1.6.25 Conservation Commission

uh welcome to the for Conservation Commission meeting being held at uh one government center public hearing room first floor uh Monday January 6 2025 uh 5:30 p.m. uh pursuing to the open meeting alls when person make an audio or video recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium attendees are therefore advised that such recordings or Transmissions are being made whether perceived or

unperceived by those present and deed acknowledged and permissible start with roll call to my left uh lisis Ferrera John brand Jim kiss Tim McCoy McCoy uh we also have Dan agar conservation agent recording secretary Patty agar we are missing Chris Bole our uh condolences go out to him and his family for uh attending a funeral our prayers go with them too um and we have Craig from R TV uh first on the agenda

is notice of intent sc-24 d831 owner applicant Jeff Sylvia project location 2450 Indian toown road cessor map is w- 34-12 followed by ecosystem solution Inc on behalf of the applicant the applicant is proposing restoration plan to remove the unauthorized cart path created in or around 2017 from an order of conditions from 1997 D file number sc-24 - 289 this is table from November meeting so to

give you guys an update as you see on the report that you have there it has the the lengthy history of what's transpired here for just about over a year now um this was if you recall a response to an enforcement action where the property owner had altered some Wetland it was in an area of uh endangered species uh program land so the city of Fall River um water department and the landowner

had been working together to try to resolve this matter so dating back to February we had requested some additional information that we've been waiting every month for this information and that we were told that it would be coming we finally got an email today from Mike laasia um on behalf of the owner that they have no intention in submitting the requested information so you can either leave it on the agenda to

sit forever or you can vote on based on the information that we have received which is minimal and what we have determined to be insufficient for making um or granting an order of conditions allowing the alteration to remain with the proposed mitigation that they proposed which is still uncomplete so of the information that we had asked for so if if it is your decision to deny the

request um for the granting of an order of condition conditions make it specific um and that your finding should be um that you are denying it based on the fact that we have not received the requested information and that we have been told via email that the applicant has no intention of providing that so if they want to appeal it they can go to D second to that which we won't necessarily take up tonight but most

likely at next month's meeting we will then have to deal with how do we address the outstanding enforcement action so the initial action is telling them to file a restoration plan and address you know what what they've done they did do that however in order of conditions is not granted so at another time soon as you guys would like to deal with it we can send out an additional enforcement

action or we can start the process of sending it directly to DP I think we've we've dealt with this long enough and I think you've all been good and been more than accommodating to the owner and the applicant to try to resolve this matter um but it appears as though we're at a stalemate with them so we can talk about that part of it afterwards tonight we should just deal with the actual request

for the order of conditions that's been before you one thing to note that from the very first day one of the first items um that we had a concern about was that the original order for the construction of this house had never been recorded at the registry of deeds and what that means is that the real estate is not encumbered by this outstanding order so if someone were to go convey this piece of land there would

be no one no closing attorney uh real estate attorney real estate agent new buyer would not know that this existing order has not been closed out we were at at least able to get to the point where that order is now recorded which now allows us to have greater teeth in trying to get this resolved at a later time because this will now show up so at some point in time when when these

landowner wants to sell this property they will not be able to until they come to us and get a certificate of compliance which will then trigger their requirement to come through with the restoration or we can ask for D's help but we'll talk about that part of it you know at our next hearing dealing with the enforcement action okay Dan was there no rationale in the email message no just I I know that they were in

negotiations multiple parties the owner the water department the um the consultant for both parties which was Brandon fan I think you may be remember he was in on this originally then um NEC Northeast Consultants came in um trying to put together either the variance plan that was required the subdivision plan that was required and the restoration for this altered Wetland area and it's

just Fallen apart so laaser has not been able to get response from the landowner and from what he's told me was that it's off that there's nothing happening there and that he would request that we just take a vote so either way I'm not I'm not opposed to letting it sit but if you don't want to let this sit as item old business 01 forever you know for how

long at some point in time there has to be closure to this uh what's the board's feeling on that if there's no comment I would make a motion not to not to Grant the order of conditions okay second with the finding that it was due to not supplying the additional information requested make sure that that's there so we have a motion in a second for denying and uh the reason why as request for information is not

forthcoming and um we'll take a vote uh I I I I okay and then we'll revisit D with the next month DP or whatever yeah so for next month I'm want to put on the agenda all of now we're starting in the New Year again let's put a list together of all of the outstanding enforcement orders we've done a great job of closing up a bunch of them but let's bring all

of them up under a singular discussion so that we can plan out for the year how to deal with all the rest of those we'll throw this one in there sounds good uh next is review and discussion of update on Bell Rock Road table from November 4th so if if you've had a chance to get out there the actual site work that was required under the enforcement action is complete the site looks much better the

site is completely graded um the tree plantings that we had requested along the roadway are in the site is generally cleaned up very well however as you see in my report we still don't have substantial grass growth so there's still erosion that's going to take place over the next year until grass has grown I mean they just recently LOM seeded so it will take another growing season for

that to establish so my recommendation is is that we continue to table it will monitor that activity cuzz if you remember part of the restoration is to clean up the adjacent Wetland and remove any silp that carried over from the storm Water Management areas and from the site itself so the first thing is to get the site stable so that the continued erosion doesn't happen and more silt doesn't wash in so once the

site gets stable at that point we'll have them go in clean out any visible silt that's carried over to the well and area and then we can make a a decision on releasing the enforcement action so my recommendation at this point is just to keep it keep it on the agenda we'll continue to monitor it through the spring growing season all right can I have a motion to uh table the matter and

keep it on the agenda monitor motion to table old business item 02 B Rock Road seconded I I I I okay next is review and discussion of uh adopting fee structures uh the state still has not finished so can I have a motion to table motion to table second call I I I I okay review and discussion of 1262 bra nav was table from uh November 4th so what I

would like to do over the next 30 days um is work with the owner um their representative to schedule a site visit um get a date where what I would like to do is find out what members do have an interest in going um and then see see if we can get maybe like a staggered 15 minutes for groups of two to go and view the site if you if you choose to I'll

find the date that's available see who's interested we only have two that want to go fine but we can't have everybody go at once because then it would be constituting a public hearing so let me work on on the scheduling of that so that we can go view the site make sure they're still in compliance with uh with the enforcement action okay can I have motion to table uh motion to table

second roll call I I I I okay next notice of intent sc- 24- 843 owner applicant is Marco Fritz project location 565 Detroit Street assessor map is e-27 0042 followed by Farland Corp on behalf of the applicant the applicant is proposing to install an inground pool with concrete pad and paper patio with Associated grading was table from November 4th so you may recall um at the first hearing when we had presented the

information to the to the engineer regarding the previous permitting of the site where the previous Wetland line had been determined to be uh I did finally receive another email back from the consultant stating that they're working on a revised plan um with the owner and that he asked that the matter be tabled so that that would give him some time to continue to revise the plan and get us

something and hopefully before the next meeting so I would recommend that we table the matter until we receive that information a motion to table second okay roll call vote i i i i next uh notice of intent sc- 24844 owner appon is Omar if car project location one Middle Street assessor map is h-21 00001 filed by car Scot and civil environmental consultant Inc on behalf of the applicant the applicant proposing

site Redevelopment of an existing Mill complex including parking and storm water management system this was table from November you may recall after the initial presentation we had um given the applicant a list of comments both from the Conservation Commission and from the site plan review committee they're still working on those plan revisions uh to address comments that we had we do I did

receive email correspondents today um from the engineering firm as well requesting that the matter be tabled so that they can complete their work motion to table seconded roll call I I I I all right next is a notice of intent se- 24846 owner applicant is Alex Loro project location 263 Redwood Lane cessors map w5- 0059 filed by Jamie Basset of the Zenith Consulting LLC on behalf of the

applicant the applicant closing Wetland restoration area and buffer zone restoration areas before we start J did you send in green cards or do you have the green cards in the legal ad happy New Year good to see good see

you well Jamie is setting up and before he gives us the information that he needs to provide I'll just give you a little bit of update a history of where we are on this if you might recall this is with regards to the larger open space restricted parcel at the end of Redwood Lane where there had been some gravel access drives built um some of them through a wetland filling some Wetlands

so we had filed an enforcement order um the property owners their attorney and the consultant have been very responsive with putting together um a notice of intent petition that's here here this evening uh that has to deal with the restoration of those altered areas um uh again this is dealing with the Wetland jurisdictional items be before the Conservation Commission um there is

still the underlying issue of what can and can't take place under the conservation restriction or the land use restriction that came with the zoning variants that allowed this to take place so that is not before you tonight tonight we are strictly dealing with Wetlands Wetlands jurisdiction and the restoration of the alter areas I do not this is this this is one that we we read advertised right because we didn't

have the last meeting that's correct yeah we'll have that one but I want to at least see that you adverti the one that we canceled on you but that's fine I can get that check okay no worries in any event we we had to read vertise this because we had to cancel the December meeting so in-house we paid for these new ads to to come back on okay go ahead all right good evening Jamie biset

Zenith Consulting Engineers for record um I think Dan kind of went over pretty well there was a wetland violation uh the owners inadvertently went through some uh woods and some Wetland area uh once they were notified they stopped and they came to us and asked us to help fix it met with Dan um also met with Steve schme Wetland scientist and kind of went over plants and how to mitigate these

issues um boun some ideas off of Dan and Steve and came up with the plan that you have here um pretty dense plantings in all the way up to the 25 foot and then after that it's l and seed to stabilize and then what we've done as well is just outside of the buffer zone we've proposed a turnaround for the cart path so that they know exactly where to stop

to stay out of the buffer the little turn round area is outside the 100 foot buffer zone so backing up I've reviewed the wetlands line and the information Wetlands data that was submitted I'm in agreeance with with what the wetlands line has shown it basically determines that a good majority of the rear of this parcel is a bordering vegetated Wetland um and what's been proposed is to remove

any fill that was placed um within the Wetland within any buffer zone activity and then as Jamie stated um extensive plantings through the Wetland area with Wetland species as well as the 25 foot no activity Zone and then from the 25t to the 100t zone looned and seated uh so that that site would be stabilized as well I don't have anything else to add but if you have any questions be glad to answer

them I have no questions I have no questions either this you going to want to ask if there's any a any audience comment because this is the first hearing any questions from the audience on this matter I'd make a motion to recommend the approval of the de delineation and proposed restoration again and uh again as Mr ago stated without making a determination on the the um usage the land usage that's

out of our prw at this time yes some I'm assuming someone else in this building will determine that it's their jurisdiction and we'll let them deal with that right we have enough to deal with oh that okay so have a motion in a second roll call I I I I right thank you you want this the ground for the CC um yeah I would um actually you know what because this if we could and and

this will be quick can we take item number eight out of order so that Jamie can get out of here so Qui second second all right I okay number eight is request a certificate of compliance sc-24 d821 owner applicant is Allison Bernard owner Allison Bernard uh project location 30 Brookfield terce assessor map is -4 lot 63 request for certificate of compliance in accordance with previous granted orders all work has

been completed substantial compliance the order condition you just want me to give a report or do you want to give yours no I all right um I thank Jamie for doing picking this up um and trying to get this matter resolved and along with his letter and the asilt plan that was submitted both acknowledged by himself and by by my review um I would have to offer that the site has not been

constructed in accordance with your order of conditions um one of the all General only conditions that you normally put on swimming pools is that the pool equipment be placed 25 ft from the bvw and that was proposed by by Jamie on his plan but that has not been done so that would be one of the first issues um that has not been resolved and then secondly to that um moving some of

the Wetland signage up to the proposed fence the the actual where the fence was installed I'm not in opposition to that not a big deal really where the location of the fence is it provides the same level of protection to the Wetland um but I would say that you should require that the pool equipment be removed to way you would required it being 25 ft away and that the Wetland signage be

attached to that new fence that was installed that's all so at this point in time you just vote not to issue the certificate of compliance okay y all right can I have a motion to uh deny certificate compliance motion to reject certificate of of compliance second roll call I I I all right thank you and the two reasons were the the signage yeah the signage and the pool equipment did

she say what did you did you explain to her that I tried she just doesn't try again she's a PhD and something she should understand yes all right I'll give her a call I don't have a PhD that's why I'm not Brant me I don't either all right thanks everybody have a good night thank you all righty next is the request for extension of order of conditions on sc-24 d782 portion of Route

79 so this is the um existing order of conditions for the Route 79 Tov Street corer work um we did receive a letter from Mass do asking that the um that the order be extended so I would recommend a three-year extension can I motion to motion to approve second second W hi hi hi hi all righty uh next request determination of accessibility - 197 owner applicant Paul furland property location bir street

accessors map na proposed project consist of separation of approximately 14,200 lar ft of combined sewer into a new storm water drain in the southwestern portion of Fall River Work proposed at the Western most end of bir street is agenda to drial uh resources areas and subject of this RDA all other work area and proposed outside of the durur distal uh resource area and Associated buffer zones will not be

covered further in this RDS okay was have that remote good evening my name is Danielle Gant I'm from CDM Smith I'm an environmental scientist I'm here on behalf of the city of Fall River to discuss with you this evening the ber Street let me just see if I you have your legal ad oh uh yes I do I have it pulled up on here um you need a physical copy of it you

can you can email it to us if if you have it is this another one that we I do have it we did or no I don't yeah no it is this is one that we would I saw both when I pulled up the legal ads for Birch Street I saw the one on 11:21 that I and then I saw the additional yeah so I can I'll email you one but I have it pulled up on

here um let me just see why this worked before I know you guys saw it before oh it's on a different screen interesting okay hold on let's try again Tada okay okay so uh this project is it's a sewer separation project for the city of Fall River the overall project is in relation to the the court order um to control the combined sewer overflows to the receiving Waters the overall project is 14,000 linear feet of sewer

separation this is in conjunction with other projects that are meeting to are are aiming to meet the court order requirements so they're attempting to alleviate Street flooding address sanitary sewer overflows and provide infrastructure renewal in the process the portion of the project that is within jurisdiction is this let me see if I can use my little laser is this um this street right here is ber

Street this is Bay Street and in on this street here there's this sort of vacant parcel there's a an old abandoned looks like a garage of sorts that's there's a building back here um and that building has some bordering vegetated Wetland Associated directly adjacent to the building and in sort sort of what I would assume is like the front yard area where they used to have function and then there's also a

small perennial stream that meanders through this property it's daylighted over in this area and then it is culverted until you get to the Bay okay so this street here the work that's proposed in this street here is very minimally adjacent to the resource areas and I'll show you here are the existing and proposed conditions so here is sheet C2 in your package this is Bay Street here and then this is bir Street and

what you're seeing on the plans here the dark is obviously proposed conditions as it would typically be you'll see the drain the new drain or the I should call it the separated drain is running on the south side of Birch Street this here is the limit of the 100t buffer zone to that bordering vegetated Wetland that I was discussing with you so the work proposed within bir street is the obviously the drain

they're also going I don't know if you've ever been to this or if anybody completed a site visit or if you've been to this portion of Birch street but the pavement is in very poor shape it's very bumpy um there the engineers are assuming there's some kind of drainage issue underneath the pavement that's causing it to be it's very it's got a lot of almost like mle Hills underneath the pavement so when they do this

project they're also going to repave that road road so it's more accessible So within this 100t buffer zone here area here the work would simply be repaving of the roadway and then when you continue closer to the water Eastward you're continuing here with this drain pipe oops sorry with this drain pipe here so the buffer zone does encroach a bit within the area where the drain pipe is being

proposed then it scooches back into the woods there and then additionally obviously the roadway is adjacent to the coastal area so at the very Westward Terminus of the project area is this 100t buffer zone to a delineated Coastal Bank that I delineated off the sheet here you can't obviously cuz it's 100 ft from here here but it's it's I hung some flags at the edge of the Coastal Bank and so that

Associated buffer zone extends a bit into the work area here so it's almost really hard to see even on this PowerPoint but it's this little small spot right here is within the 100 foot buffer zone of the Coastal Bank and that and that's the most western portion that's the most western portion correct and here they're not Paving it's going to continue to be gravel it's just that the pipe extends

Within in the 100 foot buffer zone so I want to make sure to show that to you here so they'll this will be part of the trenching activity they'll place the pipe and then they'll reberry it so and that's it moving East that slight encro oh may do I got to be recognized by the chair or I apologize that slight encroachment into the yellow but that's further east closer the bay back but it hasn't gone

through Bay yet back obviously this all starts from correct it's all from Bass Street it's that it's this small this portion of roadway here from Bay Street here to the coastline Dan can you help me is this typically oh I'm trying to picture the bottom of Bird Street going into Bay is that is that drivable into through Bay Street to keep continuing further toward the river you can drive down it but this

is um I wouldn't I would I honestly can't even picture it I just always I I mean I'm thinking that b just kind of stops it I mean Birch stops slate is the next one up further north so so this doesn't get um much activity and again the proposal for this is in that first area Works being proposed within the existing improved area of bridge um at the outer 50 ft of the 100t buffer zone

so this is nowhere near the actual resource area this is in that outer 50 to 100 foot area and then again once we get to the end we're not even dealing with bvw we're only dealing with the buffer zone to a Coastal Bank um so the proposed activity is is minimal compared to what it could be um that's why um the filing of a request for determination is adequate for this and what you're really

determining is that that the work does not require um the filing of a notice of inent you makeing negative determination for the work and for the uh a positive delineation for for the delineation positive and then a negative for the work so you're approving what they've flagged for resource areas but you're saying that the work does not require the filing of a notice of intent so you're going to want to make

one motion but with two determinations unless there's no other comment I'll make a motion for negative determination second second roll call all I I and then a positive for the line and I'll make a a motion for a positive determination on the uh uh uh the Whitland line okay second second roll call I I I hi all right thank you very much for your time thank you thanks next is a request for

determination accessibility D 198 owner applicant Madison Properties LLC property location 594 Airport Road assessor map is z-3 d24 you folks weren't here for that matter were you or no okay just didn't yeah yeah um let's see back to the assess map is z- 03- 0024 proposed project consists of construction of rais graded uh previous platforms for the mechanical equipment fence concrete 20x10 storage pad both as

required speciate the building tenants proposed manufacturing use including a gravel drive to access the maintain the platform also addition to the rear access egress Point as well as a walk through to ensure safe access to the ESS for the tenants required interior floor plan hi John Connell scitech engineering this is uh I'll give you a little bit of history on this this is um the building that you

had permitted previously at 594 Airport Road directly south of swimex the the new building that went up there parking facility so that site was permitted under a previous order 24800 which that site is under construction almost complete the tenant that came into the building had specific requirements for some in some applications that they needed to apply to it two of them being um this

additional area to the back where some equipment is to be stored um on their rear padded area and then also working with the building department they required an additional pedestrian access from the rear of the building so the application before you tonight is for the installation of that equipment to the rear it's being proposed on an elevated platform so that there would be no increased ground surface so it still

be open underneath all of the work proposed Falls within the the previous limit of work from the original order of conditions which you see in the black line that you see showing on that plan so there's nothing beyond the original limit of work just what actually gets built in that limit of work and John can give an additional presentation or explanation beyond that as as uh Dan had

mentioned that the this was an existing Warehouse that was built without a tenant once they got the tenant the their proposed use required uh additional buildout and additional storage areas um for some of the equipment that they need so um the a new access in ESS in the back staircase and a walkway to get people out um in accordance with the code the building code uh a raised platform here 100 by

30t um graded so that we wouldn't increase the um the impervious on that that's for mechanical equipment uh AC units or the other type of mechanical equipment they need and then uh um the a 10x2 concrete pad for storage and a gravel drive just to get behind that grav um the pad and then to maintain whatever would be on top of that platform the this would drain to the parking and be incorporated into the

drainage system on the property now I think that's that's about it if I can answer any questions question is the uh dash line Limited work this is yeah this dark dash line here is the previously approved limit of work and we would supplement or add new silk fence to that area or to that line to make sure um there's no sedimentation or in and getting into the Wetland from the proposed disturbance any any disturbance

for the the walkway and and the the footings for the um for the graded platform so something you'll see in my report concern that I had um I I recommend a negative determination for the work I don't think it has any impact to the to the resource area but what so that we're dealing with this on a singular issue um I would ask that you condition that no certificate of compliance for the

outstanding order be issued until all of the work is complete you don't want to sign off and now you have no ability to look at this site and then find out that this work went well beyond the limit of work so since the limit of work was established by the previous order all of it should be complete before a certificate of compliance is issued that's the only comments I have any other

questions which I'm pretty sure they're chomping at a bit to get this done right for a couple of months now so I don't think there's an issue with that so can I have a motion to have a negative termination that would fall under the existing uh order uh conditions sc-24 D800 motion can I just get clarification on that but withholding what did you suggest a final so seals so for the

order of conditions normally so when the work gets done under the original order y they would normally submit an asbill and request that we sign off on all of the work yes here leaving this work pending yes so my to wait till that's done and review it all at once and look at this at the same time before a certificate is issued okay you know do you need that verbage in the motion

though I would oh okay okay so we want to amend it to also include U to withhold COC until outstanding orders have been completed did you say yeah made the motion I'll second okay okay roll call all right I I I all right great thank you thank you everyone app thank you everybody let's see next is a request for certificate of compliance sc-24 D820 owner applicant High development project

location 121 Robin street sessor map is D- 05- 0035 filed by Northeast engineer and consultant Inc on behalf of the applicant the applicant is requested certificate of compliance all work has been completed substantial compliance with order condition so in your package you have an asilt and the request for certificate of compliance in the engineer's letter stating that the work

has been completed reviewed the asilt um gone out and done a site inspection all of the work has been been done in substantial compliance with the order of conditions this was for just a single family house on Robin Street which is buffer zone work um so I would recommend the issuance of the certificate of compliance motion forance motion C second roll call I I I I okay uh next notice of intent

sc-24 847 owner applicant uh applicant John Henry owner Harkin Whitfield Whitefield LLC project location 121 Whitefield Street assessor map C-17 lot 0024 followed by Sean asworth of insight engineering on behalf of the applicant the applicant is proposing construction of a single family dwelling I don't think there's any is there anybody here where the right you're in opposition I don't see the

applicant or their representative here um so we cannot open the hearing okay um normally what would happen is the consultant the property owner somebody would show up to give a presentation provide the list of all the green cards that everyone was notified give us a copy of the advertisement that was placed in the newspaper so they are not here this evening okay um it's my recommendation that we allow the matter

to be tabled till the next month's meeting um just in case something happened to them on the way here um I can't even read in what my comments were um I'll give you a copy of what my comments were so that you can read see what my thoughts were um did did we speak today yes so just know that my comments went out before we spoke but I think you'll be comfortable with what I

added um I have not changed it from what I wrote this morning but I think that'll give you some level of comfort that we are aware of the situation out there um but we really can't discuss it tonight because the hearing is not open okay that's it so with that I would recommend that we table table Mo table second uh hi hi hi do you have a clean copy of this P that you can get

to thanks for coming in thank you we apologize for that that page yeah only because I just I wrote all over mine you can see it's part of a bigger issue oh trust me but we have a bigger file than that yeah so just show them on the one so those my comments are in red under number six absolutely yeah thank you so just to understand where what our initial thoughts are and we'll

take it up at the next month's meeting hopefully some will show up okay thank you thanks uh next is request certificate of compliance sc-24 638 applicant Richard uh renom CEO Prime engineering owner Estrella enterprise LLC project location 231 Commerce Drive cessors map z-5 lot4 request a certificate of compliance accordance with previous Grant order all work has been completed

in substantial compliance with the order condition so this was a request for certificate of compliance for the commercial building that was constructed at 231 Commerce Drive as soon as you take that left hand hard leftand turn on Commerce Drive a fire station is to your left directly to your right there's a there was a building there commercial building that was built um number of

years ago that gold medal Bakery just purchased um through that purchase it was discovered that one as always the order of conditions was never recorded at the registry of deeds and that they had never asked for a certificate of compliance because the order was not recorded it didn't show up in the title search so gold medal Bakery took ownership of the property not knowing that there was an outstanding

order of conditions they approached my office with renovations to the building proposed renovations to the building and to the site and I had to explain to them there's an outstanding order of conditions so they took it upon themselves as the new owner we provided them with a certified copy of the original order of conditions they went and recorded that at the registry of deeds so now that does show up in title

to this their engineer went out had done an asilt of all the work that had taken place there were a few modifications that they needed to make regarding a detention area to the rear of the building they did that submitted a revised asil plan so basically they're driven by hey we need to get our ducks in a row before we move on to what we want to do next so they've been great to

deal with they've submitted the plan we've received the engineers um letter um regarding the proposed work so I would recommend that we issue a certificate of compliance for the work that was previously permitted and that will allow them to come back to us with some changes that they want to make in expansion for for their use out there that's all can I have a motion of a certificate motion made and second all right

hi all righty next request us no we did that one that's the one that we bumped up oh that's right you did that one you're good John you're good approval minutes approval minutes from March 4th motional approve minutes from November 4th second November 4th John I say November 4th said March all right November 4th roll call I I I I okay uh I see no public input uh can I

have a motion to adjourn motion to adj second I I all right done