November 13, 2024 Planning Board Special Meeting Transcript - WEHI

69 1 itself. It references another provision. My client is 2 providing a substantial set aside before 3 (indiscernible). Under the Mount Laurel doctrine and 4 its progeny as an inclusionary developer represents a 5 protected class of individuals in need of the housing. 6 The regulation is applicable to an 7 inclusionary developer, to the court settlement and 8 even to this Board talk about the reduction of cost 9 generative items. And it also talks about other 10 things. And Mr. Afran likes to say oh, well, the Board 11 is not bound by the settlement agreement. But the 12 settlement agreement does reference certain regulations 13 in that an inclusionary developer, applications are 14 looked on more favorably -- inferences are made. 15 The applicable regulations encourage the free granting 16 of variances, waivers, relief to make inclusionary 17 developments happen. 18 So, to the extent things like that are in the 19 settlement agreement, yes, and I believe Mr. Afran read 20 the provision. It does reference. I think it can be 21 easily inferred from this agreement that there was a 22 cost generative item with compliance, strict 23 compliance, with the tree ordinance. So, a combination 24 of that combined with what Mr. DeFeo testified to, is 25 reflected in the settlement agreement. 70 1 MR. AFRAN: Well then if it’s reflected in 2 the settlement agreement, then my question is perfectly 3 relevant. 4 THE CHAIRPERSON: What was the question? 5 MS. McGOVERN: I think the question is -- 6 THE CHAIRPERSON: Mr. Afran, is the question 7 which I believe was testified to, let’s just be clear 8 here, is with the deer fencing, you bring a longevity 9 to the forest at whatever cost as opposed to just 10 replanting trees. In your professional opinion, would 11 replanting trees get the same result as the deer 12 fencing would. Is that the question that you’re 13 asking? 14 MR. AFRAN: It’s a lovely question but it’s 15 not what I asked. 16 THE CHAIRPERSON: Ask the question again. I 17 want to understand. 18 MR. AFRAN: I asked, isn’t it a fact that the 19 deer fencing proposal was raised in order to free the 20 developer of the extremely high cost of replacing trees 21 under the ordinance. 22 MS. McGOVERN: I think he’s given several 23 reasons why he suggested deer fencing -- 24 MR. AFRAN: I don’t understand, Ms. McGovern, 25 why -- I don’t mean to be rude or anything -- why

ordinance. 22 MS. McGOVERN: I think he’s given several 23 reasons why he suggested deer fencing -- 24 MR. AFRAN: I don’t understand, Ms. McGovern, 25 why -- I don’t mean to be rude or anything -- why are 71 1 you interjecting? It’s a straightforward question. 2 MS. McGOVERN: I don’t know that he has the 3 expertise to answer that specific about cost. 4 MR. AFRAN: He has the expertise to answer 5 what he heard and what was traded back and forth. 6 That’s the point of the question. 7 MS. McGOVERN: And that’s exactly what you’re 8 asking for, is what went on in the back room trading 9 back and forth. 10 MR. AFRAN: No, I’m not asking for what went 11 on in the back room. 12 MS. McGOVERN: Yes -- 13 MR. AFRAN: Mr. Plocker already helped us out 14 greatly by admitting that the alternative of replacing 15 the trees by cost was referenced in the settlement 16 agreement. Therefore, it’s a relevant question to ask 17 him isn’t it a fact that the deer fence proposal was 18 raised to free the developer of the very high cost of 19 replacing trees under the ordinance. 20 MR. PLOCKER: I object to the form of that 21 question. I know this is not a deposition but that is 22 a very loaded question with a lot of characterization. 23 MR. AFRAN: It’s cross examination. We’re 24 not here to serve tea. 25 THE CHAIRPERSON: We’re not going to raise 72 1 our voices, you guys. 2 MS. McGOVERN: And we’re also not in trial. 3 Mr. -- Mr. DeFeo -- 4 THE CHAIRPERSON: Yeah, if you have the 5 information that is not privileged. 6 MR. AFRAN: Wait a second. It’s a 7 straightforward question. It relates directly to the 8 relevant statements made in the settlement. All of 9 these directions -- if you have the information, if 10 it’s not privileged -- are really carving out answers 11 from the witness. He should answer naturally on his 12 own. 13 THE CHAIRPERSON: Can you answer, Mr. DeFeo? 14 THE WITNESS: I’m not certain I can answer 15 the question exactly as asked. I can say, however, 16 since it’s been asked several different ways, what I 17 can say is deer fencing is an alternative to the 18 replacement of trees, both of which have a cost. 19 In my opinion, the deer fencing is a more 20 effective use of money from the developer. I did not - 21 - I can’t answer whether it’s a dollar for dollar 22 savings. I think that answers the question, but I 23 don’t know. 24 Q My question as asked stands.

use of money from the developer. I did not - 21 - I can’t answer whether it’s a dollar for dollar 22 savings. I think that answers the question, but I 23 don’t know. 24 Q My question as asked stands. Is that the 25 answer you’re giving, Mr. DeFeo?