December 10, 2025, Planning Board Special Meeting - WEHI Transcript

01/14/2026 10:36:25 AM Page 125 to 128 of 144 32 of 55 sheets 125 not. Can you --1 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: I don't know anything2 about that.3 THE PUBLIC: Can you tell us anything about4 that?5 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: The board wasn't aware.6 Any letters provided today will be provided to the7 objector and the applicant.8 THE PUBLIC: I'm sorry.9 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: The letters that were10 described today, letters that were, the letters that11 were described today will be provided to the objector12 and the applicant by the expert. I don't know anything13 about a CME report that was there this morning and not14 there now.15 MS. McGOVERN: Is it on there?16 MR. PLOCKER: It's on there.17 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: It's on the website, our18 secretary just found it.19 THE PUBLIC: Is it the Mr. Kleinberg site20 plan, letter and e-mail from Mr. Kleinberg?21 MS. McGOVERN: That's O-36 and O-37 was the22 diagram and that should be on there too.23 THE PUBLIC: Yeah, that wasn't there this24 morning.25 126 MS. McGOVERN: Our board secretary is saying1 otherwise.2 THE PUBLIC: I was on there.3 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: We're not arguing with4 you.5 THE PUBLIC: I am simply saying it just6 deals, it's very difficult to follow along with some of7 these meetings where the public has not had, and I am8 sure the board hasn't either, had an ample opportunity9 to review these very important documents.10 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: They're on the website.11 As far as the secretary told us it was on website this12 morning.13 THE PUBLIC: The other question is regarding14 this CME letter, there's references made to documents15 that are not posted, like capacity calculations for16 their sanitary sewer, which are not anywhere on this17 page.18 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: We'll find out.19 THE PUBLIC: I am just saying.20 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: I am saying we'll find21 out.22 THE PUBLIC: There are a lot of missing23 documents and I just, it's very concerning.24 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: The documents you said25 127 missing apparently are there. So providing that1 information may not be as accurate as the public needs2 to hear, so at this moment our secretary will look and3 see if there ar any documents in the CME letter that are4 not there that have been brought to the Planning Board.5 THE PUBLIC: I mean, how can you review6 things and actually think about closing this application7 without the benefit of having the opportunity to hear8 testimony on these very

to the Planning Board.5 THE PUBLIC: I mean, how can you review6 things and actually think about closing this application7 without the benefit of having the opportunity to hear8 testimony on these very important new documents?9 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: We were listening10 previously, we are going to hear testimony based on what11 Mr. Afran said.12 THE PUBLIC: Sorry, say that again, sir.13 You're going to hear testimony on --14 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: We listened earlier, we15 heard the testimony, if needed by the objector will be16 provided at a subsequent meeting.17 THE PUBLIC: What about the applicant?18 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: What about the applicant?19 THE PUBLIC: I mean there's a whole new CME20 letter that there was never any discussion of the21 sanitary sewer in any real way, so my question is, how22 are you getting a review letter and not having CME and23 perhaps the engineer that created the utility plan to24 work out compliance issues and, and the record is not25 128 complete. It says it very clearly in the CME letter.1 So I guess I am saying, you haven't heard any testimony2 on this utility. Zero.3 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: We have. Thank you so4 much for bringing that to our attention. The secretary5 will review it and we'll have our board attorney and I6 look at this.7 THE PUBLIC: Thank you.8 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you.9 THE PUBLIC: Hi. Susan Pannullo, 200-foot10 notification range. Thank you for all your testimony.11 I am going to ask you a difficult question, a general12 engineering question. When there is a failure, there is13 a disaster and the engineer has chosen the less14 conservative means of evaluating risk versus the more15 conservative means being presented with two divergent16 opinions, engineering opinions from two very good17 engineering firms, when you choose one engineer who18 adjudicates this and chooses the less stringent choice19 and there's disaster, how is that managed? How is that20 dealt with in terms of litigation, in terms of risk to21 the engineer that's made that choice. How does that22 work. Medicine I understand. How does that work in23 engineering?24 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: He didn't testify to that25