thank you. Is there anyone else who hasn't spoken? All right, thank you again for taking the time to share with us your thoughts. We realize how difficult this is. I appreciate your being here. We're gonna continue the discussion and then we have other business to take care of. So we're most likely gonna wrap this up in the next few minutes. Thank you again. Okay, so we've agreed to table voting on the ordinance to September 23rd, after a special meeting where we'll discuss the edits that were requested by board members. We need to finish discussion on the form. And in the spirit of compromise and in the spirit of listening to the public, Max and Pat, I would like you to consider striking a liability insurance requirement from the form. Andy and then Max. What I was shy to say before is that my concern with the liability insurance is it gives the form of feeling that something needs to be insured when what we're asking people to do is form a bond of trust between those. So I feel that removing like you're asking is appropriate because when there's liability insurance, it's almost like you're saying that it's incorrect what you're doing when what you're doing is something that you're doing for good and safely and on purpose. Does that make sense? Am I making sense? So I agree with you and I do ask the same is that okay that I said it like that? Absolutely. Max, you had your hand up. Yeah. It took us 10 years to update the imperfect firearms ordinance. And as I said, it's still imperfect. I'd like to actually take a step back further than just the liability piece. The form is imperfect. We're trying to do the right thing, but it sounds like they know a better way perhaps to be able to come to that. I don't want to have a form out there that doesn't really do anything. And I don't know if it really does what we had hoped to do. I'd like us to consider, I know in the ordinance there's a date at which the form would become active. I'm wondering if again, it took us 10 years to update the firearms ordinance and kind of just started working on this form, really. I'd like to give it the same respect and time to maybe push that out so that we can have a better way to get a system that, again, there's an incredible resource in our community that I think would be willing to work with us to come up with something that will address the public safety that we're trying to do. And I'd like to consider or at least have the board consider postponing the implementation of the form until we can give it a little bit more time. Majority of the folks out there that have these are exactly what they say. They're doing it safely. It's those that are at that we really are most concerned about. And I'd like to hear from these experts who know how to do it correctly, how they can help us ensure that we have that whole family of ranges safe. So it's probably a surprise to you since I'm the one that started this form. It is a surprise. I'm not saying we want to necessarily not do a form, but I'm saying I'd like to give it the respect it deserves and the time. So perhaps we can address the ordinance that we talked about the way we are, but have that date for implementing something like this postponed so that we can tap into that resource and come up with something that's gonna have the impact we're hoping it will. And not just something that might not deliver what we're hoping. I just have to ask, we have had this conversation before. A couple of meetings ago, Chief Gary suggested possibly the consideration of a task force. Yeah, I'm not talking about task force. Okay, so the task force that Chief recommended was, suggested was officials, police, and residents to whom this would apply. So what is the difference between that and what you're proposing? I was thinking more like a listening tour to go out there to get, so we can come up with an encyclopedia of ideas that are coming from those who know it better certainly than I do. That it's still the board that's gonna come up with what goes into this, but let's tap into that knowledge resource that is clearly out there. But it's not a task force. We're not delegating power to anybody else. It's gotta stay here, but I'd sure like to tap into that energy source that have us come. Again, majority, I trust what I'm hearing that do it safely. It's those and they've even agreed that there's some out there that aren't. And those are the ones we wanna focus on. They may have ideas that they could give us a menu to choose from to come up with something. But I think the responsibility is with us, not a task force. I'm just looking for more. We're trying to do the right thing. I wanna make sure we do the right thing. So would you, how would this apply to the shooting range amendments that we currently have on the table? Are you saying those would stay or they would not be in the ordinance and we would explain what you mean in relation to that? Again, if the NRA guideline, and I know it's a thick book, but the shooting range piece is a piece of that. And that discount or whatever that liability piece that they put in there, they do that to protect the NRA. But what they're saying is these are the guidelines. And if those aren't the right guidelines for the type of ranges we have, maybe this information resource has a better way to have us define what those should be than the Skybook is all I'm saying. I'm sorry to throw that wrench at you, but I hear, you know, I don't wanna just do something. I wanna do something right. Or at least as close to right as we can. Anne, I greatly appreciate all that Max has said. I have a concern that I heard and was also feeling myself. Although, for speaking purposes, it did work that they were separate items. Because I think we got to hear more from people about their thoughts more fully in this regard. But I do think that moving forward that these things need to be together because there's a lot of stress involved in hearing that an ordinance has passed that requires a form and then this limbo of wondering what the form is gonna say. I think that this evening it was absolutely perfect because I feel, and I don't know why all the people left. We tried to say, we said we're still discussing but they couldn't hear us. I think that this evening it worked in our favor that it was separate because I got a chance to hear people who were very angry the first time they got up. I got to see them in a different light the second time because they had come forward again and were watching the interaction. So for this evening, I appreciate it. Moving forward, I'm concerned that they're separate because it causes anxiety and unsurety. So I think your question was a good one and I hear what you're saying and I'm gonna add one more layer to this is that I'm a little intrigued task force committee wise because we have an energy committee. We have committees for other things and so part of me is like, well, yeah, I know, I see that I don't maybe know enough. That's not at all. Well, I wanna make sure that I'm respectful of the work that's been done by people who have sat in this position before and I wanna make sure that I'm working together with the board and with the people all. I think these things are obviously very important and so I guess I'm gonna get a little bit more pushy and that I think that the form needs to live with the ordinance or we piece that out but that makes me a little nervous if we piece that out and then that makes me nervous that we're not gonna cover the whole thing. Just a response to that particular piece. In general, the form is not part of the ordinance because forms can change. So if we have this exact form in an ordinance then any time we wanna change a single line on it, whether it's administrative or anything, we have to go through the whole ordinance hearing process. So even if we wanna remove something from it, let's say we found out. Right, so but this applies to things like dog license applications and any kind of paperwork that the town uses, if we all went through the ordinance process, it would not, it's a standard practice but I understand your concern and I understand that this particular form is very laden with significance and we need to pay special attention to it. So maybe it is appropriate that it stay with it even though it's going to make it more difficult to remove pieces that people don't like as well as. We can take that under consideration as we move forward. Andy and Pat, your thoughts about Max's suggestion? I'm in favor of it. I would like to, what I would like to do though is separate the two pieces, do two different ordinance updates so that we are doing the parks part of it on the schedule that we originally intended to do it to close that in September and strike the shooting range section for consideration in a separate ordinance update once we know what's gonna be on the form. I'm very concerned. You know, and I know you rebutted it but it specifies the form but if we don't know what the form is or if we can't ever come to agreement on the form, we're still gonna have to go through a process to remove the requirement for the form if we don't get that. So I'd like to separate the two, close the parks and the hunting question and continue discussing the shooting range. Good idea. Pat? I mean, I have no problem myself dealing with the form separately because I mean we do this in lots of different things. Forms do change. I do hear what you're saying but it's a positive as well as a negative. The form itself is generally less robust than full process of the ordinance. Not always, but in large part. As far as the stepping back idea, I'm not really sure where we are, insurance, stepping back or what the feel for the board is going to be. What I think is difficult and that a lot of people sort of don't get is that a task force itself, if we set that up under the umbrella of the town and we go out, we're not legally allowed to say, hey, you know what, this works. It doesn't matter how much of an expert you guys are or how much of an expert I am. We are not allowed. We cannot go out there and say, this looks good because then the town puts its stamp of approval on whatever you've built no matter how safe it is and even if there's an accident or a problem, then the town itself is liable and all of us as taxpayers are liable. It's not that we don't think that the people who are coming to us know way more about this than we do. We agree. What we need to do is come up with a way where we, you know, and I think that's why it was kind of discounted as an idea before is that if we set this up as a task force or if we set up a knowledge base where you guys are coming to us and saying, this is what it should be, one, two, three. The second we say, yeah, that looks great, the town is liable and we can get sued and we're just not able to go forward on that path. As a select board, we can't move forward and during a path that opens us up to liability. So, I mean, I think that's probably why the previous police chief said just make Essex a no shooting town because you want to keep it simple, stupid. That's the simplest thing. What we're trying to do is come up with a middle ground here, a compromise, and I'm not sure necessarily where that lands at. It doesn't sound like the board knows where that lands, but just be aware that we have heard this. There's reasons why we haven't gone down some of these other routes because we're just not able to and it sucks, but that's the truth. So. In a lot of cases, yeah, that's what happens. Something gets passed, yeah. So I might need some parliamentary advice here. We have a proposal to, we have two proposals which we should consider separately, but they're related. Andy's proposal is that we strip section 6.08.045 from the amendment, amended ordinance that we tabled earlier today. I don't know if, because we've already tabled it, can we pick it back up right now? Because we didn't set a date, we said to be determined when we would table it. I would, wait until the special meeting. Do it at the special meeting? Okay. Discuss it then and you can vote to warn a certain portion of the ordinance to go forward. Or could we warn an amended ordinance that just strikes that section out? Would that be more appropriate if we were to go that way? Well, if you're gonna warn a meeting to talk about the ordinance, you don't have to be specific of what you're gonna do. Because at that meeting, you may decide to do something more or less. It is important that we take some steps now, or at least this fall within the next couple of months. We, there appears to be consensus of the board on the date range, and there appears to be consensus on the board for the Indian Brook Saxon Hill Entry Farm discharge bands. Yes, Annie? We will clarify what you mean by date range. November 1st to December 15th, the time when you're able to hunt within Indian Brook Saxon Hill and Saxon Hill. So there seems to be consensus about those two things. And the related definitions that appear in the amended ordinance. Would that be an accurate statement, Annie? I'm hearing you, if I'm understanding you properly, which is what I wanna make sure I am, and I know we're all tired, I'm sorry to be difficult. You are saying that we're all in agreement for the date ranges. Am I understanding correctly that if we learn about new dates that we are open to amending and changing? We don't know what they are, or if they're official. So because we don't know, we have to be with what we have now. We can always discuss at a future time when we have definite information. So then yes, I agree that. So in light of Max's suggestion that we reach further out to the community than we already have, and bring in some additional consultation that we consider at the next special meeting that we've decided we're going to have, that we discuss amending the ordinance further to not include the shooting ranges portion. And go ahead and approve the ordinance with the changes related to Indian broken sacks and hell in the tree farm. Would that be the consensus of the board? I agree with that. As long as we do deal in the near future or continue the discussion on the shooting ranges side. Absolutely. I wanted to break it up a while back. So I'm fine with doing it that way. Madam Chair. Yes. This discussion is on the forum. Yes, thank you. The other item was table. That's a good point. Yes. All right. So based on this discussion, which we just had, it sounds like we're tabling the form as well. Would that be accurate? But maybe point of order. Yes. If you're going to do that, which it's fine if you do it. Before you table it, can you please have some guidance on what you might want us to review and get information of when you meet again? On the topic. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Yes. So what I'd like to do, that we already have a list of the information that we want the staff to research regarding the ordinance itself. We've already asked them for that. You guys have those three items. On the form, which I'll get back on there, where is that? That is D. We are proposing that we table the form until we can have a deeper discussion with the community about shooting ranges in general. Is that what you're proposing? Yeah, to come up. If our concern is to address public safety regarding shooting ranges, are there resources out there? And it sounds like there are. How can we tap into those? I'm not talking task force, but at least from a more educational piece so that we can then come up with something that sounds like based on real information from people who are in the know, addresses what we really want to address. So are we asking staff to come? Yes, Annie. I think you're gonna say what I'm saying. Are we asking staff to come up with an outreach plan or are we recommending an outreach plan? What is your pleasure? I guess for them to consider what that might look like an outreach plan. And it doesn't have to be in two weeks or a month, but it's something that I'd like to make sure we have work that we work on going forward as we did 10 years on this other ordinance to come up with a place that again, we hear people say we didn't go far enough. We went too far. People say it's good. That sounds like we probably got about right. I'd like to give the same opportunity to the shooting ranges, whether it's a form or not. I don't know if it depends on the input. So then what we can be directing staff to do in lieu of approving a form tonight, we can instead say staff, please provide the board at its next meeting, the special meeting about the gun ordinances, to make some suggestions of possible outreach opportunities to discuss the shooting ranges specifically. If they're able to do it in that short period of time. If they're able to start. That would be awesome. Okay. Is that sufficient? Is that enough detail? It's really not a lot. It's a little bit of direction. Better than I had two minutes ago. Okay. Yes. I'd say so. And it, sure. I will highlight if there's enough time. Yeah. Before the special meeting to come up with an outreach plan. Absolutely. Yeah. I personally don't think it's a requirement to have it ready for that discussion. I think that discussion for the special meeting could be specific to the ordinance. And then we could have something specific to the shooting range at some time. That's picture time. Okay. That's just me speaking. I'm just one of five. Annie. You look like you were getting ready to say something. The one thing I do want to say is that I want to ask that people who come to our meeting see and understand that we are listening and hearing. It is uncomfortable at best to have threats yelled out. Like it's, we're hearing you, we're listening to you sincerely. I want to do what's right. Please. Sorry. Understand that we are sincere in our efforts. They would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Thank you, Annie. Okay. So, regarding this form, sounds like we're ready to table it. Would anyone like to move to table? I would like to move to table. If I can get it correctly. And please, someone stop me and jump in if I get it wrong. I move to table the discussion of the notification form. There you go. That's it? Yup. I had more on that. Would anyone like to second? I'll second. Max. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. Thank you. Before you all leave, please keep in mind what Annie just said. And please keep in mind the significant shift we just took at your behest. We have been listening the whole time. And most of the time, it's you guys that have been in the audience. Not people who are in favor of what we're trying to do. So we've had a lot of one-sided feedback for a very long time. But we still have to address both sides. And we still have to address, well, let me take that back. We are trying to do something that addresses the concerns and balances the concerns of everybody in the room when we could do the simplest thing, which was recommended by three separate police chiefs, which is to just make Essex a no-discharge town. We're trying to save what is important to you and we're trying to keep what's important to others. Please keep that in mind. The personal remarks and the threats of lawsuits are just not necessary. We're doing our best and we know you are as well. So thank you for being here and doing this consistent informed engagement. We need it, we want it, we thank you for it. And now we're gonna move on to other business and please go home to your air conditioning. And for those of you who are still on the agenda, thank you for waiting. Hey, Jeff, you're fine. Are those people? It's okay. It's an important issue, we all get worked up. You're fine, you don't need to talk about this. Thank you very much and if you do realize that you know you had to be involved on this and for the rest of the evening. Thank you. We haven't even started talking about dogs. We haven't. One of that is that that's even more passionate. Thank you. Thank you, all, even people who are passionate, it's okay. We'll talk later, it's okay. Okay, we were, the last two business items, we're gonna do one before the other because there's people in the audience waiting patiently. We moved earlier for item 6G, the energy commission regarding the electric bus program. There's still people. Come on down. Oh my goodness. Thank you for lasting the whole time. We will try to hit the reset button as best we can. Oh, wow. You guys are amazing. Wow. But, so this is an entirely different topic from what you were talking about before and to try to summarize it. So one of the things that the, by the way, my name is Will Dodge. I'm the chair of the energy committee. One of the tasks that the energy committee has in its charter is to look at ways that ultimately saving the town money and that includes the Essex Westford School District as well as trying to achieve renewable energy, reduce our greenhouse gas footprint. And recently, this select board passed an enhanced energy plan that had two specific items in it that I'll just read as sort of goals for dealing with transportation. And just to preface that, of all the ways that we ultimately try to reach 90% renewable by 2050 or if you prefer reducing our overall greenhouse gas footprint, transportation is one of the most difficult. We've done sort of collectively in the town, a lot has been done on the electrical side. There's a lot of work being done on the heat side. So in other words, we have more renewable generation. We have more weatherizations. But the toughest problem by far on this whole issue of how do we become more renewable? How do we deal with green gas gases is transportation. So there's two goals in the enhanced plan which says I think it's number nine, lead by example by replacing the town's vehicle fleet with electric or biodiesel fuel vehicles as fossil fuel burning vehicles reach the end of their useful life. Now you'll notice that doesn't say anything about the school district, but I'll just keep going. Number 11 says work with the school district to maximize ridership for public school buses and minimize use of private vehicles for student transport. But it goes on to talk about explore working with a bus company who is converting its bus fleet to electric. So very shortly after you guys passed the enhanced energy plan, we had something that kind of falls right in between those two goals. And that is as a result of the Volkswagen diesel fraud settlement, state money, it's not, we're not entitled to it. We have to work for it that can go toward a pilot project at qualifying school districts where the school works with a private bus company basically like what we have in Essex where those Volkswagen funds would be used to both create all the charging infrastructure necessary to have two or three buses or more and also purchase the buses if we have buses that are at the end of their useful life. So the way that we approach this issue is first we obviously reached out to the school district, we made them know of the offer. And like a lot of municipal employees, and I know I've spoken with Greg and Evan about this, it's one thing for us to come in as the cheerleaders and say, hey, here's a great offer that you can take advantage of. And it's another thing for a municipal employee or a school district employee to take the time to be able to put everything else off of their schedule and focus on that issue. So at first it seemed like Jamie Smith who's the transportation director, she had a lot of on her plate. She had dealing. Sorry, yep. What did I say? She. I'm so sorry. It's four hours in heat, you're all right. Exactly. So it seemed like we weren't gonna be able to apply but we kept talking about it and I think there were discussions within the school district and they said, let's go for it, let's submit an application to see if we can be one of the people to benefit from that pilot program. So when you look at the pilot program criteria among the various elements are support of the community for taking advantage of the pilot project. So the reason that we're here taking up more oxygen than's already been taken up is to see if the select board would support a resolution of support for the application that we would then submit or supplement the application. So I sent out that draft. I'm not sure if you want me to read the whole thing or if it makes sense to talk about it. There were a couple typos in it. It was definitely late last night and all of this is coming to a head very quickly but we really appreciate the fact that the staff put this on because what I explained in the email is this is a building block. This is changing over to electric school buses through Essex is not likely to happen without a program like this. Maybe it'll be that suddenly the fleets will start changing over. Certainly when you look around Essex you can see a lot more volts, a lot more bolts, leafs, Teslas over the past three years than certainly there were before that. And that's great. That's showing that the passenger vehicle side of the transportation problem is getting addressed but the much larger vehicles to have a chance to make those electric and to save a lot of the cost as I've outlined I think over the life of an electric bus you would basically save about $36,000 or 60% of the total that you would spend on a diesel bus and you'd be reducing the footprint of that bus in terms of fossil fuels by about 97%. So it's a great, and I don't know if any of you have ever ridden on those electric buses. I have, honestly they're indistinguishable from a regular old school bus except they're a lot cleaner because they're new but apart from that they run great, they're comfortable there's nothing really all that newfangled about them except that they don't require as many fluids, they're more reliable and they've got batteries that can basically go between 60 and 70 miles or be fitted to go up to 150 miles. So I'm not sure if there's any questions or... So Will, I'm sorry. Your application deadline was August 16th so you've already applied to VEIC? The school districts has applied to VEIC but my theory of the case is we can still supplement the application because they knew perfectly well that this was all kind of being rushed and that it needed to go quickly because of how the settlement is structured but there's also even language in here that says either show us that you have community support or explain your plan for building that. So part of this is to get the community support in and then I think it'll be up to us as an Essex Energy Committee to try to build upon what you do and what the school district has done to seek further support in the community. If this pilot program gets funded, I mean, is there a cost to the municipality? There is no cost for just that portion of the program. So we're just saying we support the idea of doing this but there's no cost. That's correct. In other words, the idea is to take advantage of the fact that the school district qualifies in order to get those funds. Now to the degree that the school district decides to do more than just accepting whatever comes through the program, we've actually been, the committee has been working on ways of trying to find out how do we leverage money generally on some of these bigger projects? A really important one is the fact that Vermont Electric Cooperative, which basically has as its territory sort of the northern third of Essex has a community fund program right now and they are trying to find qualifying projects. There's no question in my mind that helping kids who are in that part of Essex get to school on electric school bus will qualify and will fit into their what are called tier three requirements. So, but out of the gate, there's nothing being asked for of the town by way of money. If we approve this, then we're not putting money up. Correct. We're just basically helping the school district grab money that's out there that we otherwise would never see. I have two school bus questions. Are they quieter? Yes. In fact, they have the special feature, just to answer, because it's a great question. I'm excited about it. They have the special feature where because they don't have motor noise, they have a special little song that plays when the bus backs up or puts its stop on, it's just a digital and you can hear it outside very clearly and so that's the substitute for the engine that you would otherwise hear. And then my second question is, you know when a school bus goes uphill and there's that moment, there's that moment where it's, and then it's got to kick in and then it revs. What does an electric school bus do at that moment? Do you know? From what I've seen with, and this is from my own experience driving electric vehicles for years and years, you really can't tell the difference except that on a steep hill, there's often more torque. When you're pushing it, when you really, if you're so, what would be a good example? If you were driving up Pearl Street, it's gonna have a greater ability to accelerate more quickly up that hill. And the other thing is, and I think this is true, we've sort of pulled people through the committee about this. You'd think that there would be a lot of trouble in winter and it's certainly true that the battery life does not go quite as far in the winter as it goes in the summer, but it's not enough to really make a difference as far as that 60 or 70 miles go. And no one really has any more problems in snow with an electric vehicle than with a conventional. They don't. This is exciting. Thanks for that information. Andy. Do you know how far a typical school bus travels in a day? It's in the literature, but I think it's basically in the, it's obviously depends if they're going on a school trip and what is the route. So what I'd anticipate from this is that the electric bus might be used for some of the shorter routes unless it's fitted with the extra batteries. But certainly it's, the other idea that's expressed in here is, in all of the literature, is that you can have the bus do its route. If you've got the right charging infrastructure during the times when the kids are at school, it's charging, basically waiting with a supercharger to be completely ready to go by the time school comes out. And that there actually might be good reasons to, you know, to charge during that time period, that timeframe, depending on the time of year and all kinds of other considerations. I apologize, because I'm going to get very specific. I'm on the school board as well. So I haven't seen any of this come through to us yet. But I did have questions primarily about, I mean, I would be absolutely for this if Essex-Westford gets the electric school bus. We do have some of them, but by and large, Essex-Westford contracts out with mountain transit. Right. And mountain transit is very large. And they would, if they get this bus, they don't necessarily have to use it in our district. Theoretically, would this then belong to mountain transit? I believe that they do based on the guidelines that I read, because if you look, there's two sets of guidelines. One is for the school district and the second is for the bus company that it's assumed under the pilot program that the school district is working. Yeah, I apologize. So in other words, Yeah, no. So I haven't had time to wait. It's definitely, I also thought about that issue. But from what I can understand, it's basically, it's a pilot in part because if the school district and the bus company are meet the eligibility requirements, then they are required to use that bus for that particular school district. Okay. But it's a great question. Right, yeah, that was my, I mean, like I said, I mean, I'm absolutely for electric vehicles, anything that we can do to get more buses off the road. I just didn't want us to be in a situation where we're approving a for-profit business to get a free electric bus. You know, it's just. Any other questions? No, honestly, I think the rest of my questions I'll say for Jamie next time I see him. But thank you very much. Well, thank you. So, Will, you're looking for us to pass this resolution? Yes, or something approximating it or however you'd like to. Keeping my, this was drafted very quickly last night, but trying to at least put the pertinent information about why we are selecting this. I, and how soon, I'm sorry. Okay, I know, I'll get ahead. How soon? You're wanting us to do this tonight. No, you can do it. You can do it. Okay. Do you have anything to do? Do you have anything to do? Okay, okay. So. In front of a very large crowd. That's true. A lot of evidence there. So, great, unless Annie have more questions. I'm a little shy of how many words are here and then I'm gonna be like, sure, because I wanna say yes for the bus, but the specifics of this would be, can we find a way? I'm looking for a motion to approve the energy committee application for, resolution for their application for an electric bus. Yes, you could, in theory, if you want to, you could take, you could use the last three paragraphs and that would basically accomplish. I feel much better because I don't know enough to agree to those very specific details. Yes, and just so that you know, you know, we weren't trying to pull the wool over, it was more, we were taking the rest of that info from the, from the FAQ itself, but it's fine to, I think, for what we need to have those last three, yeah. So, actually, Pat, as our clerk, would you be willing to make the motion with the last three paragraphs? Yeah, absolutely. I move, make sure I have this correctly. Trying to think of Pat, for the last three paragraphs, starting with August 16th. We're just, just read whereas down. Whereas on August 16th, 2019, with the support of the energy committee, the Essex Westford School District applied to the Vermont Energy Investment Corporation, RFQ, to participate in the pilot, whereas the select board supports the efforts of EWSD, I'm assuming. Yes. And the energy committee in pursuing the pilot program. Now, therefore, the town of Essex Select Board supports the application for participation in the pilot program to Vermont Energy Investment Corporation to evaluate the feasibility and cost effectiveness of electric school and transit bus operation in Essex over a two-year period. Second? Max is going to second. Any further discussion? Annie? I just wanted to say, I did not think you were trying to pull any, well, I just wanted to make sure that I agreed with something that got us the situation, but I didn't have enough, I didn't feel that I had enough confidence to do so. Understood. Thanks, Elaine, for that. Okay, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor, please signify by saying aye. Opposed? Thank you very much. Thank you, we're very lucky. We have a very innovative and proactive energy committee. Well, it's been through three hours. It's great, and I will give you some reports on some other things that we're doing, but this is really helpful, and it's up to us. It's a big deal, yeah. Thank you for getting us involved in it. Okay. And thanks for waiting all night. Yeah, thank you for that so much. Okay. Item 6C, designating a voting delegate for the VLCT annual business meeting. And in the past, we have been amply represented, Andy. Please go ahead. I'm gonna volunteer to represent the select board as a voting delegate for the VLCT annual business meeting. You've done that how many years now? Well, I didn't do it last year because I was available, Mike Plagueman did it, but I think I've done it for four or five years before that. That's great. Anybody else wishing to contest or challenge Andy for the role of this? Should we have a backup? In case, like, what happened last year? And you can't go, and Mike, did you? I already have the day scheduled off, so. But if you got, okay. In case you get hit by an electric bus. I guess we can deal with it. I think if there's a backup, they assign one. I'd be happy to have the backup come in anyway. You can do it the day after the day out. So that's fine. Okay, yeah. Any other questions or comments regarding this? Thank Andy for being willing to do it. I'd like to make a motion. Okay. Is that how you do it? It's time. I'd like to make a motion to not nominate, but appoint Andy Watts to. Represent the town. Represent the town at the VLCT annual business meeting. Is there a second? Second. Any further discussion? I'd like to register for the conference that goes along with that, too. It's two days in Killington? Yeah. Yeah, if anybody else wants to register, let me know and we can sign you up. I'd be happy to have an Andy representative. I'm not excited about it. Let's probably have the two days scheduled off because it's in Killington this year. Okay. Okay, any further discussion? All in favor of nominating Andy to represent us at the VLCT annual business meeting? Signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? All right. Thank you, Andy. Item 6F is an executive session for discussion of legal matter. It's not a pressing item. I'd like to suggest that we just not do it tonight and do it at another meeting. If you'd like to have some more. Is that okay with staff? Is that okay with staff if we? We suggest to do it. Yeah. Opposed, opposed? They told me to do that. I also, I prefer when we have the ability to go into an appropriate room. It makes me a little shy to have, so yes, I agree. I'm glad to talk so long to say that. Any emotions? It's just an update. Yeah, so can I have a motion to table the executive session on a legal matter? So moved. Second? Second. All in favor, please say aye. Aye. Aye. Okay. Thank you. Okay, consent agenda. Now, I understand there might be a correction, Andy. Yeah, I'd like to pull out the meeting minutes because I'd like to move on the sentence. So Andy has made a motion to pull the minutes of August 5th out of the consent agenda. Can we have a second? Oh, a second. Andy seconds. All those in favor of pulling the minutes of August 5th out of the consent agenda signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Okay, Andy, what's your pleasure? Okay, line 160 starts with Mr. Watts, clarify that this statement would not rule out. It should sit, that's the word not should be struck. Oh. Line 160 you said? 160. That's not grammatical. That's completely opposite thing. Okay. Although I'm sure it's very difficult to keep up with everything I didn't mean to be. Were there any other corrections to these minutes? Nope. That's it. Okay. Can we have a motion to approve the minutes as amended? I make a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Second. Second. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. And what's left on the consent agenda are the check warrants. Can there be a motion to approve? We approve all of the check warrants with select board member, or the consent agenda, remaining consent agenda with select board member. Right. It's item 70. Second. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Okay. We've done it. We got through all of the items. It's only 10.30. The reading files, select board comments. Anybody have any comments or questions or things to discuss? Annie. Oh, not in the reading file. Okay. Okay. Well, select board comments is for, it's for whatever. I do suggest that Elaine, if it's possible, to contact the two news agencies and let them know about the extra piece that they did not hear. But I don't know if that, I think it's a piece that's important to the discussion and that is warrant, it needs to be said if you have time and it's possible before they air in. Well, they air in. I'm happy to help you get that phone call to the right person. I have to say it's not common practice to do that. Oh, then in which case? What they're gonna do is say, you know, at the time of this report, they were still delivering. I don't think they're gonna say, you know. All right, then. I don't even know where to begin. I would try, but it's okay. I'm probably overthinking it. I'm happy to contact them tomorrow and tell them the results of the meeting. Sure. Yeah, we can certainly do that. Sure. Anything else, Andy? In the meeting schedule, we have joint meetings on the 27th and on the 9th, do we have enough content to have both of those meetings? Just do, okay. Just asking, because we canceled one recently, so. We're always on the lookout for. Ways to not have to do. Tuesday nights are much harder for me than Mondays, but. Remember, Killington. I'll be there. I'm just kidding. Thank you, Andy. Any other comments? Sounds like it's time to adjourn. Would anyone like to move? To move. Second. All in favor of adjourning? Aye. Aye. Aye.