Printer Friendly Layout

News/Events - Meeting Minutes

Meeting was called to order 6:15 at p.m.

Members Present: Mr. Snow, Chairman, Mr. Breitenstein, Mr. Greenbaum, Ms. Scott-Pipes.

Also Present: Paul Shea, Jim O’Connell, Agents, Carol Logue, Secretary, Allan Greenberg, Associate Member

Agenda: Motion to accept the agenda Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Request for Determination: McAdam, 157 Turner Road (add to decks & 2 new deck sections)
Doug Friesen and Dan McAdam were present at the hearing. Plan scaled back. Zoning Board not keen on roof extensions on right of building, considered part of footprint. Were proposing two 3’ decks, front and side with roof; existing is so narrow they are hardly usable. Since Zoning Board hearing, revised plan and putting open pergola over side deck. All going to be put on new piers. Mr. O’Connell: Side deck is already there and it is about 12’. Been there a long time. More deck on ground than shows on the plan. Only doing the front of house. Need a revised plan. Make part of RDA. Mr. Snow: other work going on, if dumpsters on site make sure they are well-managed. Motion for a negative 3 - “The work described in the Request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the regulations, but will not alter an Area subject to protection under the Act. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent, subject to the following conditions (if any).” - A revised plan shall be submitted showing all existing and proposed decks. The February 16, 2012 plan does not accurately reflect the existing deck on the east side Mr. Greenbaum. Second Ms. Scott-Pipes. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Request for Determination: Zarella, 8 Palfrey Street (remove & replace 2 piles)
Julie Johnson was present at the hearing. Brother executor of the estate, including house. Dock has been there many, many years. Two piles need to be replaced. Pile driver right across the river. Exposed right now, dock isn’t there. Convenient time before pile driver goes under the bridge. Leaving in 2 days. Motion for a negative 2 – “The work described in the Request is within an area subject to protection under the Act, but will not remove, fill, dredge, or alter that area. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent.” Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Request for Determination: Donahue, 72 Gannett Road (remove 4 cu yds ledge/brush & 2 trees for lawn)
Hap Pompeo was present at the hearing. Son-in-law’s property. Request to remove outcroppings of ledge, some shrub vegetation and a few trees. Hammer ledge down to create more lawn. Ms. Scott-Pipes: didn’t show where the ledge or trees were coming out. Don’t know what you want to remove. Removing at rear of house. Mr. Shea reviewed with Hap; slightly revised plan. Wetlands behind house and across the road. Looking at buffer zone behind the house. Think work is at the 100’ line; project complies. Will receive revised plans. Mr. Greenbaum: erosion controls at edge of buffer zone; at least silt fence. Mr. O’Connell: Would like to make it a Commission policy not to accept something like this. No idea where the work is being done, at least we need to know that. Close the hearing, with submittal of a revised plan showing limit of work line, number of shrubs and 2 trees being removed, erosion controls, and preconstruction meeting. Motion for negative 3 - “The work described in the Request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the regulations, but will not alter an Area subject to protection under the Act. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent, subject to the following conditions (if any).” with final determination subject to a new plan approved by the agent and preconstruction and erosion controls Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Show Cause Hearing: Corbin, 77 Cedar Street (driveway)
John Corbin, Wanda Craig and Mr. Sheehan were present at the hearing. Mr. Snow: known the Corbin family all his life. If either side has any problem with me being involved . . . Mr. Corbin interrupted – he had an issue. Wanda: bought property this past fall. Mr. Corbin: All of a sudden anonymous person . . . the fact of the matter is we are not hiding anything. Mr. Snow: take in the facts of the hearing. Fact is we need a quorum and don’t have one if I recuse myself. Can postpone to the next meeting and hopefully go forward. Should be clear no more work is to be done. There have been new alterations that weren’t approved. A landscaper cannot be doing work that close to the wetland. Right now in noncompliance with the approved septic plan. No further work.

Request for Determination: So. River Partners/Solimando, 33 Central Ave./8 Dartmouth (restroom sonutubes) (cont.)
Michael Solimando, representing South River Partners, LLC was present at the hearing. Mr. Snow: Discussion came up whether an amendment should be filed to existing orders or RDA. Open orders for the dock. Mr. Shea: clearly this is an issue for the applicant. BOH has requested this action. Additional 2 pilings are the only issue for Commission consideration. Mr. Duggan submitted a letter and stated everything is in compliance. The pile driver is only there a couple more days; don’t have any problem with an RDA. If the Commission feels an Amendment is required, it could be submitted after-the-fact. It’s his responsibility to deal with Chapter 91 and Army Corps. If that becomes an issue he will need to file an amendment. Mr. Greenbaum: need revised plans for the Certificate of Compliance. Mr. Snow: thinking about the past few projects: TK’s situation, where the piles were placed wrong; Scituate Yacht Club foundation changed; and Marine Park changed plans. Do we have any sort of as-builts for the dock and pier? Still an open project. Little more concerned when there are multiple boards/agencies involved. Project came in as a package, now there is going to be a bathroom. Mr. Shea: Filed RDA to get it in quickly. Again, approve as a negative determination. Could make it a condition that an amendment be filed down the line. Did submit a certified as-built. Mr. Greenbaum: no guarantees that down the line you can keep the 2 piles. Concerned the project doesn’t get away from us. The plan you submitted with a couple additional dots, the engineer’s stamp should be crossed out. Looks like you are submitting a plan that was approved by an engineer. Mr. Breitenstein: Commission has jurisdiction over the piles, but the intended use is a detriment to the Act. All we are seeing are the piers. Seems like there are plenty of options for a bathroom. Commission is not approving anything other than the 2 piles. DEP only required a Port-a-potty. Appreciate his predicament. Mr. Shea: What if you issued a negative determination and Mr. Solimando submitted an as-built site plan showing location of bathroom and then files for an amendment. No hearing required for BOH. Mr. Bjorklund: 1-1/2 years ago had a stop work order, set some of the outside piles wrong, had the surveyor locate the 2 piles at the end. Motion for negative 2 determination - “The work described in the Request is within an area subject to protection under the Act, but will not remove, fill, dredge, or alter that area. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent.” - A future filing for an Amended Order of Conditions shall be submitted requiring a public hearing, notification to abutters, and an as-built engineering plan stamped by a P.E. Mr. Greenbaum. Second Ms. Scott-Pipes. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: McSharry Brothers, Lot 1 – 218 First Parish Road (new build)*
Wetlands Hearing: McSharry Brothers, Lot 2 – 218 First Parish Road (new build)
Applicant’s representative requested a continuance to the next hearing date. Motion to continue the hearing to April 2, 2012 at 6:40 Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: EBC Bldg Corp./Ellis, 277-283 Chief Justice Cushing Hwy (2 single-families)*
Brian McKenzie and Jay Ellis were present at the hearing. They were concerned there might be a quorum issue. Mr. Ellis left, thought project would just be continued. Mr. McKenzie thought Mr. Snow recused himself. Commission believed Mr. Snow had to leave to go to CPC. Motion to continue the hearing to April 2, 2012 at 6:50 p.m. Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: McClintock, 63 Glades Road (septic)
Dana Altobello was present at the hearing. Abutters notification was submitted. This is a 4400 sq. ft.,, 5-bedroom single family. Entire lot is in the AE flood zone, elevation 11’. Salt marsh is at the edge of the property. Brad Holmes delineated the wetlands. Currently the site is serviced by a cesspool, which will be eliminated. 1500 gallon tank with a 30’ x 11 ½’ leaching chamber. Tried to keep system as far away from the salt marsh as possible. Tank is 52’ away and leaching field is 91’. Proposing silt fence for erosion controls. Relatively flat site. Motion to close the hearing Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: Kelly, 56 Moorland Road (boathouse & landscape improvements)
Sally Coyle, Atty. Bill Ohrenberger, Sarah Malone, Gerry and Maureen Kelly were present at the hearing. Abutters notification was submitted. There are two outstanding Orders of Conditions from 1990 and 2006. Primarily landscape improvements; also proposing a boathouse. Resources are salt marsh and BVW to the marsh. Reviewed design plan and showed photos: 4-car parking area being reduced to 2, creating a gentler slope; repair sinking walkways; red areas on plan are where patios are being removed; removing 5 trees - 1 large maple, 2 Norway maples, and 2 Choke Cherries; installing outdoor shower; 11’ protected patio area for grill; oyster shell parking changing to pavers, but no change in grade, slightly smaller; installing wall and flattening area for the boathouse; proposing additional small patio; cut off mound to a medium grade; remove lawn in the back, add perennial beds; add stairs to steep slope; front walk replaced with pavers or stone in sand; and adding storage shed cut into slope along the wall for lawnmower. New plantings: flowers, perennials, hedges, and removing approximately 1100 sq. ft. of lawn to be replaced with native plantings. Ms. Scott-Pipes: boathouse is sitting on the 50’ buffer, too close. Mr. Ohrenberger: it is on pilings and placed at the flat portion of the slope, no continuous foundation. Mr. Breitenstein: deck elevated off the second floor? At grade level. No grading under the structure. Kayaks stored outside on racks on back of boathouse. Hay bales need to be extended all the way to the edge and be put on the plan. All plantings and mitigation should be done before construction begins. Plantings will be done prior to any construction, where possible. In order to build the wall, can’t plant first. Mitigation should be native species, no more lawn. There will not be more lawn. Mr. Greenbaum: Did some tree cutting in October, at minimum replace trees that were cut. This is the response to the Enforcement Order. Replanting 7 to 8 native trees. Not thrilled with what is called a boathouse. The way to keep it out of the 50’ buffer is to make it smaller. 14’ x 24’ is large. What other mitigation is appropriate? Mr. Shea: don’t have a big problem with shed placement; there are two areas to the right and left at the edge of lawn where it meets the salt marsh, where additional salt tolerant species could be planted. Mr. Breitenstein: where does drain go? What if it went to a rain garden? Need to talk to Ward about the soils. Mr. Kelly: existing French drains, parallel at the front of the house because the parking area in rain looks like a pond. Mr. O’Connell: very nice planting plan, however, work is being done in the 50’ buffer zone, and entrance to boathouse is from the 50’ buffer side, pull back 5 ’ or 10’. Cut back boathouse, and keep access out of the 50’ buffer. Mr. Ohrenberger: already a disturbed buffer; part of the plan is to be able to walk in the area. Additional low native shrubbery and eliminating lawn along the marsh. Mr. Snow: Distance from retaining wall to boathouse? 6’ or 7’ for mower access. Should have a sonotube plan and detail. Need to know finished floor elevation. What type of plants? Switch grass and Rosa Rugosa. Runoff will be a concern. Minimize runoff with woody shrubs; using Beach Plum on the edge. Don’t want something that needs pruning. Motion to close the hearing Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: Cilento, 260 Central Ave. (rebuild concrete wall/patio & slap/rip- rap)
Bartley Cilento and Mike Farrar, general contractor were present at the hearing. Abutters notification was submitted previously. Showed Commission pictures from his I-pad. Patio has been there since 1978; footing on northeast corner has been undermined. Tom Anderson, structural engineer, checked it, Undermined deck, footings need to be replaced, repair wall, repair the patio and install rip-rap. Ed Joy and Nancy Hand received permission and repaired their wall. Mr. O’Connell: The current repair for vertical walls is to put toe stone in front to avoid excessive scour. 2 –1/2 : 1 slope; could be a 2 : 1 slope, takes up less beach room. Seen hundreds of stone revetments, but have never seen one where 6” of stone is placed on top of cobble with 6” of sand. Revetments are usually buried below grade. Talked with structural engineer today, should use guide from Corps of Engineers. Replacing existing patio, but instead of having retaining wall all around the outside, going to put footings, so if one collapses you don’t have to replace the whole thing. Top slab will be self-supporting, with break lines, potentially replace a section instead of entire deck. Contacted Ed Joy and he basically said he would sign off on an easement to make it easier for both of them. Going 2’ or 3’ onto his property. Need letter of permission from him, otherwise he would have to be an applicant. Contact Nancy Hand for the same issue. Mr. Greenbaum: south side - can’t make a straight edge, talk to the neighbor to the south also. Mr. O’Connell: Taper it down toward the abutting property to minimize end scour. Concrete patios in V Zones are asking for damage. Jim wants to have a discussion with the engineer. Pouring a new wall in the front. Taking entire wall out, put new footings 10’ to 12’ down. Not spelled out on the plan. Mr. Greenbaum: structural doesn’t have depth of footings. Mr. Shea: need to continue the hearing. Mr. Crawford needs to tie his plan together with structural plan. Need additional information: Letter of permission from abutters, discussion with engineer and agent, how machines are getting to the beach and impacts, correct dimensions on plan, and make sure there is clear and legal access. Show everything on the plan. Ms. Scott-Pipes: rocks next door are way too small. Motion to continue the hearing to April 2, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Discussion: Grady/Mankewich, 425 Hatherly Road (CofC)
Kevin Grady and Jamie Mankewich were present at the discussion. Took a look at both files between perc tests and the actual house building. Any more pieces you can fill in? Cleared at a certain point and you purchased at a certain point. Riccardi was involved with the first Order of Conditions. Bought property in 2006. Who cleared the property? No clearing was required, already cleared and stuff pushed to the sides. Took 1 tree down to build the house. Came back in front of the board for the Extension. One Amended Order in 2009 to turn the house 90°. (Don’t believe there was an amendment.) Who laid out the house? Grady staked out the house, probably a couple of times. Latest plan revision was ‘06. Should have realized it was cleared beyond the fence. Rain gardens were in the wrong place. How do we have this breakdown in communication, different versions of the plan and working inside the 50’ buffer? Looked at the perc test plan, trees weren’t supposed to come down. Anything removed or impacted was supposed to be planted with a natural seed mix. How you got so far out of compliance we don’t know. Two files labeled 2009. Mr. Snow: Original footprint of the house changed several times, but a few were just brought to Vinny Kalishes. Jamie was involved in probably 2 versions. You are going to need a CofC for perc tests, and then the other for footprint of house. At this point we either look to remove some lawn, or leave what is there and discuss off-site mitigation to make up for discrepancies. Ms. Scott-Pipes: don’t think there is anything we can do at this point. We need mitigation. Would like to see at least 3 days of work for the town. Mr. Greenbaum: in violation of his Orders right now with the rain gardens and lawn. Eligible for a fine of $50 a day. Mr. Snow: We fine people that haven’t filed at all; need to figure out what we want to do. Grady submitted a couple of letters stating that the project was in compliance, and it was not. Mr. O’Connell: respect your organization, but to receive two sentences stating that it is in compliance, and it blatantly is not, is not good. Rain gardens much too small and supposed to be 3’ of yard on one side, intrusion into the 50’ buffer, etc. We accommodated you, so you could sell. Rain gardens have been enlarged, but can’t plant yet. Mr. Bjorklund: Mitigation from 75’ to 50’ at the side of the house. Perc test was to 60’. Mr. Greenbaum: original perc test orders were very specific, no clear-cutting, just selective cutting. Mr. Snow: weren’t many trees. Sometimes the length of time projects drag out, causes problems. Would be glad to do 3 days of offsite mitigation. Ms. Scott-Pipes: Want to make it clear to both parties, that this was not acceptable. Can’t understand how that letter was issued stating everything was done according to the plans and Orders. Mr. Greenbaum: corner of house was supposed to be at the edge of clearing, but then lawn was planted. A lot of properties in Scituate are in marginal areas. Marginal properties can’t always have large houses and large lawns. Ms. Scott-Pipes: What about putting some bushes along the edge. Mr. Mankewich admitted it was his fault, haven’t dealt with Conservation that much. Mr. O’Connell: plant the rain gardens and reduce the lawn area; and submit a signed letter regarding the 3 days of mitigation work. Kevin Grady: Project has been going on about 10 years, and there have been a couple of agents. When reviewed Orders requiring the fence to be at the 50’ buffer, decided to send the request for the Certificate in and see if there were any other issues. Withdrew the original letter and submitted a new one. In hindsight should have called the agent and discussed it with him. Any discussion with prior agent is totally out the window. Did you go to the site? Scanned the whole site. Mr. Greenberg: there have been a number of cases where Bob Crawford listed slight differences or reports have come in where there were problems. Mr. Bjorklund: Bob Crawford does an excellent job. Mr. Grady should look at the sites like Mr. Crawford does and say these are where the changes are, with as much detail as possible.

Show Cause Hearing: Totman, Turner Road / Meadow Road
Russell Totman was present. Mr. Greenbaum: didn’t report you, you reported yourself. Got a call that water was bubbling out of the driveway. Guess it was just groundwater. Dug out by the road, got to within 5’ of the shutoff, cut water line and put new one in. It was so muddy on the end, put the same stuff down as the driveway. Told the secretary that I fixed the water leak. Worked in the first 10’ from the road. You did bring in fill. What was scraped up when we dug out was spread out again. 50 years as a contractor, do all the sewer work. Mr. Shea: Last Thursday morning received a call from Pete Spencer about 8:30 a.m.--he had to replace a broken water line and wanted to repair it that day. Agent told him just to fix it, than submit the filing. Mr. Snow: when working at the edge of a street, typically not in our jurisdiction. Does it require an RDA or a notification to the agent? Not talking about a waterline or sewer connection. He thought the agent had the ability to allow such work. Should be backed up with an RDA. Mr. O’Connell: personally would like a photograph and a hand-written note of what you are going to do. If just a matter of fixing, should be some discretion allowed to the agent, but don’t want asphalt sitting directly near a resource area. Ms. Scott-Pipes: it was a emergency, but you know now, call, leave a message, and get up here and file. Mary Ellen Schloss, Agent in Weymouth: The state has an exemption for water lines, don’t know if there is something in the local; still need to know that BMPs are followed. Fixing the water line doesn’t allow fixing a driveway.

Mr. O’Connell: Bailey’s Causeway - second parking lot gravel will be brought in soon, as approved by the Commission.
Marine Park: the boathouse will be moved within the next week or two.
Responded to a planting plan submitted by the Yacht Club.
Stormwater Workshop April 5 in Kingston Town Hall.

Meehan, 16 Barry’s Landing: Stan Humphries was supposed to come back with a Notice of Intent.

Order of Conditions: Lazaris, Trustee, Lot 1 77 Border Street (new build) (cont.)
BOH has not made a decision and the issue is that if the septic moves, would like house moved landward. Septic outside the buffer. The point is the house is in the buffer. Put a condition: contingent on the approval of that plan, if plan changes, we will require something be done with the house; come back for an Amended Order. Mr. Greenbaum: should reserve the right to review the plan. Mr. Shea: applicant wanted to close the hearing, we can issue an OofC. If that septic system can move we can move the house back. Could force them to file an Amendment for both lots. Mr. Snow: I believe they said it was a done deal; want to make sure it is our determination to reduce the impact. Can request the applicant for additional time to issue the Orders, but once the hearing is closed, no additional information can be accepted. Mr. Walsh: case was closed, thought they were fine. Mr. Snow: Mr. Walsh cannot speak or have input. Use the information that was given at the meeting. Mr. O’Connell: are you are saying that the engineer was given wrong information? Can only act on the site plan that is before us. Motion to condition the project as amended: “Because any changes to the final approved Board of Health septic plans may have an impact on wetland jurisdictional areas, any modifications to the approved site plans dated February 27, 2012 involving the proposed septic system must be resubmitted to the Scituate Conservation Commission as a request for an Amended Order of Conditions, or possibly a new Notice of Intent filing. This determination will be subject to the extent of plan modification and all potential impacts to wetland resource areas and buffer zone areas.” Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Order of Conditions: Lazaris, Trustee, Lot 2 77 Border Street (new build) (cont.)
Motion to condition the project as amended as above Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Extension: Colella, 10 Lincoln Street (requesting 3 years for garage)
Motion to extend the Order of Conditions for 3 years Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Extension: North River Marina, 12 Chief Justice Cushing Hwy. (requesting 3 years – waiting for Corps – just received Federal Consistency Statement from CZM – dredging needs to be first before adding & replacing piles and the construction of washing recycling system)
Motion to extend the Order of Conditions for 3 years Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

CORRESPONDENCE
March 6, 2011 – March 19, 2012
1. Progress report for Scituate Harbor Yacht Club, 84 Jericho Road (in file)
2. Notification to abutters Kelly, 56 Moorland Road (in file)
3. Letter re: Scituate Landfill sediment
4. Brodigan, 104 Oceanside Dr - continued concern re: changes to property and significant flooding (in file) (e-mailed to members)
5. Memo from Neil Duggan re: Marina bathroom in floodplain – Solimando, 33 Central Ave. (in file) (e-mailed to members)
6. Request to continue March 5 hearing for 277-283 CJCH (in file)
7. Request for Departmental Action Fee Transmittal Form re: 0 Seamore Road – Herb Kuendig (in file)
8. John Chessia re: 206-218 First Parish Road (in file) (e-mailed to members)
9. Commonwealth of MA re: revised recommendations for management of suspicious or threat letters and substances
10. Revised plans for 18 OOBR/277-283 CJCH (would be nice if they’d decide which address to stick with) (in file)
11. Recording of OofC for 68-2393 – Murphy, 26 Buttonwood Lane (in file)
12. e-mail re: 339 Hatherly Road / Costello / McLaughlin
13. Recording of OofC for 68-2382 Hale, 816 Country (in file)
14. Recording of Extension 68-2072 – Fairbanks Trust – Lot 3 Glades Road (in file)
15. As-built plans for 68-2393 – Murphy, 26 Buttonwood Lane (in file)
16. Letter of concern re: Costello/McLaughlin land known as Ingrid Lane (in file)
17. Check received for extension for 68-2177 - 10 Lincoln Street
18. Notification to Abutters for Stormwater Permit & ConCom hearing for Doherty, Lot 2 Edward Foster Road (in file)
19. US Army Corps of Engineers Public Notice for Zarella/Donna Lee Realty Trust, North River Marine (in file)
20. Recording of CofC for 68-2372 – T.K. O’Malley’s, 194 Front Street (in file)
21. Recording of OofC - 68-2394 – Seoane, 8 Border Street (in file)
22. Recording of OofC for 68-2282 – Seoane, 136 Indian Trail (in file)
23. Recording of CofC for 68-2081 – Caulfield, 486 Hatherly Road (in file)
24. Recording of CofC for 68-2113 – Caulfield, 486 Hatherly Road (in box)
25. MACC Webinar Format - $35 per unit.
26. Request for CofC for 68-1836 – 61 Collier Road (in file)
27. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) panels – Effective date July 17, 2012; A FIRM map index, Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports,
28. 3/13/12 – Department of Fish & Game $5,000.00; Dept. of Transportation $610.00 = $5,610.00 (in file of Hunter’s Pond)
29. Request to remove a tree at 10 Buttonwood Lane – very bad shape
30. Request for continuance for Lot 1 & 2 First Parish Road until next meeting. (in file)
31. Planning Board – Stormwater permit for grading, site work & construction of new dwelling & driveway at 353 Hatherly Road.
32. Accessory Dwelling Special Permit Application at 130 Country Way – hearing 4/26/12. COMMENTS by 4/13/12 if possible.
33. NOAA Coastal Services Center Newsletter
34. The Beacon
35. Recording of 68-2395 – Beaudry/Hoben/Albanese, 4 Garfield Street (in file)

Meeting adjourned 9:45 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Carol Logue, Secretary