Town Council - Regular Meeting

Oh,

all right. All right. Melfield Town Council meeting December 15, 2025. Madame Clark, can you start us with prayer and pledge, please? Thank you for bringing us together today in a spirit of generosity. May we honor one another by keeping an open mind. May we voice our truth and listen with an open heart. May we discern your will to unite in a fruitful outcome. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

Roll call, please. Mr. Bureagod. Yeah. Mr. Christopher here. Mrs. O'Hara here. Mr. Punch here. Miss House here.

Open firm pursuant to 42-46- C-6D maximum three minutes per person. Did anyone sign up? How are you?

I I put your name down. Put my name down. Yeah. He says, "If you want to speak, I'm gonna say he wants me to say something." It's kind of funny, actually. We speak at the end. We speak at the end. Anyone else want to sign up for open forum? It's just for open forum and then

anyone Maggie Newton.

Good evening. Uh, usually I would reserve, sorry, Maggie Newton, 47 Summit A. Uh, I would reserve this for open comment, but I have a one-year-old that has a strict bedtime and 10 p.m. is not really a great bedtime for a one-year-old. Uh, so I just wanted to give my comments uh on the current zoning overlay change. And this is coming from myself and my husband, Kevin Newton. Um, I am urging the town council to vote no on the zoning overlay change. Through multiple meetings on this topic and hearing from fellow town constituents, the consensus is plainly, "We don't want it." For years, this business has shown their flagrant disregard for the town's ordinances already in place, skating around the rules, and hasn't been held accountable. Even their lawyer mentioned that if this doesn't go through, nothing really changes as of the start current status quo, which further shows us their arrogance and ignorance for ordinances. Our residents are held accountable when they break ordinances. Why isn't this business? The complaints of abuing neighbors and surrounding homeowners seems to go unanswered. Time spent listening to experts in this field that were hired by this company, not only a major conflict of interest, but further pushed the discussion of this matter out even further. While all the company continues to do is operate as usual, the town then hires GZA to come out and not to do their own independent study and testing, but just to review the information from the hired experts that we all heard from. A review is no good if you're not testing it. It's like audit 101. So, I could sit at home and I could watch all of this unfold and I could not care of the outcome because it's not my neighborhood. Like, it doesn't impact me at all. And that's the exact reason why I want to come here and stand up because if it were my child that couldn't go outside because of fugitive dust on blasting day and I couldn't open my windows like I would pray that somebody else would stand up

for us. If it were your children growing up next to this, how would you feel? So, I would like to remind the council that you were elected to represent your town constituents and they voted you in trusting that you'll make decisions that ensure preservation of public peace, health, safety, and comfort. And when the majority of your town constituents are begging you to protect their health, safety, and sanity, I beg you to listen to them. I beg you to put their lives and their well-being before whatever tax revenue the town is getting from material sand and stone. Thank you. Dario Dominic.

Yeah.

I don't live near a plane where the new material stand and gravel is where the Olay is going. I live near the old material, sand and gravel. My property that I live on backs up to that area. And this is just an example of what happens. Um, several years ago, my sister, who was living next door at the time, went to the airport and she was going through security and she was pulled out of line and they took her in a room. They checked her bag and they called the state police and the state police came and questioned her and they asked her what she did. She told them, they said, "Do you teach science?" She said, "No." So, long story short is she was pulled out because they were blasting in the back. They no longer blast behind me, but they're going to blast in the overlay. So, they they let her go and she had no clue what was going on until they finally told her, "We found um explosives on your clothes." So, when she was going through the security at the airport, it was picked up. So, you know, she got to where she was going, she came home and she talked to the state police again. said, "The only thing I I can think of is I hang my clothes outside and when they're blasting, that dust blows, and that's why she had blasting material on her clothes." They could even tell what kind of blasting material it was. They told her that the material was used a lot in England when they make bombs. It's it's a product of the bomb. So that's my little story.

Thank you.

Dominic, did you want to get up and speak or name is Dominic Rigani and I live at 2131 Providence Pike. I live there and also have a small business on the property. As I mentioned last time I was here, um I live I'm 76 years old. I came to North Smithfield because it purported to be a very peaceful place. We have a lot of 17 acres and uh I must have looked at the lot on a Sunday with the realtor because I did not realize from Monday through Saturday all I hear is grinding and beeping of the trucks backing up, the grinding of the stone and the smelling of the tar that's being produced. I can't even tell you that if this was my last frontier and last harrah that this is what I worked for since 9 years old to live that I can only go out of my house on a Sunday because between Monday and Saturday I cannot I own a high-end gallery on the property. I have people from all over New England that come here and one of the first things that they say is what's that sound? What's that smell? Because you're in the woods and this is you know God's paradise. Well, it may be God's paradise, but one mile from my property is um a pit that has been dug out and dug out of to to ruin the beauty and the calmness of North Smithfield. And why I'm talking about it now is because you're thinking about doing it again. You made the mistake many years ago. Okay, shame on everybody. We all make mistakes. But now you're wanting to change the law again to allow blasting. And you heard from Mrs. on a telly that there was actually gun smoke on their clothes. What better special uh uh intelligence is that from the airport versus these hired people who that are skewed on their on their feelings

because of where they're being paid. You don't realize and you people should be be responsible that this is a great town. You have a great school. You have a great choir. You have great sports, but you don't have a great environment. And now you're thinking about making it even worse by having blasting go back into what was stopped here before. Now I will say something good something good. I have met with uh one of the lawyers who works for Mr. Peza Tom uh Plunkett and he actually cared and he actually came to my property. I have invest in invited Mr. uh excuse me to come to my property but he has never shown up so he can hear what I hear. I can't open up my windows in the summertime for smell and noise. But Mr. Plunkett did come and he absolutely heard and smelled and saw what we live my wife and I live with and my and my neighbor Marilyn for she's been here much longer. She's been here for 40 years. I've only been here for 16. He has promised or tried to work out solutions. They are trying to turn the beepers down. If anybody hears those beepers, they will make you cringe as every time the truck backs up. Now, the people who work there don't know where the trucks are, then I would suggest you don't work there because the only people are there are the people who work there. I know it's an OSHA requirement, but OSHA can turn on down the dials. All I hear from 6:15, supposed to start at 7, but all I hear from 6:15 to 5 is those trucks packing up intermittent with all the grinding. And then for flavor, we throw in the smell. So, it's a great it's a great experience to be there. But Mr. Plunker did say that they are trying to find OSHA's readings if they can turn it down. He's also trying to look at because I had suggested along 128 they have these big planks to to drown out the 128 noise from the people who live behind there. You can suppress that grinding noise if the owners want to do that. Again, nobody has showed up. So, it goes on and on and on. I spent another summer. I have a pool. I don't

go in my pool cuz I can't stand sitting out there. And now you want to expand this new property to blast. So you start all over again and reduplicate the mistake we made a long time ago. I don't get it. Mr. Plunket seems to care. Nothing has happened yet, but I believe he's a good man and he's thinking, but I don't think the other lawyers that they have there, they're just looking for expert witnesses to purport what they're saying, which is just a bunch of baloney. Last time we have was in this very room and some guy talked about the CDC. Had no idea what he's talking about. He was just concerned about going a two two and a half hour ride he had home. The airport security is the best um intelligence you can have because he had nothing in the game. He only smelled smoke and you're going to smell it again if you allow them to blast. All I ask mentioned, we have elect you elect you elect elected you. We pay some of you to to make this beautiful town to be what it's supposed to be. You don't bring in businesses that destroy it and then the owners and the lawyers go home to their great properties and we live here with a mess. Our wells are contaminated, our blums are contaminated, our ears are contaminated and it just goes on and on and on and there is no empathy from this community because we shouldn't be having this meeting today. It should have ended before. So, let's learn a little tiny lesson from, you know, one time we had a great coach in this area. We all love the the Super Bowls and he won. May not be the most likable person in the world, but he was successful. But he was successful for one simple thing. He had three one- syllable words. That's all he purported. Three one-cllable words and he won six six Super Bowls. And those s three simple words is do your job. Okay? do your job as a town administrator, as a committee, as everything. We cannot allow these kind of companies to come in this. I've been on the economic development committee. We're trying to

bring in clean industry. We should have done something when 146 was coming in from from when we could have got that water while the walls the wall I mean the roads were open. No, we let all that blow by us. And we're worrying about having this kind of business destroy the very ground we live on. I will say shame on you if you let this go through because this would be a travesty. I'm on my last nine. Okay. But our children who graduating from these schools and want to stay here are going to live in this kind of environment. And this is a signature that shows North Smithfield what it is. Crushing rocks and ruining the rolls and ruining the wells and ruining our noses and ruining the dust. Congratulations is that you keep on doing. Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Right.

Can I answer the gentleman?

In a minute. All right. Old business discussion by council vote other action on consideration of evidence regarding possible revocation of junkyard license for HT Auto LLC DBA Leo's auto located at 955 INI road one continuation of public hearing and two discussion by council vote other action we have to reopen I'll make a motion to reopen the public hearing that's a motion is there a second second any discussion roll call Mr. Bureod yes Mr. Christopharro yes Mrs. Hara. Yes. Mr. Punch. Yes. Miss House.

Good evening, Town Council. Christopher Zangary for HT Auto LLC. We're here back from two weeks ago uh when we had a hearing on the same matter. And the council afforded my client the opportunity two weeks exactly to address some of the issues. Uh we had a very productive meeting today at the site uh with Captain Labar and also Mr. Cody. Uh they're here this evening and I hope they'll they'll tell the council what they observed because I think you're going to find those very positive findings as well. Uh my client has addressed the issue of the signage the next day. He had a commercial sign installed on the front of the property which is very large and very clear. Also, there was um and I remember it was uh councelor Dear Safaro, you had concerns about the car crusher and potential oil uh that could be released. Uh we have a letter from DEM. It's a very recent letter uh from December 11th, so last Thursday, which addresses and I have copies for the council which addresses those issues. They're actually closing their file. They found no oil leakage. They found no um distribution of any type of effluent to any type of estuary. So, I'll give those uh to the to the council if you'd like. I think you'll find that letter very helpful. Um the issues So, the issues that were addressed uh two weeks ago, we can if Mr. Cody would come up. Thank you, Mr. Cody.

Mr. Cody, are you at the site today? Yes. And what did you observe? He removed a great number of cars.

Removed a substantial number of cars. I believe probably 200. It's over 100 vehicles. 100 vehicles. And I just want to remind everybody that when we met two weeks ago, we said at least 200 vehicles. He said at least he said at least one, but I'll have my tell you how many. Before we go into this, can I just Is the fire marshall here? He is. Could fire Marshall, could you you mind coming up, please? Captain Labar, fire marshall fire department. Thank you. Could you just give us your summary of what you've seen over the last week or so before we get into

Absolutely. Uh the last time we met uh was December 4th. December 1st, correct? Uh, excuse me. Um, and I had done a follow-up inspection prior to the meeting and then I reported back to the council. Uh, December 8th, I did another follow-up inspection as well as December 11th. Uh, December 8th, um, my inspection to the property. Uh, I had noticed that there was quite a bit of activity going on and it was had it was actively being cleared per our request. uh again December 11th on that day had uh gone up there and um more removal had been had completed. Cars were being crushed and being removed at that time. Um and I spoke with uh the owner and told him that I would be back today, this morning for again another follow-up inspection. Uh when I arrived there this morning, um I did notice that all the violations that I had um given Mr. Terrarero uh were complete. Uh anything as far as the access um and so forth. Uh from the front of the property to the back was satisfactory. It was well over the 20 feet that is required by NFPA code. Um I did uh uh random measurements throughout the the access way and they were all either 22 or above 22 to 26 feet which is well within the NFPA's standards. So at that point in time I uh I signed off on the violations and at this point he has no violation with the fire department.

So is that the main road down that you correct? Yes. Now how about the ones that we talked about in between? So they there was space. So he has started uh making access roads to the side actually to both sides. He has actually had kind of a turnaround for us which we did require in the violations. uh as you proceed down to the left, he has that all wide open and then he has started making uh access roads to the right as well. So uh again, he has satisfied what we've requested and he will continue to work on that as well throughout the future. And I know we discussed the number of cars that were piled. So that has been

he has reduced those as well because the piles that he had as stacked as three high were the cars that were currently being ready to crush. So as he's crushing those, he is he is reducing that that height as well. So it's satisfactory to to us. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Cool. So can I ask you one more question? Sorry. So going forward, is there um and I don't even know if you you can do this or something you've ever done, but is there some sort of plan that you can come up with that would say that this property cannot have a maximum of so many cars to remain in compliance? Is that something that we could kind of figure out?

For NFPA, I can't I cannot limit the amount of cars he has. No. Okay. Unfortunately, no. So, you just can only limit the the amount of space. Correct. Is the amount of space that gives us um access to the to the property. That's the that's all I can I can uh enforce at this time. So, by you signing off now, that was the deadline of January 20th that you had before you turned it over to the state. Is that Actually, it was it was later on this week. That that was the deadline. It was later on this week. Okay. Um, so he's he's falling within that deadline. Okay. So, M President, may we ask a question? Uh, just a quick question. Had none of this taken place and you were just in the course of doing your job, you went and stopped by and you did an inspection, you would find no violations at this time right now. Yeah.

No. Okay. I was there this morning. Thank you. And one more question. Um, what is the regular cadence of inspections to ensure that they're meeting by our code right now? Um, is yearly. So I I usually follow up when uh his business license comes due. Okay. And is would there be any way and I'm sure this has to be a discussion amongst c the council but to um schedule maybe a more regular cadence of inspection to ensure that he remains compliant. If the if the council would like to instruct me to do that on a regular basis that you set absolutely I can do that as well. Okay. Thank you. Okay.

Thank you. You're welcome. And just before we continue, um, we have two public hearings tonight. So, if we can be done this this topic by quarter past 8, so we can take a recess and then go into the next one and be done by 9:30. Absolutely. Thank you. Mr. Hernandez is here again. And, uh, he can tell you how many cars that have been crushed and and been removed from the property. Hi. Hi. We crush about 150 cars, but we just remove 140 cars right now. from the from my from my land. So you're saying you it there's 290 less cars right now? Yeah, we continue crushing. Even tomorrow we we have a schedule for two trucks.

And what's your plan moving forward? Yeah, we continue cleaning. That's that's supposed to be because the company wants to leave the the crusher my place and it's going to be there for three months and we continue cleaning. That's what we we do. Continue cleaning the cars and crushing and take it off. But didn't you say that you don't crush the actual people that own the crusher? So, you're going to have someone on property for three months. Is that what you're saying? Yeah. They they say they they continue crushing it. It's It's actually on wheels. It's It's like a a trailer, tractor trailer, and the crusher is on that. So, it's portable. Portable truck.

So, is it going to come and go or is it just staying there? No, they're going to stay there to through next year. If you say about March, we're going to take it off. So, the crusher will remain on your property to continue to clean to ensure that you're compliant with our code. Yes.

What will your cadence of crushing be moving forward since we determined in the last meeting over the last four years, you've only had the crusher there twice and the second time being as a result of the mandated uh request. So yes, it will be there for the next three months, but as just the nature of your business, cars will continue to come in and pile up. So will you have will you establish a regular cadence of crushing moving forward? A regular schedule.

Yeah. Yeah. Regular schedule. Yeah. We going to continue crushing and you know cars coming is depend you know sometime one car one week can come in five another week and come in 20 depends. So it's almost like you would need to establish a threshold and once you meet that threshold then the crusher would come in and you would remove the cars appropriately. I think that's something that we should also discuss in the event that this is something that we do want to move forward with or allow that there needs to be a threshold that's established in order to ensure that the business owner is crushing in in a regular fashion. That's my opinion.

Um and then one more question and I don't have the time to read through this right now. I want to dedicate my attention to the public hearing. Um, but did anybody confirm with DEM or at least research the state regulations to understand if the crusher needs to be on a a non-porous platform? The actually saw the crusher today myself and it is like I said portable. underneath the actual mechanism there is I'm gonna a large metal structure that is almost a Vshape. I assume that is to collect anything that falls out. Okay.

Also, when talking with Mr. Hernandez, he does not crush engines. Those are sold either taken by part or sold wholly and shipped out intact. He does not crush engines. Only the bodies get crushed. So there wouldn't be fluid or oil leaking out from the bodies. As the engine is taken out, the radiators are taken out. Those are drained. He does have you if asked for the receipts. He does have the receipts for the recycling company. I should know this, but I don't. Gasoline. I mean, you put it in the back of the car. So the edge is up front. The gasoline is drained. Okay.

It is put in a holding tank and they actually use it on site for the vehicles on site. So they recycle it in that sense. Okay. So every car essentially that comes to your property, all of the fluids are drained from that car prior to crushing or prior to storing and then potentially crushing. Yeah. Okay. And I you mentioned last time that you had receipts to demonstrate that this is a regular occurrence. Are you able to provide any of those receipts to show us that you have a regular Okay. Okay, that's all I have for now. Is there any other questions about any other members of the council? Anyone have any other questions? I think we're good right now.

Again, we we would ask that his license be continued in I think we'll just need to hear from Leo to understand if he's abaded the violations from the zoning official. Sure. Thank you. Okay. So, yeah, I I've reached out to DEM, several agencies, the state department of regulations. Um, they've all pretty much signed off on him. They they say he's in compliance. So, So, you've confirmed with DEM that they do not that he does not need to crush on a non-porous surface, especially over an aquifer. You've confirmed that. Yes. Okay. And now he had two violations, correct, Leo?

Yeah, he still is working on the screening. which is before municipal court. So, he'll be addressing he's addressing that currently. Well, after crushing and the uh the expansion when he gets the cars out, he can correct that as he's working on the cars to be removed. Okay. So, to confirm, when you say expansion, do you mean the expansion of the cars over the property lines? Yes. Because there was too many cars to to remain on the property and still operate safely. So we don't necess when you say expansion, you don't necessarily mean expansion of services.

Correct. Okay. So that's not included in this violation. No. Okay. So he is as he crushes cars, I just want to summarize and sorry if I'm monopolizing this. as he crushes cars, you feel that he will be in eventually abate the violation of expansion past the property and do we have an ETA for that? Whatever his timeline must be agreeable I don't know we'll have to talk about just asking for a time. Yeah. So two months. Yes, please.

Um and then the other one the screening the six foot. No less than six foot. No more than 8 foot opaque screening. It's theoretically according to our ordinance it's supposed to be around the entire property that abuts residents unless there's significant vegetation. Is that something that's been completed? No, it's not complete. It's something he has started to work on. And what's the ETA for that timeline? two months as well, please.

Two months. Um, and then this wasn't necessarily included in the violation, but it sounds like it's something that's required or necessary. Vehicles, the trucks that are coming to deliver. Is there a wide enough roadway for them to enter your property instead of parking on the road? Yes. Yes. That's why we we have the the new the new driveway and all the trailers and coming is going to coming inside. That's why we we put the sign on from and now we may schedule with any driver. Okay. I know that this isn't a violation but moving forward we theoretically would not hear that there is not one vehicle that is coming to your property for business parked outside of your property.

Yep. Okay. So, can you just um when you said two months and two months, are you saying four months or you're going to get everything done within two months? Everything is everything. What's Yes. Two months or four months? Two. Two months. No, that's correct. Okay. I mean, I thought that we said when we last met, and maybe I'm misremembering, that we would renew the license if all violations were abated. We don't necessarily have to renew. We can continue this. So, we could continue. Okay. Okay. Um, anyone else have questions before the

Mr. Cody? Uh, I'm gonna ask you the same question that I asked the fire marshall, but um, had you just just been doing a routine inspection of this property and it was the mic. Yeah. Had you just been doing a routine inspection of this property and it wasn't as a result of this hearing or anything, what would your report be to recommend proof of a license today? Yes, it would. It would it's in a safe place today. Okay. Thank you. You said yourself that he doesn't have the appropriate screening up.

So, how could you approve a business and allow them to operate if they don't have the appropriate screening up to comply with our ordinance in order to ensure that the residents that are abuing the property are also able to live peacefully? Well, he's been cooperating trying to get things done. Um, but I think that's why we're here, Leo. So, I personally wouldn't feel comfortable allowing a business to continue to operate if they weren't fully compliant with our ordinances at the detriment of the residents. Anyone have any other questions?

Yeah. Um, I think I think based on the um testimony from the uh the residents, the building inspector, and the fire marshall two weeks ago, if you didn't want to give him a license, I thought we're well within our rights to not give him a license, but that's not what we Nobody made the motion to withhold the license. The motion was to give him two weeks to get it get it cleaned up. I think he got it cleaned up. We It passed uh building inspector, passed the fire marshall. I don't see where we have a choice. Uh we really we had the opportunity last week. Nobody made the motion to not give the license. We gave him two weeks and he fulfilled the two weeks.

It's not that we made the mo it's not that we didn't make the motion to not renew the license. I think and I'm sure the town solicitor could probably advise on this, but legally we're required to allow him the opportunity to abate the violations. We provided him with two weeks to abate the violations. He's abaded one in totality. There are still two that are outstanding. Yes, he's making good progress, but there are two that are still non-compliant. So, we allowed him to operate within the scope of cleaning the business up in order to abate the violations. Two weeks, it's two weeks now we're here. Only one has been abated in totality. Two still remain. So, I don't know at this point what our options are.

We have to hear from the public. There's nothing said that we can't continue this for another month. Check that he's in compliance. Make sure we're still having regular sites through building and fire marshall and come back and see if he's in compliance and he's making he's making some movement in the right direction. If you're if he's not then obviously then we have another situation. If you're asking me, I don't think that you allow some limited operation.

Isn't there also a question though about expansion of services? Like it went from a retail business to a wholesale business and potentially exporting of stuff business. Isn't that still on the table or is that one of the violations that you're referring to, Rebecca? That's that's What I had Leo clarify is that that what you're talking about, David, is not included in the violation of expansion of the non-conforming business. So that in theory, if it is determined that that's what he's doing, I believe that would have to be another violation.

Continue the matter for I don't know why that's doing that. could continue the matter pending review of these two violations. And if you want some additional, you know, review, I don't know if uh there's any other review that the building official can do, but you're raising something that has not is not before you. So, if you're claiming that there's a violation, then the question is the gentleman sitting right here in front of you now, if he believes that the violation is happening. If not, or he needs to do research on that, he can do that and he can consult with, but we're not in a position to tell you whether there's a violation. It's up to the building official to say there's an expansion of what expansion of beyond the property line is what the violation was that you're putting vehicles outside the property line is my understanding what the the word expansion applied to in this case. I'm not claiming anything. They stated they've changed the operation. They made that statement

by, you know, saying they're putting stuff into storage containers. I'm not making that claim. So, they've told us they changed it. I think absolutely prohibit any expansion or change of of use that's not allowed. You you can do that as a condition of your license. You you don't need to do investigation on that. to the extent that they're um I think you're right, Councilman. I believe there was some comments made about storing products inside a container. I mean, the council can certainly prohibit that when it's got nothing to do with the automobile salvage company. They have no license to operate that. Um I think it had to do with clothing or something. I there was some reference. Is that what you're talking about?

Question. So, there was um talk about washer washing machines and other like mattresses and all this other junk around the property. Has that all been cleaned up? Has that been removed? Leo can say you look Yeah, most of the appliances are gone. I think there was most uh the appliances gone. There's still some refrigerators on site today. Okay. So, they're not gone yet, right? Correct. So, there's still clean up there that needs to be done. Yes. Okay. All right. Does anyone have any more questions? We can open it to the public or everyone good? All right. Thank you. Anyone like to speak from the public?

I'm sorry I can't see you, but if you want to come up and

sign the sheet and then state your name and note right on the podium. There's no sheet here. It was it's just a pen. Yeah, but she put one up there. Oh, thank you. Yeah. And then just mention your um state your name and your address, please.

My name is Timothy Colom. I live at 1050 Iron Mine Hill Roadfield. I would like to start with the junkyard is located at 955 Iron Mine Hill Road which is located in zone one of the overlay protection area for our drinking water which is classified GA and GAA which strictly prohibits any junkyard. Um in these zones junkyards are strictly prohibited in this area see overlay district which I gave to you guys. Special exemptions must apply for special use permits C3 and 3.1. Existing permits are allowed with exceptions. Must be lawfully operated within permitted uses. The junkyard has not been operated in any manner like that because they're shipping food. They admitted it all. Um, the business was fined by the EPA in 2023 for number one, stop the release of oil, clean up and properly manage the release used oils and other materials. Contain the release used oil. The next citation was containers in above ground tanks must be clearly marked used oil. It took them four months to fix this after the EPA had to send them letters. It's the same thing last minute the mo. It's always the same. The Crookbook 4 wershed supplies drinking water for the towns of Northern Northfield, Oxbridge, Milville, Blackstone, Mass. Also in Saka, Lincoln, and Cumberland. It's no longer just the the people that live around it. It's everybody in these towns. It supplies the drinking water for everybody. So, it's against the law to let a junkyard operate in these zones. I gave you all the paperwork to prove it. So, it's not just us anymore. So, you guys have to do what the law states. I mean, it's your ordinance. I mean, I don't know what else to say. It's a law, you know. So, it's not just us. It's our kids. It's your kid that's coming. I mean, it only takes six months for hazardous material to get in the water. He's been doing it for three years.

It's always the last minute. And so, he he knew about everything that's going on. So, the ordinance was changed when he started shipping rice and water and clothes to other countries. There was it was admitted the last meeting. So as far as you saying we didn't want this here, nobody wants it there and everybody admitted it. So now what do you do? You let him operate and destroy the water for everybody. Thank you. Good evening. Um, I don't see a signup sheet. Do you guys have one that you need us to sign?

Okay. Oh, sorry. I took the sheet. Sorry.

It's okay. Uh, Beth Newberry, 53 Fallout Street. Sarah Leav 66 High. We're here to speak on the topic on on this topic on behalf of the groundwater protection committee in an advisory capacity. Leo's auto parts falls within the wins socket reservoir number three wershed which means that it is subject to north smithfield ordinance 6.19. Additionally, Leo's auto is adjacent to the crookfall brook wershed which sits topographically lower than the business. This means that groundwater has the potential to flow from Leo's into the crookfall brook watershed. These wershed areas serve to not only provide water to the wells immediate area but also feed into the reservoir serving winset northfield Lincoln and Cumberland residents. Quoting from ordinance ordinance 6.19.4 Four, water generally enters an aquifer by downward percolation from land surface recharge area and moves laterally underground towards areas of natural and maninduced discharge. The soils and subsoil condition of the lands in the groundwater aquifer zone are such that any use introducing pollutants or hazardous materials into the natural drainage system could adversely affect the quality of drinking water resources including waters of the Slaterville and the Waket water supply reservoirs. regarding a special use permit for a pre-existing non-conforming business. The ordinance states, "In making such determination, the board shall give consideration to the demonstrated reliability and feasibility of the use and pollution control measures proposed and the degree of threat to water quality, quantity, and quality, which would result if the control measures performed at less than designed efficiency. In addition, the board shall take into consideration the sensitivity

of the water body to which the site drains. The Rhode Island DEM's website lays out the potential human health and environmental risks associated with auto salvage operations are diverse and variable arising from a broad array of physical chemicals and biological hazards. Such hazards include the potential for fire or explosion at improperly managed sites, the transmission of diseases where yard areas serve as vector breeding habitats, for instance, for mosquitoes, soil, surface water and groundwater contamination resulting from the improper management of solid and hazardous waste, including mercury switches, air releases of asbestous fibers, fugitive dust, and/or volatile organic compounds. There are two large concerns that the groundwater protection committee has regarding this business. Concern concern number one, are vehicles that are stored there drained of their fluids with the batteries removed immediately upon arrival? Are those drained fluids stored in sturdy labeled enclosed containers on concrete pads or BMED areas to prevent soil and water contamination? Concern number two, are any mercury switches being removed prior to being crushed? In accordance with section six of 6.19, in making such determination, the board shall give consideration to the demonstrated reliability and feasibility of use and pollution control measures proposed and the degree of threat to water quantity and quality which would result if the control measures performed at less than designed efficiency. In addition, the board shall take into consideration the s sensitivity of the water body to which the site drains. The groundwater protection committee, if the concerns that we laid out are not being met in our advisory capacity, would recommend that Leo Auto Parts be held accountable for any remediation needed to secure the area and ensure the aquafer is protected. If you, the members of the town council, are not satisfied with the

business's actions and demonstration of responsibility and accountability, we support a determination to deny this business the certificate to operate. We cannot afford to contaminate more land and water in our community, one that already bears a disproportionate burden of environmental contam contamination compared to other communities in Rhode Island. North Smithfield and the surrounding communities rely on the environment for drinking water and hold special value to our rural amenities. Please use the full extent of your power to protect our groundwater and the health of our residents. Thank you. May I ask a clarifying question about this nonconforming use and special use permit? Leo, I think you might be the most appropriate person to answer this. It seems like it came up twice. Is a business required to apply for a special use permit upon sale?

I I believe so. Yes. Okay. So, this business, this type of business is considered a non-conforming use within this this zone. Correct. Okay. So, Mr. Hernandez purchased this business four years ago. a non-conforming business within this area four years ago. Does he have a special use permit on file to be operating that business in that area? I have not checked on that. We haven't checked on this. This was run it was running before I got here. So,

okay. So, we have not confirmed that he has the appropriate special use permit in order to be operating a non-conforming business within this very sensitive area.

Okay. So, in theory, I believe that a business only has so many months, days, months in order to apply for a special use permit. Yeah. In order to maintain a non-conforming use for their business. Correct. Okay. Do we know if this business has a special use permit on file? The scrapyard's been work operating since the 1960s. He has a special use permit is required on sale. No. According to your ordinance? Yes. Then I don't know if he has one or not. Okay. Look into that.

Okay. Thank you. Did you get it working? I think I did better this time. Actually, I really did my homework on the USB. I really did. I spent 16 hours the other day, so I'm hoping. And I have to have my laptop because I'm blind, so I can't even see that screen up yet. All right. My name is Carrie Roy, 911 Iron Mine, Hill Road. I abut um the HT Auto LLC which used to be Leo's Auto Parts. Um so I did a PowerPoint today. I'm going to try to make it quick. There's 25 pages, but they're all like boom boom bang bang boom. That's it. That's it's just quick and to the point. You don't have to read it all. I'll give you the rundown on it all. One of the major points that I'm going to bring up in this PowerPoint presentation is the the special use permit and the non-conforming use because I have gone right directly to the Northfield e-code page and regulations and I have looked it up. So there's where we started at Leo's Auto Parts right there, HT Auto LLC. That's the title page right there. That's that's where we started. You can go to the next one. So our own definition of of a junkyard right there. You can all read it in the yellow. I have to bring my my copy up because I'm blind. Um, so it's where a place where cars and car parts are stored in on a property of a business. Go ahead. You can go to the next one. I just have to I'm wondering if I can't Okay, that is an aerial view of aerial view in 2021 that I get off of historic aerial views. That's when Mr. Hernandez first took over the junkyard. He's he transferred the license over in

September 2021 by the town council that we have here. Well, some some members weren't here. And um this is the this is the condition in which he got it in in 2021. You can go to the next one. That's the condition in 2023, 2 years after he had it. Do you see the enormous amount of cars that have have accumulated on that property? It's it's a magnification of it all. partly due to the fact that he's doing wholesale. Go ahead. You can go to the next one. That's what it was. December 6 of of this year, 2025. He has done a little bit of work. As you see, my back property is cleared off, but there's still piles of junk. All the little scrabble piles of junk. Um the cars all the way to the left, uh bottom left, those were stacked high. He has crushed some of those. I'm going to I'm going to attest to what he has done, you know, because he has done some work. Um, he does have a little bit of an aisle back there. So, that was December 6. And, uh, also, yes, he should have a fence all the way around because I believe Ralph Farah's property is right there. And I think like 10 to 15 years ago, the last owner, they had him put up a fence abutdding his property. So, that should be a requirement if it happened the last time at Ralph Harrow's property. Okay, you can go to the next one. Okay, this is the street view of the junkyard in 2021. Um, you can see how it's not messy at all in the middle picture. That's a close-up picture. There are no shipping containers. Um, there's a building there. As you can see, there's a front building that used to be an office, a side building right behind that building that was also an office. And then there is a garage and also a canopy where parts are stored. and any truck body that's on the property originally from all the original owners, they would take the cars apart and all the parts would be in what they call a second containment. They can't be on the ground. They can't be leaking stuff. They have to be within a second

containment. Especially if you're doing wet engines, uh alternate, you know, whatever whatever you're selling that still has fluids in them. They cannot be on the ground. They can't be on a wood pallet or a natural pallet. They have to have they have to be almost on like a uh like a spill pallet and in a and in a second containment area where it's not seeping into the ground and there's no no um threat of it seeping into the ground. You can go to the next one. Uh this is the front of uh HTO in 2023 that in August 2023 when Mr. Hernandez uh took it over two years. You can see the mess starting to pile up. The picture on the right is is you know the of 2021. So you can get a side by side of what the difference is in the accumulation and magnification of uh the pile up here. You can go to the next one. Uh right here I had asked some questions to the previous manager who managed um for CMBB scrap Chris Bruno for uh nine years when he took it over. And um I can't really read the questions that I asked them because I'm blind and I didn't get it on my laptop. But some of the questions that I asked them, what's your name? How long were you there? For 9 years, Leo's Auto Parts, but it was CNB Scrap under Capital City Towing. Um how often have you, you know, crushed cars per year? What kind of how often do you get hazardous dispos uh disposal done? Uh where do you take cars apart? We take them apart in the shedded area or on cement slab because they're not supposed to be taken apart on soil as what's been been going on the last four years. Um, where do you store the parts? We store the parts in the the the containers that we have on there. So, uh, that's basically you can read all the questions. I'm sorry I I got to get on my laptop because I cannot read and I am blind.

You can go to the next one. That's more questions that I have asked them. Um, again, he was there for nine years. So, uh, I wanted to let you all know there was no shipping. No shipping ever in the nine years that they were there. No shipping. No shipping of parts. No shipping of cars. That is an extended use of the non-conform property. That's actually building and expanding. So, you can't go from a little general and then think it's all right to go to a Costco. There's a big difference with traffic, with pollution, with the amount of road blockage, and and in a in a tight-knit residential area. You just can't go from a little general to a Costco. It it can't happen in non-conform use. That's expansion of use itself. And that is in our ordinance not allowed unless it's by variance or a special use permit. Okay, you can go to the next one. Here's all our regulations in the E code of nonconform use of land. Um, obviously you can see up there that it's it says that, let me read it here. Sorry, I'm trying to go as fast as I can. Um, it is the intent of this chapter to permit these nonconformities to continue until they are removed, but not to encourage their survival. It is further for it is further the intent of this chapter that nonconformity shall not be enlarged upon, expanded or extended, nor be used as grounds for adding other structures or uses prohibited elsewhere in the same district. Um non a non-conforming use of land shall not be extended or enlarged after passage of this chapter or by the addition of other uses of a nature which would be prohibited generally in the district involved. You can go to the next one. Okay. What expansion of use means? Physical enlargement could be one of the expansions. Increase in intensity or scope of operations, which is what we're talking about here with the

shipping containers and the wholesale. A a significant increase in the volume of business, which is what we are also talking about here. The number of customers or operational impacts, traffic, noise, smells, and odors. Uh other ones are structural altercations, the change to different non-conforming use and increasing density. But number the highlighted one is most specifically what applies here. You can go to the next one if you could. All right. These are just some examples. We've seen them all before. These are people lining up the road. Here's the shipping container. It causes traffic issues. It's causing issues with the neighbors. Uh cars are being put in my driveway. We have to tell people stop blocking the driveways. because of the magnification of what these shipping containers are doing to this business and what it's turned into. You can go to the next one. Those are just all videos, but we're not going to play them. All right, we already looked at these. These are the people that are bringing stuff. Here we are. I have the dates right on it. Um, yep, you can go to that one. Special use permits. All right, special use permits. An applicant for a special use permit shall pay the necessary fee at the time he presents all required exhibits, plans, and other required data to the building zoning official. Um, I don't believe anyone's for these uh shipping containers or the expansion to wholesale has ever done that. I don't believe we don't have any applications, I don't think, for a special use permit on on any of that through the office. The application for a special use permit, variances, and appeal shall be accompanied by the following. a letter including the name and addresses of property owners of record applicants specifically indicating the portion of this chapter under which this you know a list of property owners within 200 ft of the property which would be all of us and none of us have gotten any of that in question shall accompany the letter. We can go to the next one. All right. I put the shipping containers there because technically this is what's

making it wholesale and this is what's creating the whole problem for the whole entire road and the business is the fact that he's bringing it to a grand business than what it was. Like I said, it should be a little general, not a Costco to accomplish the general purpose of this chapter. Certain of the uses requiring a special use permit under the provisions of this chapter need further consideration because they are somewhat unique, highly specialized or often present difficult zoning administration or enforcement problems. The effects of such uses on the surrounding environment often can not be foreseen until a specific site has been proposed. So that's why we need to hand out applications for special use uh because of these instances. You can go to the next one please. All right. Here is the board zoning board of review. Right here it says the board immediately upon receipt of an application for special use permit shall request that the planning that the planning board uh Oh, mine didn't come out right. I I can't see far. Are those for Yeah. All right. Thank you.

Oh, nope. I can't even see what these

Oh, my computer. Oh. Um, no. For some reason, I didn't print it all on this one, but I'm going to stand up here if you all Hello. Hello. Okay. The board shall for a reason of time uh the board shall fix a reasonable uh time for a hearing of a special use permit. shall publish notice of of the hearing to those once once a week for two successive weeks immediately prior to the date of such hearing as a newspaper or a circulation um 14 days prior. Notice of hearing shall be sent by certified mail uh return receipt. So basically what this is all saying here is that he does not have a special use permit. He's never applied for one. We've never been noticed of a public hearing for one. Therefore, if you are going to allow him to continue to keep running, he would not be able to run with with the shipping containers into the magnification that he is running because it is expansion of the use of the business right there. And like I said, you can't make something that was a little general and turn it into a Costco, especially not on Iron Mine because it causes traffic problems. It's causing neighbor problems. It's causing an excess of vehicles on the property. It's causing an excess of junk on the property. It's it's causing all these issues with people bringing other different things. So, if you're at least going to say, you know, he can run, I definitely think in and this would be Leo who would have to say it, but those are definitely guidelines for a special use permit that he would need to acquire and then we'd have to have another

building, a public hearing for the neighbors in order to have that taken care of. So, that's part of that one. The words are killing me on that. All right, so here's another problem that we have right here. Traffic noise, un unloading in the street, blocking of the road. Those are some of the things that uh you know obviously are a problem here. Again, against the special use permit because these are issues that are becoming magnified. It's It's not something like it used to be. What used to happen and as you've read I think on the last one when John the last manager used to run it. He said what they used to do is they put the parts online or someone would email him just like every other owner and they would say we need this part and they'd go and when the person came they'd pick the part and bring the part to the person. That's how the business runs. It doesn't run like a Walmart. It doesn't run like a in out constantly. Everything's going on. We got shipping containers. We got people coming. We got cars blocking. We got some sometimes we got two trailers blocking the road 2 by two. So, it becomes a nuisance as far as that's concerned. You can go to the next one. Uh that was just recently. That's some other examples. That was a van out the other day. I put the dates below it on December 12th out in the middle of the road. Um, and then that's just some more examples of more cars out in the middle of the road. That's it. Okay. Some of the hazards that we that we have here as far as the junkyard. And as you'll see in that picture, um, you'll see that there is oil right in the middle of the driveway of the junkyard right there. And that was most recently, that was this year, a couple months ago. Uh, it's an environmental hazard. It causes

pollution, noise, and orders. It's a fire hazard, uh, safety hazard, traffic hazard, health hazard, pest infestation, and contamination of soil and water. And as you see from these examples of these pictures, we have water right here. We have parts all over the place, rusting, uh, like he like one of his customers said, he's sometimes sells wet, you know, engines and stuff like that. So, what's really in all these piles? Do we know? Does anybody know what's really under these piles? It could be something hazardous leaking and we wouldn't even know because everything's just piled on top of piled on top of piled. Okay, you can go to the next one. All right, so Rhode Island regulations for storing wet engines and hazardous material. It's a prohibition of discharge. No person shall place oil or pollutants onto the land of the state or in any location where they are likely to enter the waters of the state. Secondary containment, which I already told you guys about, is any storage of oil or hazardous materials must have secondary containment. Storage on an imperous service and within a containment area designed to capture any potential spills and waste management. Used engines and parts that still contain fluids are considered a potential hazardous waste source. Storage areas for such items must be organized and managed to prevent leaks, including regular inspections to verify the conditions of the containers. All right, you can go to the next one. Um, can you play that the video of the town council meeting on the first? I think there should be a play button there.

There you go. I find it. I buy the engine and the transmission and the rear differential. I buy those. They stay. I don't want him to drain. Okay, I take it. But when he when he

Okay, so in the top right picture you will see uh below the sofa there is an engine. He's got it uh hardly in a plastic uh oil paint pan container. Uh it doesn't even fit under the engine fully. It's almost on the soil, half of it. And then you'll see a big pile on broken pallets. Uh they're kind of just all over the place. All these engines, these wet engines with oil on them, and they're on pallets, on wooden pallets that soak up oil that can go into the soil. If you look at the bottom picture on your left, you'll also see another engine is kind of tips sideways on something on the pile. Um, if you look on the right, uh, all the way to the a little bit to the right of the dumpster, there's another engine on top of another junk pile. How do we know these engines are empty? How how do we not know that they're wet engines like this guy says he gets? These are all parts that are mixed in that should not be on the ground. All those engines, those should have been in a in a truck container. They they should have been contained in a secondary container. That engine should have been in a secondary container. That engine, the same thing. They should not be out on piles in the middle of junk, tipped over with oil coming out of them. You can go to the next one. Oh yeah. Okay. In 2023, August 11th, he was violated. He got violations from the EPA. And as Timmy has already stated, it was um it took him one of the violations was to stop the leak. It took him four months to do it. So if it took him four months to stop the leak, where did all the stuff go that was leaking? And before that, nobody even inspected him. So if there was a leak in 2023, then when did it start leaking? Was it leaking for 2 years? Was it leaking for

a year and nobody knew what happened with all that stuff? Then we had a he had a deteriorating um container that he had and one of them wasn't even labeled. Um, and it took him between three of two violations I think he rectified in November. So, it still took him four months. And the one with the leaking and the stop the stop the leaking and everything that took him till o uh December December 6th. So, from August 11th to December 6th, it was leaking. It was not fixed. Who knows? We don't know. We don't know what's going on because all there's not a details on it. But how long was it leaking for before EPA even caught it? cuz there is no agency that had checked them out from 2021 until this date right here until uh August 11th. Okay, you can go to the next one. All right, here's more piles of cars piled on top of each other. Um these are just more working. You can go to the next one. Working outside of operational hours has become another problem, too. People are, you know, we're talking about Saturdays. He's supposed to close at two. He's sometimes getting out of there at 7:00. So, you know, that's that's ridiculous. That's 5 hours past being open. We're talking about sometimes he's there till, you know, 8:00 at night. I've got 2 in the morning. You know, that's another problem that this business is having. Who's going to rectify who's going to rectify that? Because even in the last, I don't know, nine months now since I've committed to this, uh, the cops have showed up multiple times. It's still happening. It's I mean, just I don't know. It's I mean just now with the abatement he's not doing it. But if we don't stay on him, who's to say he's not going to continue? Look at all the times that he's done all throughout the year. And that's even when the cops were coming. All right, you can go to the next one. Um these are just more pictures of cars

coming in in traffic. These are these are videos from the other day. So he only started crushing on December 8th. That was the first day that they started crushing after we had the town council meeting. Um, and the other morning they started at 7. I had trucks pulling in at 7:18 a.m. Even though their license is 8:00 a.m. Um, so it's still kind of operational hours are still kind of going a little wacky here. Even during abatement, you know, it's like he's got nine hours a day. I'm not understanding how a 9-hour window you can pick every hour out the outside the window to get stuff done. Uh you can go to the next one. These are uh yep. Uh these are pictures from today. These are recent pictures from today. So he has cleaned up a little bit around the office. Um you know there's there is a little bit of a fire aisle. He had two cars at the end of his property that were blocking the aisle, but um they can always just access my my this was from 957, I guess, my property from my property for that. Um and then you'll still see that there are still you can go to the next one. Still piles of cars a little bit in the back there. You can see the crusher back there. Um you know, these are just random pictures from today. So there is a little bit of a fire. There is a fire aisle. I will I will definitely say that there's the cars in the back of the property that are blocking the end of the fire aisle. Um but other than that, that's that's about it. That's about it. That's all I think I have on here. So, in short, I would like to say um if you if if you guys do decide that he's operational, obviously I would need a confirmation that he's going to actually need a special use permit. Leo, do you think for the containers?

What we were working towards was getting the yard scaled back again back to a normal junkyard. So the container stuff was all supposed to stop anyway. Okay. So it will be stopped then unless otherwise. Okay. All right. Because we explained to him the container is is not allowed there. So Okay. We're trying to scale them back to a normal junkyard again.

Okay. All right. That sounds good. Thank you, Leo. Thank you very much. So, that's feasible. But what are we going to do with the other things? Do we have a plan? Is it going to be like do we have someone to babysit this business? Because I feel like we need somebody to babysit this business in every aspect. I feel like there it's he's kind of I'm and I like Edward, don't get me wrong. I I have no I don't hate the guy. I think everybody needs a chance at a business, but the problem is is that when your business starts affecting my life, now I have a problem. And if it's something I have to keep continuing to babysit for the rest of my life, I don't want Do I have to worry about my water? I I donated my kidney. I don't I'm I'm not going to skip the line like they give you. If somebody else has been waiting for a kidney for a long time, I'm going to say let them have it. That's the type of person I am. I'll I'll go to my grave. But I don't want to drink water and be poisoned. Like I've lived through so much. I don't want to like this instance for it to happen. He we need either the soil tested over there. Somebody's going to take responsibility for that because like I said, you just saw the EPA report. How long was everything leaking for? How long was the oil leaking before the EPA picked it up? Two two years. Nobody checked on them before that. How long is this? But how long were the engines? How long were they on the ground? How long were they leaking everything? You know, I I would suggest that some kind of soil test needs to be done either at his expense or who's I don't know whose expense. Definitely not all our expenses because we've already compromised for four years. So, I don't think that a compromise we should even really compromise more because we've compromised our health, our safety, our properties, our peace of mind. So, I mean, that's basically all I have to say. So, thank you very much for listening to me. I'm sorry I made it long.

CJ, before you give her back the thumb drive, can you go to slide eight, please? So question number five. Yeah. How often would the business dispose of hazardous waste materials? Right. It looks like the response is we disposed usually three times a year,

right? Because they ran at a smaller scale than what he's running at. They ran at a little general, not at a Costco. So, they weren't actually going to the magnification that he was and everything was contained away properly. Um, CNB graph, they often got heckled by for, you know, by DEM, by EPA. They were there all the time and they literally did everything by the books all the time because they were always, always, always checked. So,

thank you. The reason I pointed it out was just because two weeks ago there was a comment made about um Edward not even knowing the name of his um hazardous waste disposal contractor. Yes, I know. Exactly. Yes. Yes. Any any other slides anyone would else would like to see? All right. Let me thank you very much everybody. Anyone else?

I do have one more question for Edward and his attorney. Um, so safe to assume that no face no phase one was done on this property prior to him purchasing it. I'm not aware that one was, but uh the name of the the company is Western. That's the environmental company. Here's the receipt, which we did we did bring. So, two weeks late and $2 short. How many receipts do you have now? How many times you have done like a three times? Three times in the last four years. Three times the last four years. Yes. That's how many times he needed it.

You need it. You feel it all the time. And when you pull, you call. Okay. So he had it done three times a year, but this former business owner was at a much smaller scale than yours. So you're also saying that you have the hazardous waste removed three times a year, but your business is on a much grander scale. He's not saying I I don't he I'm not sure what the scale of was the pre that's the testimony of Miss Kerry. I don't I don't know that to be true or not. They may operate it differently. He's saying that when when it's full and needs to be removed, that's when he does it. If that's three times in four years, that's when he does it. I can't I we we can't testify as to what the previous owner did, what the previous

I'm just looking at the aerial view, the aerial view, the juxiposition between the former business and this is and I don't know how the former business dealt with engines or how they sold the parts. They may have done it differently, which may have affected how they collected the fluids. So, I I I can't answer that because I don't know what they did. Well, especially if some of your customers are saying that they prefer the fluid within the engine. So, maybe you're not emptying all the engines because your customers want the fluids in the engines. Okay.

What else I again what I would point you to is the letter that I started off with. So, the agency that's charged with determining whether or not there's pollutants in the water, the DE, the Rhode Island DEM was there last week. They gave you a letter stating that in fact they saw no evidence of the groundwater being being polluted. So that's they actually clo they received a complaint they closed the case.

They saw no evidence of runoff. And maybe I need to better understand what runoff is. But runoff in my mind is stream running off into a water source. Running off of the property. It sounds like the concern here is hazardous material seeping into a porous surface. So, if we're stacking engines that may or may not be emptied of of the of the fluid that is in them, can we say with with 100% certainty that those fluids aren't leaking into a porous surface if they're not if they're not being contained in this second containment area that Miss Roy referenced in her PowerPoint? What what I would ask the the council to do is when we we we asked to come back in two weeks, we were going to address certain things. My clients addressed those things. You've heard from the fire captain, Mr. Labar. He's satisfied that they Mr. Terrarero's abated the violations. You've heard from Mr. Cody that while not not all, but he's made great progress and there's some things that are left. So what we're asking for is what you what the suggestion that was made was to come back in two months to see if there's more progress and complete compliance which he says he can do because the goal is to remediate the problem. The goal is to become in compliance. He's done that with fire. That was the big one. That was the big safety concern. And despite what and I'm sorry what CJ said, the fire chief disagrees with her. She says, "Well, he's made some progress." So he says he says he's abaded it completely. Now it's got to stay that way. We'd ask to come back in two months, show that further progress and that be allowed to make that progress, continue to operate just as he has in the last two weeks. And as the solicitor had indicated, operate at a at a low level, keep his operations going. He's going to be back here in two

months. If he doesn't if he doesn't perform, you still have the lever at your at your disposal uh to revoke. But the progress that was made is significant. It's substantial. It's what you asked for. Uh and he's done it. And he's removed the cars. He's got the aisles, right? He's got a clean letter from DEM. That that's that's significant. I mean, it just can't be ignored. We can speculate all night long about what the possibilities may be on that site that's been there for over 60 years long before he took it over and when her father operated it and and say what could be under there is telling you what's there right now what they see the person who wrote the letter professional engineer and PhD that's someone who would know I don't have that kind of credentials in that in that in that arena that they do. So, I would ask you to put some weight on that. All right? And also weight to what your building official said and your fire inspector said. I would ask you to do that and allow him the time to further get to the goal, which is complete compliance. That's what we're requesting. Thank you.

Complete compliance in conjunction with applying for a special use permit. If he if he were to be expanding the use, he's he's said he's ceased those operations on that. So, if he does that, that that that's not that would not be an issue. Okay? So, he's going to cease doing that. He's told are you going to cease doing that? Cease doing what? The contain the containers the expansion of the use beyond scrap the scrapyard

Stan Zuba 910 Iron Mine Hill Road. Kim, I know you said 8:15. I'm going to try to be quick. Yeah, but thank you.

Quick few bullet points. All right. So, what the pre-existing non-conforming I think is a real issue. Okay, it's gotten way bigger. It's different. Okay. Um, inconsistent, bad neighbor, loading and unloading in the street, operations at all hours, unsafe. It's an accident waiting to happen. There was an incident in Paul's yard on Paul's property where my 27year-old daughter felt she had to intervene and, you know, a physical altercation was about to happen. Okay. That's an unsafe situation. Uh, last meeting you stated you have two employees, correct? Yes, I checked the uh state workman's comp records. You have no workman's comp insurance in your business name or listed to your property. You're in violation of state law there. Not a town issue, but just goes to sloppy business. Do you have any workman's comp insurance? No. Do you have any insurance on the property? Pollution control, liability, anything. You're an LLC that can walk away from this disaster at any time. Okay. There's nothing tying this man to this property, to this responsibility, to the potential hazard that he is creating. Okay. Um, as we stated before, he's operating under a consent order from the state. Kept no records of vehicles in or out of that property for the last four years. Do you have the paperwork and records for the 160 cars you just removed? You also have to have the paperwork and the records for that. It's part of the state law. Doubt. Uh, I was told personally today that the director of the DEM is now involved in the situation. Um, I believe there's been some very conflicting statements made to this council and town and the DEM. Uh, earlier you stated that you store gasoline on the property that is removed from the vehicles. Correct?

Yeah, you did. Bill, you seen any uh gas tanks out there? Any storage facility? No. Building inspector, you seen any gas tank out there? Containment storage. They storing, you know, tank that, you know, double walled tank or a tank with containment to store this gas. No. All right. Could you tell us how you're removing this gas from the vehicles? You know, you pump drilling a hole in the bottom of the tank, you pumping it out. How how you getting it out of the vehicles? No answer, Mr. Zuba. I don't know if he he doesn't have to reply to you, but he can reply to us.

Okay, very good. I think it's a valid question. How are you getting the gas out of here? Where you storing it? Um, same thing with the oil. We have a receipt for from Western Oil. They are a waste oil and fluid handling company. Earlier we stated all the oil was being left in the motors and transmissions. You're burning the gas in the vehicles on site equipment or whatever. Again, I'd ask what equip equipment this gas is going into. But if the oil and transmission fluid stay in the vehicle, stay on the motor and the gas is being used on site, what are we removing three times in the last four years? Be kind of curious. Um, again, this is considered hearsay, but I was told by people at the DEM that this junkyard claims they have no containment on site for the hazardous materials. They don't need it because the vehicles were all brought in empty. That's what I was told was told to DM. So, I'd be very curious if we could get the backup on that report, the workpapers that go with it, the individuals that did the inspection, and see what they say. There's also other fluids in the cars. There's the rear end. You know what I'm saying? Um, you know, there's tons of solid waste also involved. We're crushing cars, but where are the tires going? Where's the interiors going? I'm not completely familiar with the crushing process, but I know the scrapyards want metal, not all the other stuff that goes with it, the glass, whatnot. Um, you know, this business just doesn't belong in Iron Mine Hill Road anymore. It doesn't fit. It's a bad situation.

Like I said, as far as I can tell, he has no responsibility once something goes wrong and he can just walk away. Um, there is a mortgage on the property. he doesn't own it outright. Mortgage holder could be hung with it. U but like I said, I'd really really like to take a deep look at the DEM report, see what DEM has been told, compare that to what this council has been told and what people have physically seen or not seen on the property. And uh I think that's the the big problem. I think the more you look at this, the more twisted it gets and the more it doesn't make sense. Thank you.

Thank you. attorney. So he says he's scaling it back back to the way it was originally. But when you start taking the car when the cars come in, you take off all the good stuff. That's that's how you make your money. Once once that stuff starts accumulating, how can you not be selling it to get rid of it? It can't. You know what I'm saying? You got to sell it. You got to get rid of it. So, how can you not be selling all the good stuff that comes you pick apart off the cars? Let me ask him. So, you're asking exactly what's his process? How do what does he do with the parts?

Yeah, because now you're saying we're not going to have we're not going to when you're not going to like wholesale the stuff. You're not going to get rid of it. But what are you going to do with it all? You got good a lot of good stuff there. It's in the trailers and everything. It's ready to go. It's good stuff. You're not going to just dump it. So, you got to sell it, right? Yes. Yes, but how you going to sell it if you can't you can't sell it like individually have people coming to the knocking on your door looking for like an alternator? You might have 150 alternators. So what you what's your process? Yeah, we process we process. We take it off. You speak into them like please.

Yeah, we process because we dismantling the cars and we set it up the the engines and then when we sell we sell the whole engine. That's the way we take the car apart with the suspension, with a dashboard, with a seats, lights, mirror, doors, hood, bumpers. We left only the shells, right? So, he has to sell it. He has to get rid of it. So, are there any records of what you have on property? Do you know? Like, if someone comes in and they want something, do you know what you have and where it is? Of course.

All right. I I don't think he I make my point clear enough. It's just that when you said you were gonna you weren't going to wholesale stuff, you don't have so much of it. You have to wholesale. You have to get rid of it, right? Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Well, I I think that's a valid point, John. If Mr. Hernandez needs to operate outside of the scope of the prior use, then he would need to apply for a special use program. That's what I'm saying. Right.

So if Mr. Hernandez needs to sell his product in the capacity that he's currently selling and off in order to ensure that it's a profitable bit profitable business, then he needs to apply for a special use permit. So that's just one requirement. In the event that that is what is required in order for him to stay in business and profitable, I would say it's not before us tonight. Before you tonight, we would ask you to do again. focus on the request that we made and why we're here this evening.

Yeah. Yeah. I know. But if we're going to consider a twomonth period to allow for you to get to 100% compliance, these are some of the check boxes that need to be checked off. So, it sounds like a comparison of previous use to current in order to determine whether or not you need a special use permit. I have very, very real concerns about this containment of hazardous waste. Sounds like you're saying that you fill up the containers, they come, they remove them almost three times a year. But we heard from our fire marshall and our building official and others that there are no containment containers on site in order for you to store fluids from these cars. So which is that?

Yeah, we have the containers, but the problem is we have it inside the boxes. That's why they don't sell it inside of boxes. Inside the boxes. Is that the appropriate protocol? Yeah, that's the protocol. Yeah.

Okay. I'd like an understanding of the protocol for how this business is supposed to operate. So we can say in two months that you are operating within the protocol of this type of business and then moving forward Leo like who who to Miss Royy's point babysits this? Who ensures that this this hazardous material is being stored appropriately? Is that a municipal responsibility or is that DEM or EPA? There's also state licensing. State licensing involved that usually handles fluid management and all that. State licensing. Yeah. How often do they go?

I don't I would think annually. I believe we we need an understanding of all of the requirements at the municipal and state level for this type of business to operate within this zone. This is a very sensitive area. It's not like you're operating in an industrial or commercial area. You're operating in a residential area. So, there's sensitivity to this. So, we need to recommend that we keep him on a short leash and keep an eye on his operation till he gets it smoothed over and back to where it's supposed to be. But, but yes,

but also to ensure that he's he's managing a responsible business and he's maintaining it like hazardous waste containment. have junkyard background. Um, so neither do we. So, we have to rely upon our building official and our zoning official in order to provide us with the information that we need in order to make informed decisions. I do have an email to the state, the Department of Business Regulation. I've been trying to get my hands on all the protocols and what he's supposed to be doing. So, Okay. All right. All right. Anyone make a motion?

I want to make a question. Ask a question of David. Um, is it within our realm to request that a phase one be done on the property? Um I don't know if it's you would request a phase one but I think in some sort of evidence that environmental compliance and has it is being handled properly I think it's within your realm and if that's being handled by DM or the state and they have compliance rules and regulations and reporting requirements maybe we can ask for that but just to demand it phase one. Um I I don't know if you're there yet.

Even even if you were in the legal position to require that a phase one would not be sufficient given its current use, it automatically gets kicked up to a phase two only because only because of the use. Just like if you're next door to somebody who is doing something that could be an environmental issue is going to be kicked into phase two. But David, you're saying that there are stipulations that we could require from an environmental

information to confirm that the environmental conditions are being complied with. And what that if that's DEM and the state, that's fine. And if it needs more than that and you got more, you know, that leads to a further discussion, then I guess we could go deeper. I'm just I just want to make sure that we walk before we run. jumping to a phase two is a big jump and that's going to be probably costly I assume it's very costly that's soil evaluation um right is that correct ta

so I I mean I think you you you can definitely ask for information about environmental containment make sure all that's being complied with and maybe some sort of maybe there can be some sort of limited testing you know but I I think we need to get information first right I mean I like to know what DM is doing at the site if what they did what the state requires for these disposal usually it's from um cradle the crypt uh is that not that's my understanding of of the law with regard to handling hazardous waste in Rhode Island is they require documentation of of the uh the moment the hazardous waste comes on site until it goes out That's my understanding. But again, I know that applies to body shops. It applies to gas stations. Um, you know, that that do automobile. I'm I'm I'd like to know if that's also the case for salvage yards, but I I would tend to think so, but I again I don't know those answers. I don't know those rules off the top of my head. This is a new issue that was brought up today obviously to this extent. So I think we can ask for that information and during this period of time maybe we can get some information before the you know do put the two-month period for the continue to comply and abate allow the limited operation and in between that maybe we could have uh some information gathering event that's you know that can help the council in two months. That's But um I mean he mentioned he needs two months, but we could obviously not extend it that long and just continue to keep close watch on while we're while we're getting this documentation. Correct.

Okay.

Just a question to consider. If I own a piece of property and I have a bunch of junk cars on my property, do I need a license to remove those cars from the property? This person owns a piece of property. He has a ton of junk cars on the property. He doesn't need to be in business to clean the property up. Suspend the license. Make him clean the property up. Does he need the license to sell things though or to, you know, he's disposing of scrap assuming he's getting paid for that scrap after these things are crushed. Does he need the the license for that aspect of it? Probably. Or I don't know.

Well, that's why I said if I own a piece of property and I got a bunch of junk cars on them, do I can have them towed away, can't I? Think the town would make me do it, wouldn't I? Just saying. Thank you.

I mean, I think we could probably extend essentially the motion that's in place now, right? So, we had a two week allowed for two weeks to abate the violations. It sounds like again one is abated in totality. The other two still a little bit hazy, but although some of the questions that have come up are not necessarily violations, they would allow for a safe business. So I think we need to understand like to to the town solicitor's point what are all of the things and to my point too what are all of the things that are required of this business in order to maintain protocol not for the business to just be operating within the lensure and the state rags but also to environmental regulations. So, I think that I need those questions. I need that information and I need those questions answered in order for me to vote in confidence because I cannot I don't think that we can run the risk of allowing for potentially hazardous practices in a residential area. And and I also would like to ask and I don't know if this is something that's um feasible, but for folks within the vicinity of this business, if there are concerns that hazardous waste has potentially contaminated soil and we know that everybody up there is on wells, is there the option for this business to test residents wells to ensure that those wells are safe for use? I know that it's costly, but I mean I don't think that the onus should be on the resident to pay for that if it's a potential bad practice of a business. Now, I don't know if that's the case. I think again, we need to understand with DEM, but if we do find anything questionable, I think that that's something I would like to consider in the future.

Who are we here to test? Who would taxpayer or a person that has not followed rules and regul regulations? I don't know about you, but um there's got to be some justice here because for years it hasn't been happening. And until they can make it right, I don't think they should be open. Agree with me or not? That's how I believe. That's our vote.

The way it's supposed to be and reopen.

You'd have to come up to the podium. Should the place be closed until it's up to EPA standards with the right tanks and oil contain containment and stuff like that so we don't have to worry about it? My well is like 200 yards away from the crusher. Plus, I have a 4 acre cranberry bog behind my house with beavers and otter and swans and every other thing. So why should I have to worry about it while you guys let him run? It's just not right. He doesn't even have insurance. So if that place catches on fire and burns my house down, now my insurance is going to pay for it because of his negligence or burns his house down. Think about it. It only makes sense. You should shut him down until it becomes up up to EPA rules.

Mr. Hernandez, do you have insurance for your property? Just said no. His lawyer told him not to answer. He can't even prove he cost $150. I didn't see 150 across the street. Do do we know it was a lot? Do we know if this business has insurance to operate?

Yeah. I think I think I think we need to understand again all of the requirements. Understand if this business is in compliant is compliant with the requirements of the state of the town. We need an environmental assessment of some degree to ensure that he's operating appropriately and safely. Um the last time we made a motion to allow him to operate only within the scope to abate and then I believe it was some sale in order to remain profitable. Right? That's what we said. Yeah.

I mean, I'm not Again, I don't think that we should I don't think that we should award bad business. It's hard for me to even want to do this, but I think we extend another two weeks within the current scope. Two weeks. two weeks to continue to abate the two violations that he hasn't fully abated yet and to provide us with all of the information that we need. State, municipal, environmental, and insurance,

insurance, appropriate lensure, whether or not a special use permit will be required if you need to operate outside the scope of the current non-conforming use. And then in two weeks, we can make the determination of whether or not we're going to renew your license. Yeah, I would ask I would I would ask for a little more time than the two weeks because a lot of the things you're asking for are things that are just coming up tonight. Progress. A lot of the things are just coming up tonight. So this this has the scope of this has spread out very far. No, the scope has spread out because this business hasn't done it

for four years. So the scope hasn't just magically expanded within the last hour and a half. This has always been the requirement of the state and the municipality. We're just finding out that it's hasn't been done.

You're you're asking about you're asking about environmental issues that are just being brought up and and I and and all and all speculative by the way. So what I would say is he has the obligation to comply with whatever the municipal code requires, whatever the state law requires, that's what he's going to have to do. So whatever that is, that's what he has to comply with as we sit here today. and the solicitor very candidly said he's not sure. Your building official said he wasn't sure. Let's find out. Let's give them the time, especially the building official, to find out what state regulations were required. He said he emailed DEM. He hasn't received a response, at least according to his testimony today. Let's allow him the time to do that and so that my client can comply.

All I'm saying is the two weeks is a very, very tight timeline. So, we would ask for a little bit more. I think that's a that's a reasonable request. I think two weeks is enough time to provide us with the information that we need to understand whether or not this business is in compliance with state and municipal code. Does he even have insurance? He has liability insurance. Two weeks to demonstrate progress not renewing the license. So we're going to keep it the way it was. Keep it the way it is. You can keep updating. So you're going to continue on the same as we did last time. Is that correct? Okay. Is that a motion you made? Yes. I guess that's my motion. All right. We have a motion. Is there a second?

So, and continue to June uh January 5th, right? Correct. Looks like David has a question. So, my only So, I just So, I fully understand we're going another two weeks of removing crushed cars. What else? Well, the screening was another issue.

Yeah. So, I had environmental compliance records, a special use permit, at least some kind of indication as to a does he have one, which it doesn't look like he does from when he purchased it. Is he going to apply for one? Uh, the fence completion, the um minimization of his um expansion of operations, meaning he's, you know, basically going back to what the previous non-conforming use was and records of state compliance. Is that essentially what we're looking for in the two weeks? And environmental compliance. That environmental compliance. And you mentioned there was still washers and mattresses and stuff that needed to be cleaned up.

So if we can see progress, he's going to be working on it. So just like you did last time. Yes, that was my motion. And continue the public hearing to January 5th. And Right. Right. Right. And continue. So to continue, we're actually making a motion right now. So to continue the current status of the junkyard under the scope that was established our last meeting with the added points to better understand those components of compliance.

Point of order. Should we close the public hearing before we make this motion? We're not closing it. We're going to or continue it. Okay. So, before we continue it, someone had his hand up over here. We want to hear from him and then we'll continue. So, looks like there's someone else with a hand up too over there. So,

Andrew Crochaw, 783 Poundill Road. um coming into this late my first meeting hearing this testimony sounds like things are very um tense regarding this issue the only thing I felt should be mentioned I guess it's on behalf of the person who's being grilled here is that you should consider giving him more than two weeks at this time of year if there are questions that need to be answered from dem things like that it's very difficult to get anything done around the holidays like this so I think you're being reasonable and granting him some more time. I'm just asking for a couple give him a couple more weeks to get beyond the holidays. It's very difficult to get anything done as someone who

but being new to this to this certain cases we've been there's been many months. I've I've heard that. I understand. I just I've also heard a lot of people Sure. I've heard that, you know, he's had some more time for things. We're talking about giving him two weeks and it sounds like there are several requirements that need to be accomplished in that two weeks and all I'm saying is reasonably with many people in state agencies not being available if you want information from DEM and so on and so forth. It's going to be very difficult. If it was two weeks in the middle of September, I think it would be very very doable. Just an observation from someone coming in for the first time and hearing it. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? Before we continue it.

Oh, wait a minute. Can you just wait a minute to Can you let this gentleman speak? Go ahead. My name is Fippito Delman and um I'm a one of his customer over there in the young and uh I've been hearing a lot of things over here that saying like about the motors the training the oil uh like in the ground and um I'm the one that they bring motor to the inside the junker I buy in another junk and same same as auto parts all those motors you can go over there you can prove there no oil in them those motors because over there what we dry with draining. They draining before they went they was making a hole in the the transmission and the motor and then we said no because they keep leaking. They put it like the little cup red cup but I said no we we told them no we need a you take the b um the screw out and then put it back. That's what they doing. So that that's one of the things motors no oil clinic no oil over there. That's not true. That's a lie.

So there is or there is not fluid in the no fluid in

No fluid over there. I any of you can go over there because I know people who live around there. They just want that that junk closed. But my question is that junk been over there for more than 60 years. And I've been going to that junk for 20 25 I think. after this people those the gentleman the gentleman or his father I don't know was one of the owner of that that right in the 60 after that came his brother or then after that two guy two more guys one of them was my friend they put all those car in the back more 15 or 20 cars in his job right all those cars at that moment I can say they have oil or I can say they have food inside I can't say that but a white all that years more than 20 or 25 years that don't bother to nobody now to this guy he moved all those cars what's the problem now you know somebody called the other day like I think it was for forest forest they sent two guys over there because they want to find something to scam him right and what those guys said no you're okay everything is everything is fine we got a paper over there Right. Other thing is that the lady show one of the van over there. The the van with the trailer. That's my van. The first one when I get there. Oh, other things. The motors when we bring it, we we put in pallet. Some at least my motor we put in pallet. And then if we don't have palace, we put that big carpet that want to come in the trunk. We put it behind the motor. Doesn't matter if that hot oil or not because I shipped all those water to my country, right? And that she she was showing my my van over there. That van wasn't on the street. That van was in

his property. He owned the property. So I think if I come and I drive back and my my trailer and I put in his job, it's enough space over there. A couple of weeks ago, like around 4:45, I bring I came from the junk with three motor and one trailer. So, I went was 4:45. I know we only have 15 minutes to close. He wasn't there. I just put him over there and uh because he was on another place when I was backing up in my in my giving reverse in my vent. It was already inside the the job, right? And when I try to go from my truck, my my van, the train is going. So we I call the towing truck. I going to leave the trail over there and I going to take my van. Somebody I don't know who call the police. When the officer coming, he say, "Oh, somebody call again, but you're fine. You are you are inside. You're not in the middle of the street." When the towing throw came, somebody take a take a picture for me. And I just want to say to whoever did it, that's illegal. Take picture from people in the street is illegal. I'm not a lawyer over here. I'm a lawyer in my country, but I know that's illegal. Take picture in the street for somebody. And I usually have a a company tow company. Any tow and throw company have a permit to block the street until they put the car inside in the top the the the the towing truck. Right. They got a business to block the street. Somebody taking me a picture because a couple of people was waiting. All right. But the police know already. He said, "Okay, no." Because the guy was closed. So I just want to let her know whoever doing that that's illegal. Take a picture. I just found out like two weeks later after that, right? But I don't

think that's right. I think it's somebody trying to do something, you know? I don't know. But you can prove that about the motors. It's not oil. There's no leaking over there. There's nothing over there. Nothing over there. Thank you.

Couple of weeks ago. State your name again.

Uh Timothy Coline who wrote couple of weeks ago we were here. So he had to crush an X amount of cars. Don't you think the one thing he would have brought for evidence is how many cars he crushed? He can't even tell you. But you're going to let them go another two weeks when you can't even say, "Okay, I crushed a 100 cars. Here's the evidence." When you they go to the scrapyard, somebody's going to pay for them. A scrapyard's not going to pay for eight cars and give you a receipt for 50. It makes no sense. That's the one thing he should have brought. His lawyer shouldn't even know that. He should have said, "Hey, you better bring the documents. You want to stay open. You guys shouldn't let him open with Why should we babysit him? It makes no sense." I think having a log is something that's require we need to understand what needs to be recorded from a state and municipal level. I think Okay.

All right. Go ahead. Let me John Gray 2,000 Pound Hill Road. I am a HVAC service technician by trade. Um I'm an EPA cart carrying member. It's a licensed to car carry a refrigerant. And I was just curious as to what the owner of the uh uh scrapyard did with all the uh refrigerant in the vehicles when he crushed them. Good question.

Yeah. Where's the refrigerant? Hydrofluorocarbons are extremely uh bad for the environment. One uh chlorine atom can destroy uh like 300,000 ozone molecules. So, it's pretty bad. So, if you have like there's like five pounds or less in vehicles. Five pounds of refrigerant can destroy entire communities of ozones. And if you crushed 150 cars, there's I don't know, do the math on how many hundreds of pounds of refrigerant there is. The EPA fines $10,000 per infraction. This is a big deal. I would be fired. So I just want to know what we're required to fill out audits uh reports for audits handling of refrigerant document how much we pulled where it goes etc. Uh the EPA requires that and he should be able to produce those documents. Also the EPA tests our drinking water. The last test was in 2019 for uh heavy metals and stuff. I would like them to test our water again. So, thank you.

Very insightful. Thank you. Okay. Okay. I think we have our motion. Do I need to restate it? Close the public. motion to continue the public hearing and allow this business to continue operating within the confined scope of cleaning up

to uh abate all violations and to also provide us with the points that Mr. Punchek listed. I'll restate them. environmental compliance records from a DEM and it sounds like EPA perspective. Also an understanding of what that protocol is for this type of business. Whether or not a special use permit will be required if you need to operate outside of the current scope of the previous non-conforming use. Uh we have fence completion. That was one of the violations uh from our building official that needed to be completed. Minimizing the expansion of operations. It sounds like that's not just pulling cars in within the confines of the property, but that's um ensuring that you're operating within the scope of the current non-conforming use unless you determine you need otherwise and to determine whether a special use permit is required. And then um state and I would also say municipal compliance, what that looks like for this type of business. And then we need to determine if you are compliant with those requirements.

That is it. Oh, to a date certain of January 5th. Second. We have a motion, a second. Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Mr. Burgod, yes. Mr. Christopharo, yes. Mrs. O'Hara, no. Mr. Punjac, no. Miss Elves, yes. All right.

Um, we can take a three minute recess in case anyone wants to leave prior to opening up the next uh item on the agenda. Why? Because I want to call you an exact address. Okay.

Yes. Yes,

but I want to get a little more. Okay, so full name well 12. No, I understand. Okay.

They were all Drive all the way to

in your I will prove that.

Okay. Five Well, the school normally closes at 10, so I don't know. We don't have permission to stay later than that as of now. Marilyn. Marilyn,

I love your jeans. You do?

Oh, I can put this All right. Discussion by council voter other action on petition/application for an amendment to the zoning ordinance pursuant to Rhode Island general laws 45-24-50 and 45-24-51 45-24-53 as follows one petition/ application for amendment to zoning ordinance filed by Pinehill Realy LLC 618 Greenville Roadfield Rhode Island 02896 the owner of the Paso land situated off old Oxford

Road Pinehill Road and Pineh Hill Road in the Town of Nusma, more particularly described as town of Nusmafale tax assessors plat 7 lot 38 consisting of 89.44 acres subject property and text amendment and a zoning map amendment to the zoning or ownance of the town of Nuspa the zoning ordinance. The proposed zoning amendment will create a new zoning district industrial space management district one overlay. The intent of the district is to allow mining, boring, sand and gravel extraction, loom stripping, stone cutting, operations, crushing, washing and or processing of materials. The zoning map amendment proposes to amend the zoning designation of the parcel of land located at 14 Pine Hill Road in town of Nosfield, more specifically described as a Cesus Plat 7, lot 38, the property from rural agriculture RA and rural estate agriculture REA to industrial special management district 1 overlay continuation of public hearing and discussion by council vote other action.

Madame President, I will recuse myself at this time. Okay. make a motion to I would like

I would like to make a motion to open the public hearing. That's a motion. Is there a second? I'll second. Any discussion? Roll call, please. Mr. Burgod, yes. Mrs. O'Hara, yes. Mr. Punch, yes. Miss Alves, yes. Who's is GZA? Okay, sir, if you'd like to come up to the podium and if we can try and keep the lawyer commentary down to minimals just so we can try and get in as much um public as possible. Is it on?

There you go. Hello.

Hi, I'm uh Tony Orbano with GCA Jew Environmental Incorporated. Um we were hired by the town to review the uh provide a peer review of the previous testimony that was provided. Um testimony was provided by uh Mr. Robert Ferrer, uh Mr. Richard Gro, and Mr. Mike Hammond. Um it was all video testimony that were reviewed. But in addition to that, we also reviewed available USGS geologic maps and uh uh ge uh surficial geology bedrock geology maps um air photos and we reviewed the public available information that the uh EPA's provided for the western Santa gravel property which is abuing the property to the west and also the LRNR property which is about 1,200 ft to the northeast of the property. Um, and in addition, I performed a site reconnaissance to walk over the site to see what conditions were lack at the site. Um, all of our findings we put together an October 7th, 2025, uh, letter report, the pair review, which is relatively extensive. All that information is provided in all the details of our findings or whatnot. Um, at at the end of the report, we had conclusions and recommendations. Um and uh those were generally incorporated into the 13 stipulations that were provided by the town planning board um of those are some of the conditions basically that were incorporated into I guess the recommendation to move the thing forward. Um in particular um on those stipulations uh we're uh well the the major things that we were looking at are the geohhydraologic impacts, the blasting impacts and potential blasting impacts and potential advert impacts from air quality and dust and silica. So those are like the three main areas that

we're investigating what that may be um impacted. Um, one of our things was to make have them include a dust control mitigation plan was that was both prepared and implemented to um control dice writ um division of air air pollution regulations basically kind of cover that but it prevents migration of dust particles not beyond the property line. So that would be one of the one of the conditions that is in there. There's another one that's um and it's already been doing right has been going on but that's the blast vibration monitoring and a butter notification um you know that's there's uh the all the testing to date has shown that there's been no exceedences but it should continue as they continue expand to make sure there is no adverse impacts basically to structures and whatnot. Um in addition we recommended um well it was incorporated into a site restoration plan. So the site restoration plan would provide a bottom elevation for the quarry and would provide like slides side slopes for the for the perimeter. There'd be steep slide slopes for the rock but uh more gentle side slopes for the area where gra and gravel's been excavated. Um and by knowing so so basically the one of the questions on the hydrogeeologic side was what are the adverse potential adverse impacts to that and it can't the the information to date shows that that it doesn't appears to be any really adverse impacts that are readily noticeable. Um but as they continue on with the um whether they go deeper or more laterally they may potentially have other effects. So once you know the the bottom elevation that the core is going to go to um at that point then you can evaluate potential adverse impacts um what we recommended is putting some monitoring wells in um

around to the northeast and to the souths southwest basically of the quarry um that would allow an evaluation of if whether the water levels being dropped or not from the quarry operations. Uh the concern there would be is if the water level drops significantly in an area where there's bedrock water supply wells it might affect the yield of the wells. So um but it the draw down is always greatest right at the quarry and the further you're away those less and less draw down and that's sort of the function of how much they're going to excavate below the water table would be uh to once you know that dis that depth you'll have a better idea how much it might propagate away from the quarry and whatnot. Uh I think there's also like a 200 foot setback. So you have that like as a minimum but you still has to that we're recommending the hydrogeeologic consultant um evaluate the bottom depths and then basically uh evaluate if there is a potential adverse impact to those wells um and and identifying the location of the wells and well construction and whatnot. Um the um let's see there as I said there are two super fund sites. the LRNR it looks like there's no adverse no potential implications from the operations at this point but if they continue to go deeper um they might so therefore we're recommending monitoring walls in that direction on the western sand and gravel which abuts the property um again the sand and gravel the the way the systems operating the water comes out of the bedrock and they pump it into the sand and gravel so it kind of recharges so the water that's at the site never really leaves the site it just kind of comes up out of one end of the pit and then recharge into another area of the pit. So, which is good. It's kind of maintaining overall recharge on the property basically. Um, but if they continue to go into the rock, there's a chance that the uh bedrock groundwater

flow beneath that facility which has low levels contamination, but there still is some um might have it. So, that's why that we're recommending that they provide the the the hydraologic consultant review. And then I think one of the of the 13 conditions was there' be a third-party review of that report to you know to evaluate what they say and just you know evaluate whether there's an agreement on what the findings are of that study. Um I think the last thing that was added was um at the um was a performance bond or a liability insurance would be if there is but the intent is if there is problems that the quarry operator would address anything that would happen over time dust control issues or potential uh uh private well issues and whatnot. But then the performance bond would be is if they didn't if they didn't act this would cover the funding I believe. So, those are the general recommendations um that we included and and what was incorporated into the planning board meeting. Um so, if you have any questions, I guess I'm available.

I do. So, you just stated kind of quickly Yeah. low levels of contamination.

Can you expand upon that low levels of contamination? What are you talking about? These are the two super fund sites. So, western sand and gravel has a very well-known contamination. Um, a lot of it's in the overburden aquifer. Um, and that's been migrating. In addition, there's some also low-level I think it was more recent. They do a five-year review and it's part of the five-year review. I think they found one for dioxin and POS or something low levels. Uh, but detectable levels. Um, and that's something that we would be worried right now in that southwest. So, this is the western side of the site. The southwest area, the rock excavation activities to date have not extended. It doesn't appear to be extended below the water table. So, there won't be any impact. It's only and we don't know what their plan is. But if they plan to go deeper in that area, that's where you'd have some type of monitoring wall network and to evaluate if you're going to change the bedrock because the overburden because of the way there's so much recharge from the the groundwater wouldn't change, but it's the the deeper rock is something that might have. So the contamination is on the two

on the western Santa and the other one is way over in the LR now which is pretty far away but they've gone much deeper into below the bedrock surface in that area and that's why there's a concern about that.

All right. So I have a couple questions on your report. You make a comment. Based on quarry observations during the site visit, reported water management and area hydra hydrogeeology, aquafer dewatering is occurring in the quarry, but the volume of groundwater pumped is relatively small about 30 gallons per minute. So I think that that is um kind of a a relative statement. If a home is required to have five gallons per minute at their well, that's six homes. So to those six homes, it's not a small relatively small quantity. If they don't get their five gallons, they pretty much

we looked at the entire site, this entire site itself, and it's like a 90 acre site. And if you look at the amount of rainfall that happens per year, there'd be an equivalent. So to keep all the runoff from the site, not not all the runoff goes into the pit, but most a lot of it does, they'd have to pump like 200 gallons a minute. So that's just surface water runoff. Of that 200 gallons a minute, about 30 gallons a minute could might be. I mean, we did this was not a that's just an approximation to put it into perspective. Um it's it's not it's a lot less groundwater than it is surface water. It's mostly surface water.

So I'm glad you brought up rainfall. When you visited the site, was the um dewatering pump running? No, I talked to I So all the water drains into a pit um and that pit can fill up and and that and then basically they turn a pump that pumps like a th00and 2,000 gallons a minute for a short few hours. Was the pump running?

No, it was not running. But I interviewed the the operator and he said on typically in the summertime which is which is well I think there was in the fall or late fall late early summer late I think early fall um that's when you typically get just ground water unless there's a big rain event or something like that and I think he mentioned it's operated for a few hours every every few days or something like that. um just which should be consistent with our rough estimate of groundwater flow. But the wa whatever they pump out is not leaving the property. It's just going to the western side of the property which is actually creating a bit of a barrier. So it kind of pushes the western sand and gravel. The plume is already going to the northwest which is towards the Slaterville reservoir and that would just continue to push it in that direction.

Where is Hortonia? What's that? Where is Portonia? I'm sorry. H O R T O N I A. Sorry. What page is that? That is in the appendix C property values summary. There's a statement. The town of Portonia, okay. Should seriously consider stronger protections for the regionally unique limestone natural resource that is present in the community. Looks to me like that was a regurgitated report from So there was a whole actually the whole appendices on this is on the

the um the value of the property whatnot which is really an out of scope service if we just provided that information. So it's all there. It's stated, but that's is just in a bunch of bullet points.

Uh, I do have one other question. Um, let's see. I think it's this one. If future, you kind of mentioned this, but if future quarry operations in the southwest portion of the site are planned to extend significantly below the groundwater elevation reported at the WSG property, generally less than 262 feet. GZA recommends the quarry operator have a hydrogeeologic consultant evaluate whether those operations could draw ground could draw groundwater contamination east from beneath the WSG property. So can you explain what would a hydrogeeologic consultant what kind of things would they do in order to you know give the town a a better understanding of you know is there potential for this water to come back from WSG?

Yep. Well it's again the main thing that you need to have is is the restoration plan because right now there's not it's it's a historic quarry it's been operating that there's no bottom depth that they've defined where they're going to stop. So this would once you have a restoration plan which you don't just saying how deep they plan to go under you know whatever scenario once you know that then you can start working backwards to figure out you know if they're going to go 100 feet below the the the water table that was one thing if if they're only going to go 50 feet below the water table it'll be a lot you'd only look at the well we did notice that there's a lot of private wells um right now there's not a to the southwest of the property basically there's wells and that's why there's a concern there. So, and and actually the property goes like right up to like almost the backyard of some of the homes I think at the entrance road and stuff like that. So, no, there's already been a 200 foot setback, but that's like a minimum. It wouldn't it may or may not be enough to to, you know, to protect the yield of the water supply well. So that hydro geologic consultant would look at where the water supply will actually are where the wells are what the b what how much how much draw down's going to be and then from that they can interpolate how much um anticipated draw down might happen um towards the water supply well and as I said this is the same area where you you can make engineering judgments about what it's reasonable or likely to might happen but the monitoring ing wells or something that would kind of prove it. You'd have a monitoring well. You could put a I think we recommended putting a data logger and it you could get it readings every hour or something like that and then you can see and if the water if they if they're blasting and the water doesn't doesn't move that's one thing. If you if you see the water table start dropping then you got to take corrective actions or change their quarry operations to make sure they don't continue to move in that direction or something. So that was the kind of generally how it would work.

And I think there's some other recommendations more more specifically about getting an inventory of the private wells. It's we don't know the exact depth of the wells that they typically at Rockwell in in Rhode Island. It's usually about a 100 ft minimum and it can go up to 500 feet deep. If it's a really low yielding well. So that's kind of the range. But we don't know if you know these are low yielding wells that they're installed by the neighbors or if they're high yielding. That would help you know making that determination as well. That's all I have for now.

So um in one of your statements you said that basically GZA considers the testifying experts from Mr. Ferrari, Gro and Hammond to be credible. So, was there anything in their testimony that you did have you just weren't certain about or were they like right on with what

No, I mean they were but but it was like you know testimony with a there's not enough available information to make an opinion basically. So like when you're impacting the impact on a private wall you need to know need need to know well construction details and so I what I we put in our recommendations just the details of what's going to be necessary to to make that opinions and whatnot. Um, so but there was a lot of testimony about the like uh western Santa gravel. We completely agree that the that the dikes they have there and what like that there's really no issue. Uh I you know there was some runoff issues and made the dikes higher and whatnot. So, uh, so we would agree that that there shouldn't be a problem over there. And there's a monitoring program that the EPA is implementing to looking at the water levels that are underneath the western Santa gravel. And they actually have a telemetry system and I think they download the data every week and they're always checking it to see if the water level rises. Um, so if that does happen, communication with the with the property owner could could quickly, you know, address that if there ever I it was a very wet season that they encountered the high water levels and the water levels dropped significantly since then, but now there's a system to monitor continuously to see if it ever h got up high again.

Okay, thank you. John, do you have any questions? I have a question of I just help me understand. So if the water if if the if the super fund site's at certain level y

and then the quarry is digging lower than the level of the super fund site, how would it be possible for the water to be to to contaminate the the super fun site if if it's above the level of the quarry? So right now the quarry has excavated in that southwest area but it's all above the groundwater table. So there's there's no at least from what we could see there was no indicator that there's even a possibility for for to be a problem. Okay. But if the quarry there's certainly room in there to go deeper and as they go deeper that would be the thing that would again I the sand and gravel which I think 95% I'm just estimating of the plume is in the overburden and is always going to go away from the site but our concern was that that small amount that's in the bedrock um has a possibility to to come back and that's put a monitoring well network in there and evaluate it. So,

okay. So, if I read the report, right, generally speaking, you're in you concur with uh the ex their experts. Yes. Yeah. I mean, they there was no written testimony. Just from what they said, we would agree with the the statements that they made. Okay. Thank you.

Claire, any questions? Um, anyone uh in the audience have any questions or any comments? If you can come up, please

question. Can you just can you uh state your name, please? Ann Lily, Maple Lab, Forest. Um, my question has to do with monitoring the dust. We were told the question has to do with the dust and monitoring the dust. I believe that the quarry had told us there were was no dust that it was just water. So is dust being emitted from the quarry during blasting.

Yeah. Yeah. Dust is created but what they the dust management plan is to basically put water on the road. So it's usually along the roads where the trucks are going back and forth if it's really dry create a lot of dust basically. Um and um so the water management plan and actually what we re what we have in there is the best management practices is implementation of those and one of them is paving. So if there's a main travel road like the entrance road that goes down Pineh Hill Road or something like that um street sweeping and and and and watering that area as well as the main road that goes down into the quarry is an area with a lot of traffic basically. So that would be um paving if necessary but um dust control to keep down that dust that would be generated when the car trucks are going back and forth or whatnot. So um and then throughout the quarry is just you know dust control or water management. It's a very uh good use of uh basically on a really if it's already wet it doesn't have to be add water. But if when when sand basically gets uh dry it can have a tendency to create dust.

I think she's referring to though the dust for the blasting. Oh the the blasting dust. Uh I think there was the testimony was that it wasn't blasting dust. It was like a water vapor. It was just a It's just water basically. Question is, do you agree with that? Uh oh. Yes. Yes. As far as that blast in that. Yeah. The thing that's coming off of So you see a plume traveling across the that that's what she's I think referring to. So that's water vapor. Yes. Okay.

Anyone else have any other questions? name is Richard San Andre. I live at 15 Oak Valley Lane. It's actually in Burville, which is uh kind of put me at a little bit of a disadvantage here, but I just would like to ask this gentleman. I I you I guess I want to make sure I understand you correctly. You said there were no violations in any of the seismograph blasting results that they've done recently. Yeah. Go ahead.

Yeah. I mean I we went by the testimony. We did not review all the logs, but we were told during testimony that there were no Yeah, it's now there's there's the sound of it. That's something different, but there's the

nothing to do with what I'm I'm going to be talking about. So, probably I guess probably about a month ago, um I happened to be home when they blasted and I got to tell you lived in Alaska for over three years, lived through a lot of earthquakes. know what a house looks like when it shakes in a three, four degree magnitude earthquake. This thing here rattled the living hell out of my house. My back my back door windows in my sun room were shaking so bad I thought they were going to break. So, we had them come out probably about I don't know how many years ago to do some testing in my property when they were blasting. The day they they put the graphs or the the sensors in the property, the day they blasted to get the results, it was like somebody shot off a little salute somewhere. We could barely hear it, barely felt it. So, I have no I have no belief that they they are actually going to be doing what they say they're going to do as far as blasting goes from the results that I've seen since I've lived there. been on the property for 20 years and it has just been awful recently, especially these this last one was terrible. My house has damaged. Okay. And um a little history before I purchased my property, I had a GZA or I don't know if it was Clean Harbors or GZA environmental engineer look at western sand and gravel to see which way the contaminants were flowing from that pit. So we know that the the lots that are towards the norththeast side of those wells were all contaminated from western sand gravel. So now if we we're going to sit here and talk about draining water tables down now that the the flow of the liquid is going in that direction. So before I bought I made sure that there was going to be no impact to my well that they put the well

to feed those properties down the street from my house. So my concern is we start drawing water tables down with playing Russian roulette here whether we're going to contaminate all these other wells with the stuff that's over at West Sand Gravel because we don't know how deep they're going to go. I have no no respect or can't believe that anything these gentlemen say is is the truth because from what I've seen it's absolute bull crap and lies. So, I'm very concerned with what's going to happen to the wells, not only to the to my neighborhood, but also towards the other end they start drawing that down, that water table down. I it's just absolute craziness to think that we're going to allow that this to even have be considered in the proximity to a super fun site. So, that's all I have to say. Thank you.

Anyone else? So I I guess what I want to clarify is I'm concerned about silica dust and you're talking about dust from the trucks. So do you have I I didn't hear you say anything about the silica dust that might emanate from the site. do

the dust is just the what you can see basically and so that that's why we talk about the d but it's the silica is within that dust clouds basically it's so

but but well I mean we we stated it in our report but there have been numerous no I know but there's numerous studies that have been performed to kind of see if silica is affecting properties and stuff like that in the there's the silica on the facility where the workers are and that's controlled by Osher and there's all kinds of inspections and stuff like that. So that's there's a lot going on there, but then it's there's been studies in other areas of the country that have looked at is silica dust coming from, you know, gravel operations and stuff like that. And the the data doesn't suggest it. Um, but it's but by by maintaining the dust, you're basically controlling the silica because it's all

okay. Now I've read about South County and they have had the silica problem in from the gravel pits there for years. And how is this site different? I am not familiar with which one you're talking about, but um but I mean if there is no dust suppression there would be a then you would have problems if there is a dust control plan and you're putting down water and you're keeping the dust down. Um that's is what so nothing is coming from the site the same.

Yeah. I mean well Ryum has regul I mean if you have concern you you can go to Ryum and they have air quality and they would they would basically evaluate but basically what Ry and Reg says that the dust can't come off the property. So if you're off the property you you know the intent is to stop it all. So that's prevents the dust from coming if

I in um February 2023 DEM cited them for having dust clouds coming off the site and the um water vapor that they continually talk about does not carry any any kind of um silica dust or silic crystalline silica or anything like that. Um yeah, the dust which is the sandot but I mean but the cutting of the

when you're cutting rock of any kind you get a dust

um and this everything is controlled within the site. I what I can mention I know at the town planning board there was a question and bas you you can do a dust monitoring program it's but it's usually it's not a continuous thing but if there's like a concern or something like that there are devices that can basically be put in and basically test the air for silica and stuff. So if it was like a if that was a super you know if that was like a critical thing that could be addressed basically you don't want to do it during different times because if the wind isn't blowing and all that other stuff but yeah but but but this all the studies have shown is that it really isn't necessary but

okay so what I'm concerned about is it's a back back to back to a residential area and nobody has spoken about how all of this is going to affect the children you No, I just just historically the studies that have been done in other areas of the country. Okay. All right. Thank you. You can keep it up there so that way people come up. Anyone else? Are these questions for him or anyone? Well, anyone, but he's here to answer. I would like to speak then general.

You know, I went back and re I'm Richard Grub from Fed Street. I went back and reviewed YouTube videos all the way back to the beginning of this year. I looked at the February 6th meeting or 10th, I forget what it was. I guess it was February 10th of last year when the quarry first presented their position and suggestion uh for the overlay project. And then I looked at some of the uh videos from the planning board and then some recent videos and particularly the planning board just last week that made the recommendation that they would approve this zoning overlay which blew my mind. I wanted to remind you of a couple of things because Mr. Landry has a habit of kind of telling a fuzzy story and he's maintained right from day one right up until the meeting last week that basically we're going to keep mining no matter what you do because it's our right. And I wanted to remind each person in this room that the quarry lost the case. They came at us like they're doing us a favor and we lost the case. We're giving us an opportunity to gain control. Well, the judge rockini specifically told him to come back to us and work out something with zoning, not suggest a zoning overlay change, just work out a variance with zoning. But they kind of threw it up that we're

grandfathered in for 89 acres and we have every right to mine this as we see fit and it's too bad. We're just giving you a bone to kind of settle you down. Well, I wanted to go back and actually talk about a little bit of history because Judge Proacini was aware that the tax department at Northmith Field had combined the three lots for tax purposes, but he specifically did not make a judgment that the three lots had grandfathered properties. In fact, I have to believe by the wording that he had that in mind when he first of all talked about the history. The peasants did not apply for an earth removal permit, zoning change or use variance for the new lot. However, plaintiff, which is them, blasting and excavating the new lot once it was purchased in 1987. Our zoning prohibited new mining from 1979. So, eight years later, they bought the property with full knowledge that we had our zoning requirements and then proceeded to mine it anyway without seeking a permit but just going about their business. We had an we had an inspector, Mr. Benoy um who got a cease and dist order to stop mining the newly purchased land. Immediately there were well maybe not immediately within months there were injunctions

against the town from absorbing from enforcing our own ordinances and Benoy went out there and said I want to see the new lot versus the old lot. He couldn't see it. They said, "The lot lines aren't available because I've already dug in and mined part of the new lot without a permit." Now, that was 35 years ago. Now, we have certainly capabilities of measuring lot lines with GPS or laser or whatever. And we could go back and determine those lot lines and say, "You know what? You never had grandfathered rights. You claim you have grandfathered rights, but you never did. I've checked this with our own officials here in town. It's not been proven in a court of law. It's only a claim. And to me, presenting a claim as if it's a truth is the same as a lie. And it's just another example of how the quarry twists what it does and then offers this magnanimous solution, a little pat on the head, which I see is the moral equivalent of a white panel van and an old man outside of a school saying, "I have a puppy." But if you do for some reason decide to approve this overlay, I suggest we name it a more descriptive term which I would nominate suckers of North Smithfield zoning or belain number one.

Anyone else? I'm going to get up at the mic and I'm not going to whisper because that's what it's been all night. Uh Scott Walling, 563 Greenville Road. Uh just with the dust that's going off the property, the fugitive dust, has anybody been on the site and been invited during a blast here? Anybody? Nobody's been on the site and we're making a decision to go further. We haven't even started. They don't have a earth removal permit. Prove it to us. They don't have it. They They're not following the laws. It's just like this gentleman here on Provenence Pike said early in the night. That's all he wakes up to. It's it's this, it's this, it's that. But it is a problem that you've created. Not you group, your group here. It is a problem that this town has created on the site of five of uh I guess it's 600 Greenville Road. Okay. We we we screwed that up big time. Okay. Why do we want another one? Why? I don't understand it. I don't understand it. It's just like the other guy with the junkyard. Are we ready to hire two more babysitters? Because that's what we need to solve these two issues. They have to be babysat because they do what they want. Mr. Landry has told everybody that. Great job. Great job. And I I'm asking you to really think this. If if they say they're going to control the dust with BMS with screens, why isn't it there now? get it ready for some kind of approval that you're showing us it's right right now. Yeah, we'll do that like

everything else and it'll never happen. So, I'm asking you not to go forward with this until more decision has been made because they're not good neighbors. And and how anybody can stand here and say the blast goes off, it comes up and it doesn't leave the property when we all seen Jason Rich's videos. Okay. Back in 1987, I was the one that found out that they were blasting on Greenville Road illegally because I just finished washing my car and it rained sand. So that left the property. So what's different? 40 years later on Pine Hill, it's the same thing going on, different different area. And I feel bad for everybody that lives there. It's not ending. It's never going to end. They're going to do what they want. So, we need to just stop this and just keep fighting with them because they're acting, these seven suits here are acting like they're doing us a favor. They're doing nothing but trying to intimidate you guys and to to try to see that they're they're coming up with an educated guess. I don't buy it. I'm hoping you don't buy it. I just really The town has let me down on my end of town. Uh I'm hoping it doesn't happen up there and I really appreciate it if you really consider this. And the other thing I'd like to add, uh, did anybody get a letter from Jason Richard from the, uh, you know, he's a physically handicapped guy, can't be here tonight. Does anybody intend on reading his statement so he can have a chance under the disability laws? Can that happen?

Okay, that's all I'd like. Thank you very much for your time. Anyone else? No problem.

Hi everyone. Beth Newberry, 53 Fallout Street. Um the town council tonight has before the decision on whether or not to creating create a zoning overlay for one business. We've listened to many people in town lay out the various ways in which this business is operated without permits and to the extent of purchasing a budding land under the guise of having a horse farm so that they could then turn around and expand their quaring operations. At the recent planning board meeting, Ms. Dristo Ms. Dristophoro aptly pointed out that Mr. Landry keeps speaking in very threatening language, essentially saying that the Corey can do whatever they want or play nicely. And this is their attempt to play nicely. Material Sand has painted a vision for the ways in which they will be doing this with buffers and BMS and dust reducing walls and a plan for what happens when they're done with their cing operation. Truth is, if they wanted to do all of these things, nothing was stopping them from doing things prior to now. As has been previously mentioned, there's already a zoning overlay district in this area, one that supersedes a district that they would like to create. In ordinance 6.19, which you've heard me reference earlier tonight, there's a section that discusses pre-existing non-conforming businesses. And it states that in making such determination, as I said earlier, the board shall give consideration to the demonstrated reliability and feasibility of the use and pollution control measures proposed and the degree of threat to water quantity and quality, which would result if the control measures performed at less than designed efficiency. We heard Mr. Erbano talk about 14 dioxide tonight, which is a known human carcinogen. We heard him talk about PAS, which is a forever chemical that never goes away. Um, he said it should be okay. Um, in addition, the board shall take into consideration the sensitivity of the water body to which the site drains. I think we all know what water body that site drains to. I urge you to vote no on this overlay and focus on the priority of protecting the aquafer. This quarry is

sitting precariously close to two existing super fund sites and this company has not shown throughout its history that it can be trusted to not disrupt those sites or contaminate the aquifer. Thank you. Anyone else? Hello. Uh, I'm Muriel Howerin and uh, I live on Douglas Pike, 62 Douglas Pike, my property, which is well actually I've deeded it to my grandson, but I'm speaking for my grandson, his wife, and their two children who now live in my house. Oops. I've been there for over 50 years and the property abuts actually abuts the quarry and so I'm definitely affected. Um, I think the the most serious thing is I'm concerned with the blasting because the blasting it's it's going to move things from under the ground and then I wasn't aware of silica dust but apparently that's as dangerous as a speestous for affecting the lungs. Why would we even we being the town consider continuing this operation when they've

been there since 1978 taking what they can 197 No is it 78 yeah 78 so 58 is it what's the number 58 okay 195 58, same year I graduated from high school. That's a long time ago. Cuz I'm 85 now and I'm not really good with this microphone. Um, hey, I make you laugh. So, I'm saying no. A definite no. No, no. Don't continue this. I know people have jobs. I know people. But we have lives too. And let's think about the people who live in the vicinity and also people who are going to be affected by the silica dust. It's not going to stay on that property. No way. We have a lot of wind in this area. In case you haven't noticed, in the last few weeks, it's been windy and uh so it's going to travel and if it gets into the aquifer, which probably already has, we're going to lose our water supply. Slersville reservoir. No. Anyone else?

Let other people speak first. Lucian Lamro 1899 Pound Hill. They talked about all this stuff and I see it every day. When the wind is blowing, that silica dust blows right onto my property. I think I'm going blind sometimes. I'm looking at the end of my field. I got to turn and look the other way to see that my eyes aren't bad or worse than they actually are. And they talked about their blasts have been in compliance. I'd like to see the record they have for the first blast they had on the 3rd of July. I don't remember the year, but it was like at six o'clock at night, but there is no record for how high that blast was. And it almost knocked me off my feet when I was in my blueberry patch. And I've been through typhoons when I was in the Navy, so I can stand up pretty good. And The blasting shakes the house all the time. They had to put in filters for my well, which drive me baddy at night when they run because it was so much brown stuff. I don't know exactly what chemical it is or whatever. It was coming in my water every time they blasted 3 4 days. So, I couldn't really do anything. Couldn't wash. I'd have to drink bottled water until it settled down again. And the blast are just getting worse and worse. Oh, and the other thing about blast, you know what they say? They've been in their perimeters. They're supposed to have they're saying 30s or something now

that I get, you know, maybe 40, but you know what 100 is? It's knocking the plaster off the walls of your house. You know, it's not even saying cracking it. It's knocking the plaster off. So, I mean, how can we live that way? And I've got a nice piece of land back there that I'd like to do some farming on, you know, my imagination. I'd like to do some kind of community garden thing, but I don't dare use it because of all the silica dust, you know, and they say, "Oh, they've been there." Well, I've been there just as long as they have, you know, because we moved in in what, December of 52, I think it was. So, where are my rights? You know, that that's my big thing. Thank you very much. Hi, Rebecca de Christopharo, 1931 Poundill Road. I'm speaking tonight as an abuter. Um, I don't feel comfortable providing an opinion on what which way you should vote. I said the same thing to the planning board the other night. I think you have information from residents as well as others. I think you'll make an informed decision. Before I go through the points, I would like to show you what everybody is referring to as far as dust. So, Lucian Lamro, who is my neighbor, is referring to this dust cloud that comes through his property. And I I just want to show share this video.

I'll have to find it because I just lost it. I don't want to flip through my pictures. Um, based on the recommendation of the ethics commission, I'm going to stick to my experience and I'm going to comment on some of the conditions that were outlined by the planning board. Um, I made mention of these conditions the other night and I don't necessarily see that they were incorporated and I think that it's important that the town council considerate them, consider them rather. So they mention uh number two within the 200 feet setback there should be a minimum of 100 feet of linear no cut buffer from any abuing residential properties. U said buffer shall be supplemented with uh trees and etc. I 100 ft in my opinion of vegetation is is not enough to really mitigate the noise um even to mitigate the dust that I I will get around to showing you. Um, I I know that they did talk about screens. I I think that we need to really see what that is to ensure that, you know, whatever they do put up really mitigates the degree of dust that does come off of that property, especially on a windy day. I I don't it it comes off of the property on a Sunday, right? Like nobody's there to necessarily mitigate the dust that's coming off of the property 247. So, we need to ensure that whatever this business does um consider that it's mitigating around the clock. Um, I would also like to mention the traffic. So, they would do a traffic study to understand, you know, the effects of the road, but also the effects of the abunding residents. Um, some of the trucks that come through there, the noise is just obscene. And it's not actually the material trucks. The material trucks are relatively quiet. It's mostly the contractors that come in to pick up. You can hear these guys coming down Route 7. They're coming down Route 7. They're turning into Poundill Road. are turning into Pineh Hill Road. I mean, I can hear it within

the walls of my house. It's it's well above the allowable noise decibel level in town, and I don't necessarily know how that could be um abaded, but it's something that we need to take into consideration because it is a significant nuisance. Um, additionally, the the representative from GZA talked about how the depth of the mine could potentially impact wells. I think he mentioned that they were put into essentially test wells. I think that the mine plan that it sounds as though they're considering it needs to be informed. There needs to be an evaluation or at least some sort of impact study to understand the depth that they can go and at what point it actually impacts the wells. I don't think it should be like I don't want it to be like a cart before the horse situation, right? where we just keep digging down and digging down and digging down then all of a sudden oh okay now wells are impacted because we dug too deep right I think the mine plan should very clearly articulate based on this depth we will not impact wells once we get to this depth wells could very well be impacted um lastly I don't actually not lastly but I don't see anywhere in the conditions I know this was something to discussed at past meetings um testing wells within a certain area uh within a residential wells within a certain vicinity of the quarry to determine, you know, whether that drinking water is safe. Um, and then lastly, I I think we've seen that, you know, this has been a 30-year, 15-year issue, you know, that this court case rather. Um, and we've seen other issues come up in town where I don't necessarily feel incredibly confident that we have the resources to enforce some of the conditions that are outlined here. Um, and I don't know if

this is a possibility, but I would request that these conditions dependent upon obviously which way the council votes, but in the event that these conditions were agreed upon, I would ask that the court uphold these conditions. Um, so in the event that this business does not comply with conditions and we find that they are in violation that, and I don't know how the legal system works, this is just Rebecca in an ideal world. um that this actually go back to court and the court is able to uphold the conditions versus our zoning official, our building official. Um I think that we've seen in the past that we're kind of in this quagmire as a result of some of lack of oversight over the last very many years. Uh and in order to mitigate that from happening in the future, I think if we can put in some safeguards, that would be helpful. Thank you. I'm gonna find that picture.

Anyone else can finish up?

I've been asked to um read Mr. Richard's statement into the record. Um public statement opposing the proposed industrial special management district overlay for the Pineh Hill Road Pory submitted under ADA accommodation. The proposed zoning amendment to create an industrial special management district overlay for the Pontill Quarry Road Quarry operated by material sand and stone flagrantly disregards North Smithfield's aquafer and groundwater protection ordinance section 6.1 of the zoning ordinance which explicitly requires any mining operation to submit and obtain approval of a comprehensive hydraological study ongoing monitoring wells and a contingency plan for contamination before any permit or expansion can be considered. Yet the applicant's petition contains no such study, no monitoring data, and no contingency plan, relying instead on a paid GCA peer review dated October 6, 2025 that simply parrots the applicant's paid experts without performing any independent testing or verification, thereby deliberately evading the ordinance's clear mandate to protect the town's soul source stratified drift aquifer from irreversible harm. This aquifer is part of the larger Blackstone River Valley groundwater system, a high yield glacial sand and gravel aquifer shared with Massachusetts supplying drinking water to thousands across state lines. And the quarry is dangerously sandwiched between two active super fun sites laden with PAS forever chemicals and 14 dioxane. The western sand and gravel site abudding immediately to the west with quarry discharges and infiltration ponds as close as 75 ft from contaminated areas and the landfill and resource recovery site just 1300 feet to the northeast. Ongoing dewatering pumps and unpermitted discharges in this location risk drawing in, mobilizing or spreading these persistent toxins through highly fractured bedrock where groundwater follows erratic fractured pathways and

zones of least resistance, rendering plume tracking or containment virtually impossible and dramatically heightening the threat of irreversible interstate contamination that could expose Rhode Island and the town to massive liability, including potential lawsuits from Massachusetts or federal agency under CRCLA, the Clean Water Act or transboundary nuisance claims if PAS or 14 dioxane migrate northward into drinking water supplies. This evasion directly endangers the health, safety and welfare of residents as the proposed expansion will dramatically increase blastering truck traffic, fugitive silica dust and illegal dewatering in a densely set settled re residential area without any required health impact assessments. mandated setbacks greater than 200 feet from residents or enforcable dust suppression measures beyond the applicant's self-s serving promises leaving families along Pine Hill Road, Pound Hill Road, and Douglas Pike to suffer uncontrollable uncontrolled respurable crystallin silicon exposure proven to cause silicosis, COPD, and lung cancer with death clouds so severe that the operator must illegally wash Pineh Hill Road multiple times daily using contaminated quarry water that flows goes untreated into storm drains and wetlands in violation of DEM best management practices and the Clean Water Act. The proposal completely ignores critical air and water quality protection under the Clean Water Act, the Groundwater Protection Act of 1985, Class GA aquifer, zero tolerance for industrial discharge, and Rhode Island DEM regulations. As the GAZA report admits ongoing dewatering and infiltration ponds, but fails to address the operator's routine practice of hosing down Pineh Hill Road with quy affluent laden with settlement sediments, chemicals, and heavy metals to control fugitive dust from overload trucks, sending all of it straight into municipal storm drains and adjacent wetlands in direct violation of the no

discharge permit requirements and the town's MS4 storm water obligations. violations the violations the operator remains in non-compliance with under the no discharge permit as confirmed in recent federal oversight. Rhode Island DM has logged multiple formal complaints including the October 18th, 2025 wetland alteration oil leak on Route 7 and earlier roadwashing plates, but has repeatedly refused to investigate or issue violations. instead sending emails denying any wrongdoing or even the need for investigation despite photographic evidence and resident follow-ups demonstrating a clear pattern of regulatory abandonment that leaves the Branch River wershed and the interstate aquifer that feeds it completely unprotected while residents bear the burden of enforcement. This inaction is now drawing urgent scrutiny from higher authorities as just this week, US EPA Region One confirmed they're actively responding to these exact concerns through their saber fund program to ensure the quarry's discharges aren't exacerbating contamination at the adjac adjacent WSG and L and RR sites. This quarry has been operating illegally since at least September 1980 because owners Leonard and Constance Paza failed to file for the required certificate of compliance within the 15-month grace period mandated by the June 1979 Earth Removal Ordinance Chapter 11 Article 4, which requires all pre-existing operations to register the exact extent of their non-conforming use by September 1980 or lose grandfather status. Yet no COC was ever filed for the original parcel and the later application for the additional 32 acres was explicitly denied because lateral expansion of non-conforming uses is prohibited under 340-104. Yet the operator has been illegally excavating those 32 acres since 2013 in open defiance of town law. Despite this clearly illegal illegality, the town has continued to issue building permits and electrical

upgrades under the status quo court order, effectively rewarding decades of non-compliance while residents suffer the consequences. Approving this amendment directly contradicts the North Smithfield comprehensive community plan, particularly land use element goal one, protect natural resources and rural character and policy 1.3 limit extractive industries to existing sites with proven mitiv mitigation as the plan repeatedly calls for preservation of rural landscapes, protection of groundwater, and strict limits on industrial expansion in residential and aquafer areas explicitly stating that extraction operations shall be limit manage current currently active sites and no new or expanded extraction operations shall be permitted in aquafer protection zones without full compliance with all protective measures, none of which has been provided here. adding yet another industrial scale disturbance on top of the town's existing 500 plus acres of solar farms, including over 400 acres at the Iron Mine Solar Project, plus the approved 162 acre gold property solar farm, will only accelerate the loss of the rural character that residents overwhelmingly reaffirm in the comprehensive plan update process and previous ballot initiatives. Legitimizing this illegally expanded unpermitted operation through an overlay district sets a catastrophic precedent that will invite mining applications townwide as any landlord or any land owner could demand the same special management treatment to bypass aquafer rechar recharge zones farmland and residential neighborhoods without the rigorous sight specific reviews required by Rhode Island general laws 45-24-51. The procedural def defects in this process are undeniable. Multiple public hearings occurred with only 200 foot notice on both state law for map amendments involving specific parcels in North Smithfield zoning ordinance 340-5.25D require 1000 foot written notice as

confirmed by town planner Marulo's own email of October 7th through 8, 2025 suppressing public participation and violating due process. The quarry's long history of unpermitted earth removal, wetland alterations, fugitive dust violations, and Rhode Island DEM's refusal to enforce despite logged complaints to demonstrates that self-regulation has failed and partial summary judgement in 2023 preserved only the narrow status quo, not a license for expansion or amnesty for decades of illegality. For all of these reasons, the town council must reject this amendment to protect public health, including from irresversible interstate aquifer contamination and super fund plume migration, preserve our rural character, enforce our own laws, and honor the clear directive of the comprehensive plan and the will of the residents who elected you. Failing to do so, the rural character we voted for, approximately 90 and in favor in regards to the comprehensive plan, will be trampled upon, leaving North Smithfield as the state capital of solar farms and earth extra extractive industries. Thank you, Jason Richard.

We do have to um get this closed up. Anyone else have anything quickly? Hi, young lady. I don't know. Bob Bell humor. 219 Old Oxford Road, North Midfield. What's your name again? Bell humor. Bob Bell humor.

What the hell are we doing? Here's a guy who wants to put in test wells because it may affect our wells. You're going to say, "Good. We're going to have any there's no problem." He's going to put in test wells. Why? What's be perceiving the problem? You going to let him do that? You going to let them ruin this land that we have left over here? It's right down the street from my house. He says, "Oh, blasting is nothing. My house shakes every time. Every time they blast, they send an engineer down. They put probes down by my foundation." He said, "Oh, you're all right. You're in the 30 or 35% or whatever. My everything shakes in my house. I've repaired cracks on the walls. It's all where your house is built. Well, only I got lost the well few years ago because the understructure in the ground moved over and I ended up with half a hole. They couldn't get the pump out. Guys, you got a half a hole. How does that happen? He says some rock formation moved down here. Where's that come? We we we in an earthquake zone. Come on. I know damn well it's from the blasting. It moved something. I ended up replacing the well. And you're going to do this again to us, to all of us who live here. We got some nice property out here. We moved here because it was beautiful. Was nice country setting, which is becoming less and less of a country setting. Now you want to put another hole over there. Come on, guys. You any of you guys live there? You live around the area? Think about it. You represent us.

Thank you very much.

Couple of just detail points. Uh, at the planning board meeting, I wanted you to know that Mr. Landry specifically didn't agree to those 12 is uh stipulations. He said they're a good start and he even kind of mumbled that they can't meet all of them already because some of the boundary lines are closer than 200 ft. So, please don't accept this based on those stipulations unless you get agreement from them that they accept those stipulations. I also noticed there was a road use permit granted by our town in 1990 and it stipulated 20 trucks a day maximum. I know people in these meetings and at the planning board asked questions and and specified that there's upwards of 100 trucks a day. How did it get from 20 to 100? Is that operating under status quo? Um I don't get that. But our current road use permit doesn't have a limit. So, let's figure out what happened and the next time it's due up, think about what that limit should be if they're still in operation. I also heard someone at this meeting in February talk about Blackstone uh Massachusetts having a bucket tax on their quarry that every time a bucket load comes out of the quarry, the town gets the money. Mr. Landry again has made the case that this is a great benefit for the town and more than one person asked him how is that the case? We see how it's a benefit for you but we don't see how it's a benefit for the town. I thought one idea would be to

follow Blackstone and charge them a bucket tax if they're going to be in business and put that into a special fund somewhere. But then we could at least say, "Hey, it is to our benefit, too. And lastly, I still believe you can do all this with a zoning variance. You could safely deny that request for an overlay right now back to the table and say if you want to talk to us, talk to us like Judge Brackini said and talk to zoning for a variance. Thank you. I would like to make a motion to extend the meeting to 10:36.

We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? Roll call. Mr. Beerod? Yes. Mrs. O'Hara? Yes. Mr. Punch? Yes. Miss? Yes. Anyone else? Before we move on,

I'd like to make one more comment in relation to the zoning overlay and I stated this at the Oh, Rebecca to Christopher 1931. I stated this at the planning board meeting as well. Um, I don't necessarily feel comfortable with the zoning overlay in this town. I don't feel comfortable with the zoning overlay in this town because I feel as though it could become a loophole where there are other developers who may come into this town and say, "Well, you granted this business a zoning overlay to mine this property, so we're going to pursue a similar zoning overlay to mine this property because we need to mine the property in order to put up a development." Um, I mentioned this again at the planning board the other night where I don't know if this is happening in Burville or Smithfield. I can't recall. Um, but a developer came in, bought a big piece of property, and they requested to, not really requested, they have the right to mine the property for the next 10 years before they actually start building. So, my concern is that by providing this business zoning overlay, um, you're opening up the door to other zoning overlay requests in the future. I think Mr. Grub makes a solid point. Maybe the zoning overlay is not necessarily the answer. Is there another option in the event that's the route that the town council wants to go? And then lastly, I just want to share with you just a 30 second video on what Lucian Lamro is referring to when he says that there's a dust cloud that comes through the property.

Anyone else?

Hi, Silly. State your name. Say my name again. Carol Dangle. Town Hill Road. Thank you.

Um I also attended the um planning board meeting. Um and there was really long but very enlightened discussion. I I have to say that I don't agree with the findings but they um I thought the discussion was excellent. One of the things that came up um because it was a comparison between um the comprehensive plan and the existing business and um one item on the comprehensive plan was um prevent incompatible non-residential uses in residential neighborhoods. And I don't think anywhere you would find anybody who would tell you that a quarry was compatible with residential. But the what happened during the meeting was they weren't sure that the residential preceded the quarry. Well, Muriel's house is 1785. And she found a map. It's a copy of a map, but I'm sure we could get a better one um from the historical society that shows the cluster of houses, the resident residents living in this is 1947. The um the quarry was bought in um 1958. So in 1947, you can see it's a residential neighborhood. So when this was brought up during the um during the planning board meeting, maybe things would have gone the other way or or some other stipulations would have been made. But

um there seems to be an issue as to whether um that's a difference and I would think that makes a difference. all these when I'm listen when you listen here um you sink your your money into your home you choose a place to live where you'll be healthy and comfortable and then along comes a change in zoning with a business that clearly beginning from the beginning would be not compatible and there's a I had also compiled it I would be redundant, but all of the times that they were cited beginning starting with the purchase 1987 and cited for um removal, sand removal and um and it just kept going on and on. And so um are they if this was a positive would be be in left in the hands of it looks like a business that's not really reliable as far as con considering the neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you.

Anyone else before we continue?

Hi again. John Gray uh 2000 Pound Hill Road. on one of the first houses off of Route 7. So, I see these guys drive by every day and uh some days there's more than 20. Uh but they're uh material guys are really respectful. I have nothing but respect for everybody over there. They're good people. Um but I don't know about the next company that comes in. Uh so they're good, but what about the future? And I understand people are upset now. Some of these issues like the dust doesn't really affect me as much, but that's just the nature of whatever. My point here is I I think the tax was a good idea in the special funds and we use that towards like air monitoring stations that that money goes towards the people most directly affected to by this decision. Whichever way it goes, um I think there's some good ideas and uh I'd be willing to give up a portion of my property to redo the road in front of my house. uh talked to the guys about it and it seems like everybody we can make this work and that might help with some of the traffic issues in front of the house. There's been a few accidents, not with these people but with just in general in the community. So, I just wanted to bring that up otherwise have a good night.

Thank you.

Anyone else? Um, I wanted to make mention that in the event that the town council does approve the zoning overlay that this zoning overlay is specific to the business on this property. My concern is that in the future, if this business were to ever sell, that the zoning overlay could go to another business. maybe a bigger business, maybe a bigger business with that that doesn't have as much regard for the residents, um, or as much regard for the administration. So, I don't know if that's something that could be stipulated, but the zoning overlay should be specific in the event the town council decides to vote this way. The zoning overlay should be specific to this business on this specific property. It is not to be grandfathered into the next business. So on their request,

is that it? Anyone else? Are you waiting to speak? Can we just um make it quick?

Well, um we'll be as I'll be as compact as I as I can. Some of these folks have spoken three times. So, we've been here since 6:45 as well. But I'll be respectful. I'll be compact. We don't intend to call witnesses. Um, we would like to make sure that the videos of the testimony that were presented to GZA are included as part of the record to these proceedings. I've got a a a memo here, a one-page memo that lists the videos that were presented to GZA and that were part of the planning board record. I would ask that that be included as part of this record. And we also have an affidavit as to service um of the notice to Butters for these uh proceedings. If I may provide those. So, I'd like to say uh I have a few comments about how we got here and where we are. Again, I will be concise. Um the the the this all originated from a real uh conundrum in two respects. a zoning conundrum that there's been some reference to here tonight and a transparency conundrum that nobody has been able to break through in the 67 years or so that this operation has operated and 30 years of litigation. It remains a conundrum from a zoning perspective. I I have to clarify that I've been practicing for 46 years. I have never represented to anybody that my client would do whatever my client wants to do,

no matter what the law says. That's a misrepresentation of anything that I said or would ever say. What I did say is that this zoning conundrum which remains stuck with the court which knows everything about these proceedings, this petition for a zone change, every step of this process has been reported to the judge that asked us to come here and undertake this process because it's such a conundrum. The conundrum is that we have a nonconforming use that preceded zoning. The lady here tonight that talked about nonconforming uses talked about all kinds of other nonconforming uses, but now not the ones that apply under Rhode Island law to mining operations and extraction operations. The law there is that because it's a diminishing asset and the very activity of mining involves expansion every bucket of material being a further expansion to the operation. So to to disallow the ability to expand in some way uh would take away constitutionally protected property rights to conduct that business. It's not like a gas station that can't get bigger. Extraction by definition means expansion. Expansion can go to the property line. Now this property under the zoning ordinance is all one property. It's 90 acres. That's how this property is zoned. So there is a an issue in the court that has remain unresolved and may be unresolved for

quite some time with respect to exactly how that works out with respect to this property. In the meantime, the operation continues. Both the old part of the operation and the new part of the operation have potential uh for substantial shelf life for further activity. The new the old property can go down and out. The new property is a is a is a question of whe how far it goes out and how that's been interpreted. But that could take a very long time to determine one way or another. And in the meantime, the property remains a con a conundrum. And it's not as easy as saying don't allow a new operation in. It's not a new operation. It's an old operation that carries with it these rights. And hence, we have a a planner report here that's very clear that you can't just say the zoning is rural uh estates, rural agricultural estates. there aren't going to be any rural agricultural estates on this property for a very long time. So, whatever the zoning designation is is really, you know, not helpful here. Same thing with the comprehensive plan. The planner has noted that the comprehensive plan is for new future operations. It doesn't deal with pre-existing legal rights, especially this type of mining right. And that has to be considered. It's not as if every word in the comprehensive plan can be made applicable to this kind of use. And again, that is just an explanation of one of the reasons why this operation has continued and and and is it's uncertain as to what's going to happen

in the future. So, our approach was to introduce some planning to this process where we're not guessing at how deep it goes. We're not guessing at how long it goes. We're not guessing what happens when it's over. There's been discussion on the table at the planning board about these 13 conditions that didn't exist before uh about additional reports and planning that would be part of this ordinance under those conditions. uh a dust control uh plan requirements and enforcement measures to be developed that there be no transmissions across the property line. a mining plan that would determine how deep you go, where you can go, what types of buffers have to be uh honored, and and that's measured and kept up to date over time as as the the operation gets lower to make sure that that's safe and that there are periodic rockto-rock checks to make sure everything's proceeding adequately and that the buffers and setbacks are uh adequate. and a reclamation plan for what happens at the end of the day and how does that get how does that get funded? And there have been discussions along these lines about the applicant perhaps through some kind of bucket fee as has been described finance the compliance that would be required and the eventual uh reclamation. So all of these things, the 13 points and the various plans that have been discussed about being brought together were deemed uh you uh by the planning board to be a reasonable approach to this to this issue. The

planning board determined that it's better to plan here than it is to simply allow things to develop on their own on an ad hoc basis. And that the transparency that the town's lacking, the inability to answer questions about who's doing what, what regulators done what are there violations out there would all be replaced by a regular reporting regimen where everybody's notified and the town has all of the notification that everybody else has. Now, we didn't uh expect that you would believe everything that our client said about the the the operation. And we didn't expect you to do that. And there's been an awful lot of facts presented. There's been an awful lot of fiction presented and everybody's got an opinion and everybody's entitled to opinion. But one thing we recognized at the beginning is that it was going to be up to us to establish a trust factor here and it's it would have to come from genuine experts in the field who have qualifications who have obligations not just to us but their professional lensure to say things that were true. And so we brought people who are at the top of the game here in in in hydraology, water related impacts. Uh Mr. Ferrari is hired by most of the many of the municipalities in Rhode Island to represent them in dealing with these issues. He went through extensive testimony about how not only is there no genuine risk of damage to wells or contamination, but that the Birming and Well structure that's been developed at great expense by the applicant is actually a a valuable uh asset valued by the federal government for its impact and pushing contaminants away from this

area and where they're supposed to go. It's a zero discharge site from that point, from that perspective, highly regulated, highly watched, and highly controlled and very unlikely to result in any contamination or damage to anybody's wells. The seismologists uh testified as to how all these efforts were taken to measure the impacts of blasting, how it's all been done in accordance with state regulations, uh and will continue to be so. and that the types of of disturbances that have that have been generated by this there there are other reasons why someone can feel an impact to their house but the actual disruptions from this were evaluated as being no more than the width of a human hair. Okay, based on the the documented analysis of these activities over time and that the movement is and the the blasts are just within inches of of meaningful uh long-term uh impacts. And then on the on the dust and silica control, again, someone who had a lifetime career at the Bureau of Mine Safety, personally familiar with all of the repeating testing that's been done on this property, that not only people off the site, but people on the site who are working on the site, working with these materials every day are well well below the detection or actionable rate or or or relevant rate of of of silica in any measure. people who are right in the middle of these activities day and night. So, but we didn't stop there. We when we were asked to consider it, we agreed to fund expert uh corroborating

analysis, neutral expert corroborating analysis by a firm of the town's choice. Agreed to pay for it, agreed to turn over all of the materials to that firm, whoever it was. And the town selected a very solid firm in GZA to do that with the expectation that they would either agree with all of that testimony that you heard both sides of here and the planning board heard all of the same things for many months and the GCA firm took a long time to go through all of it visit the site form their own conclusions and came to the conclusion that and I'll quote right from the report. GCA considers the three experts to be credible and agrees with their testimony and responses to those questions with no exceptions. No exceptions for all of that material that was presented. Now, we think that's a that's an important thing and we knew that the concerns about whether these allegations about health and safety issues would be a distraction that could make it very difficult for anyone to even meaningfully consider this balance. Now, the planning board again determined that it would be better to plan than to not plan. um encourage various uh safety valve type uh measures, additional uh u requirements in addition to the ones covered in the 12th conditions. They made a 13th condition. And we did agree on the record that as to probably most of those uh conditions

uh we are either in compliance or will get in compliance. Uh there are a number of them that require more discussion that could prove more favorable to the town. In other words, if you build uh a better burm, uh it can be that the a a and and invest the money on burming and netting and and other factors. It can be more effective even though it and perhaps more expensive for us, but it could be more effective than a larger buffer. Uh there are issues that need to be determined about if you're if you're already within 30 feet, you know, you obviously can't create a 200 foot bucker. So there are wording issues within that uh that grouping. Uh there are technical things. There are some waiverss that read, well, you you can't do this if it'll have an adverse impact. So what's an adverse impact? That needs a little work from people who are knowledgeable to define a standard that even our engineers are comfortable with. They they don't they want the standard to be the industry standard, but it's just too vague to say what's adverse. If somebody hears a loud bang, is that is that a violation or is is there a definition that would go into this? So our so they when you came out of the plan we're here tonight with two things being very different or one the technical position we presented has been affirmed uh and the planning board has made a very emphatic uh recommendation uh you know not a close vote to to proceed and to continue to work on what we're working on here. That was just four days ago. Uh, and there's a there

can be a lot of discussion about what these conditions should look like. And we're not trying to run anybody over on this and never have. We've given you all of the time and all the funding necessary to do what you feel should should be done. Uh our sincere request at this point is to answer the question of well where you know where do we what do we do with this information that we have right now and where do we take it. Uh our suggestion is that you approach this the same way you approach the technical dispute and that is to go to resources that are neutral uh and professional uh and that will be funded uh by the applicant uh and take that information and that and the results of that process and factor that into what you're thinking about with respect to this text amendment or tying it to pending litigation or whatever. I mean, we thought the text amendment device was a good device. There were people on the planning board that liked the whole structure of where we're going, but we're worried about a text amendment because it might have a presidential value. We think that could be managed, but we're not laying on a railroad track for a text amendment. Uh if it could be done in some other way, uh we'd certainly be open to that. And uh we're suggesting that the judiciary that has control of this case has a number of retired judges that are part of that package that serve as independent

neutral mediators. um that could look at this picture and help the help us put more definition, safety valves, parameters, guard rails on these conditions, uh on the plans, the issue who of who pays, is there funding, what does the funding look like from the applicant? work through a mediation process with qualified neutral moderator and bring that back to this discussion uh or to whatever further consideration the town council may be may deem pertinent as to the d the direction this whole thing is is to take and and I I would and we're we're patient again we're not trying to run anybody over, but we've made a lot of progress here. I sense that it may be difficult without more for some of you to act on this, certainly to act on it tonight. And I I I assure you from the applicant's perspective, if your goal is to gain better information, have the court weigh in on what's being done, that that would be a constructive process, and we're willing and happy to to work with you, continue to work with you toward that end. Thank you.

I'm I'm personally not really uh thrilled about what you just said in the sense that um I don't want the courts to get involved at this level right now because it all that's going to do is just kick the can down the road. The courts, as we know, they grind so slow. We're talking months, if not longer for the courts to really get involved and get their hands on this. So, I would like to I would like to address this before it gets to

Can I make a quick response to that because I think you may have misunderstood. I'm not suggesting we go and ask the court to decide the case. That's that's something any either side could always do. What I am suggesting is that the court there are retired judges on the court that serve as mediators in cases. They don't decide the cases. It's not the judge that's going to decide the case that would be a mediator in the case. But sometimes the judges bring a level of of of knowledge uh and wisdom about what the the court system is all about, what the law is that it can be helpful to both parties, but I if if the if the council is interested in in pursuing a mediation, it doesn't have to be a judge, but I we're thinking you may feel more comfortable if it's a retired judge as opposed to someone from a big engineering firm or something like that. But that's up to that's up to the council uh how they how how it wishes to proceed if it decides to pursue that point.

I need to make a motion to extend the meeting again. Um 15 minutes 20 minutes 11 o'clock 11 o'clock. That's a motion. Is there a second? Roll call, please. Mr. Bureau. Yes. Mrs. Dera, Mr. Punch, yes, Miss Al. Yes. Any questions for me at this point? Any other questions?

I have a lot of Well, I have a a good amount of questions or a good amount of comments. Um, but obviously we're kind of against um a time constraint a time constraint. So, um I don't know where do we go from here?

I I think we have to continue. Um there's like just a lot to unpack. Um I don't know that I'm in agreement with getting a mediator involved at this point. Uh that just we see what we went through with getting GZA on board. Um I don't see this as being or that mediator as being a quick process. not that you know we're looking for a quick process but um you know there's been nine months you could have presented that option to us and here we are now having that option presented to us so um you know the way I look at it over the past nine months I'm seeing nothing has really changed from what the applicant is offering you know right now we're still looking to continue or you know keep going the way we're going and give us a yearly report and oh here's 12 conditions that well we may be able to you know abide by some of them we may not be able to abide by some of them so um at this point I'm going to make a motion to continue the public hearing to a date certain of

is there much on that agenda do you know Oh, so is it the 20th? I don't have anything on that agenda as of now. 20th January 20th. I would prefer to do two weeks. Um, and we have the um HD. These guys can go first. HD can sit and wait. Um, I would I don't know. I I just you do a special meeting.

I'm I'm going to be honest. I disagree. I think that uh we're here now. The lawyers are here. The experts are here. We're here. The people are here. Uh to continue this even even further now that what's going to happen on the 19th and we're going to get a call. Oh, this guy can't make it. That one can't make it. Let's continue with another two weeks. We're here now. As far as I'm concerned, when this all started, I was against the overlay. Okay? And I've heard a lot of testimony. I've listened to a lot of people. And you know what? It hasn't moved the needle. I'm still against the overlay. So, I'm personally I I'm ready to vote on this. And and all this other stuff that we're listening to is great. It's important. It's informative. But really, it doesn't. The question is, do we do we want to allow them to have an overlay district or not? It's not all that other stuff is good and and it lends into the to the discussion, but really the bottom line is before the overlay or against an overlay district. An overlay district, I think, would create a problem down the road, which was pointed out by several people tonight about other people coming in. They're wanting an overlay. They're going to want a mine. I personally feel that the overlay district is a bad idea. Personally, we should go to a negotiation or mediation, table this right now, table it or continue the meeting and if we find they're not negotiating in good faith, if things are not going well the way we we expected them to go, then we come back and we call the vote. We have that we we have that hanging over their head. But to continue this another two weeks, three weeks, whatever delays, I'm ready to make the vote. I'm not ready to make a vote. There's just too much information and I think we're putting ourselves in. I'm not ready for a vote tonight.

What more information do we need? It's not I know I know it's I know what you're thinking is a sense that the the experts are saying this about is it is it silica? Is it not silica? That's all. Don't let that distract you from the fact that really what it comes down to is do we want to let them have an overlay district or not. That's really what it comes down to. All that other stuff is important stuff, but it really the question is overlay or not.

My I'm prepared to make a motion if if if that's the case. Uh but um you know if you want I'd like certainly you say you're not ready. I'd certainly like to hear what you have to say. I just don't want to put us in a in a situation that now they're going to go to court and they're going to force us into things. I'd rather see if there's if there is some things we can mediate on. Like I just don't want to shut this down and then be forced. That's all.

Well, that's a good point because if we vote there there there's not just two options here. A, we we vote no. B, we vote the other way around. Excuse me. Vote. If A, we vote yes, B, we vote no. If we vote no, this is back in court and we lose the edge. We lose uh and a judge is going to make the decision. If we go to mediation, we will have control and we can get rid of the whole overlay thing and whatever we discuss, whatever we come to an agreement will be specific to this site only. Somebody else can't come in and say, "Oh, I want an overlay, too." because there won't be an overlay. It'll be just specific to this site and we can set the conditions. We can bring in all the concerns that were br brought up by the planning board, all the concerns that were brought up by the people, our experts, their experts, they can all come to the they can we can bring that all into the meeting and we can we we can hash it out and if it's not going our way, fine. Come back and call the vote. We have nothing to lose by by by talking. just sit across the table and talk and mediate and hash this out once and for all and then bring the bring the results back to the council for final approval and if it gets approved what we agreed on in mediation gets approved bring it before a judge codify it they have to they have to agree you know they have to obey it and then um we'll put this to rest once and for all after all these years we have a real opportunity here

how do we how do we get to that point get

like going forward now. So if we don't continue the hearing, we don't necessarily want to vote on the overlay. Um how do we you know move this thing forward so that a this you know it doesn't just keep dragging. That that's my fears. It just keeps dragging and dragging and dragging. And if we put the responsibility on the applicant to, you know, really push this, I at this point I have no confidence that they would, you know, having these 13 stipulations from the zoning board. There's no time frame associated with that. Like there's got to be time frames associated because like John said, we've got an opportunity to, you know, do something meaningful. So, um I guess that question is for you, David. What how do we move forward? Well, I guess mentioned something um if you're going to pursue that, you'd have to continue it to a date certain to keep the application alive and then direct some sort of activity whether it's a negotiation or mediation and try to I guess put some time limit on when it would occur and some time limit when you get a response and how quickly that could So, Mr. Landry, in two weeks, would you be able to, so if we go to a mediator or something like that, typically half a dozen names is, you know, presented and each side gets to, you know, vet those six or whatever names and, you know, come to an agreement. Would you be able to have, you know, those names for us in two weeks to be able to or even prior to so that in two weeks we would know, you know, who this mediator is going to be so that, you know, we can try to keep moving forward or do we go to two weeks and say, "Okay, here's six names and then it's two more weeks to pick somebody."

Well, we could give you names. You have to the We have to decide mutually on who those people are. So in two weeks you may want to check it. It may make more sense to table the matter for the in order for the parties to reach an agreement on medi on mediation including the method of which the the mediators would be chosen. We could probably do that in two weeks where we have an agreement for mediation with certain kind of rules or proceed under the rules of the American arbitration association. they have a whole procedure for selecting mediators. So that might make more sense than to try to negotiate uh each each piece of that. Um you know, we could we could we would work we could work with David to come up with the the structure of what that would look like and what an agreement on mediation would look like. put a timetable by when it has to be completed, time frame by when the mediators have to be selected, uh who's going to pay for it, uh where it will be held, who can attend. Uh I think we can do that. I mean, it's maybe your early January might be wrong. Yeah, I I think we could do that in two weeks.

I don't want to see this drag on either. I want to we should set time limits where ex this certain steps along the way have to be met by certain time limits, right? Because I don't want this to keep dragging on the way it's been.

Well, we don't either. I mean, we we No, we don't want it to drag on either. We we we suggested a mediation process may be faster than it's going to be a lot faster than anything we've experienced here. You know, it may not be all done in one meeting or two, but it's something that can be convened without waiting for a trial calendar to open up. Uh, you know, it can be done by agreement at any time, day or night, to uh and and the topics broken up and ordered. uh you know it it may make sense to continue it to a day certain to have a a general agreement on how we're going to come to an agreement and who's going to be involved in that process. I I don't think it makes sense for us to stand stand here and decide who the mediators are going to be. But we can we can we can propose an agreement for mediation that we come with here next at the next meeting and then and I I hope that's not going to be the week after Christmas. I don't know how many people would you hold meetings that week. Is that the week? Is that what we're talking about?

Meeting is the 5th. The 5th of what? January.

Oh, okay. Well, that's Yeah. And yeah, I think that's fine. Um that's fine. But we could come with a proposed agreement for mediation, a proposal anyway, and the town probably you won't be in a position to accept it that night. Uh we'll provide it in advance, but you may consider doing something like uh tableabling the the petition and deputizing somebody to to finalize that agreement in behalf of the of the town. and then and bring that back for approval somehow. I mean, I I don't know, David, if you're thinking of of something different than that, but um whatever that period of time, whether it's two weeks to have a proposal for the council to consider a mediation process, the mediation process, it can't be done in two weeks. It could be done in a month but not in two weeks because a mediation is totally private. That's outside the court system. Involves a judge but a retired judge usually.

So a proposal in two weeks proposal so that the council would know the public would know what that mediation would be potentially the names of the judges to be retired judges. There's like that's that's there's a there's a handful of retired judges, Supreme Court judges and superior court judges that they're retired and they do mediation. So the the motion would be to continue this to date certain of January 5th with the stipulation of the um proposal for mediation that and that give everybody a chance to think about it and the proposal will be in front of you on January 5th

and if you agree then you could vote for assuming that's where you want to go you'd be in a position that if you like what you heard you could then authorize and it would have to be somebody authorized might be a council person or town manager or the town manager and the planner and me or maybe um you know some you know however whatever team you wanted to put together you know you know the information the information is public it's been on the record it's about communicating the information to a mediator and a mediator is not an arbitrator and they're not a judge in the sense that they're not going to decide the outcome that's going to be binding it's nonbinding basically the mediation would either lead to an agreement that would be a consent order for a judge to sign which would be specific to the project or it would lead to come back and there's no decision and you would just vote and I think that's what council bure was saying he would want it to be project project specific

project specific and if we find for some reason they're not we believe that they're not negoti we'll call the vote right that's all so do you want to make a motion for this particular one Yes. So, uh, tell me where I'm going wrong. Uh, the town council, uh, I make a motion by the town council to direct the administration to enter into discussions with the applicant regarding alternative solutions to the requested zone change, including any potential settlement agreement by negotiation or mediation that may be considered by the town council. The details of such negotiations or mediation are to be worked out by the town administrator, town solicitor and approved by the town council.

That's fine. And then the mo and continue this hearing.

We'll continue this hearing to for two weeks. But the how about the the motion before us though, the issue before us will be tabled or will it be continued? I think the motion is the way it is. We can address that hearing and this petition and continue that to the same date. So, you want that by um January 5th. You want that information? I that would be great if we could get that that quick. That'd be great.

Well, it's going to be the process is going to be presented to you, right? I want the process I want I want us to agree on the process by January by January 5th. You could act on that. So, that's a motion. All right. Is there a second? I'll second. Any further discussion? Roll call. Mr. Burgod? Yes. Mr. O'Hara? Yes. Mr. Punchac? Yes. Miss South? Yes. And now you would need a motion to continue this matter. Item B, both the public hearing and the discussion voted on the action to January 5th. Unless um I think you should probably do it to January 5th at this point because if you didn't get what you want on January 5th, you want to be able to act on this. Okay.

And then on January 5th, we could decide if we want to table it or not, right? Okay. Okay. Does that satisfy Mr. Yeah, that's fine. So, I'll make a motion to continue the public hearing for uh item two to a date certain of January 5th, 201 and also item one. Item one and two, both the public hearing and the discussion. Oh, item one and two. Did you mean B? You meant B. Is that what you meant? Yes. B1, B2. So, yes. So, that matter is completely continued, madame clerk. Okay, that's a motion. Is there a second? I will second. Any further discussion? Roll call. Mr. Bureagod. Yes. Miss O'Hara. Yes. Mr. Punch.

Yes. Miss. Yes. Thank you. Good night. Happy holidays. Thank you. You sir. All right. Discussion by council vote or other action on payment of bills. Anyone have any questions? I did not put it. John, you're all set. I am. Thank you. All right. We need

We just want to wrap this up. Sorry. Paging Rebecca.

She heard me.

I didn't get to pay the bills. No. All right. Um, anyone have any questions on the payment of bills? I did not. That's pretty quick. I mean, I feel like I can't comment on payment of bills if I didn't get it. I don't receive the town council pack yet. I didn't get it. I don't have it. I just checked my email. It's okay. I'll look through it. And

I mean, I could always just recuse myself because I wasn't able to look at the information. All right. Anyone want to accept the payment of bills or approve the payment of bills? I will make a motion to approve the payment of bills for December 15, 2025 in the amount of 3 million23,830.92.

That's a motion. Is there a second? Oh, second. Any further discussion? Roll call, please. Mr. Berod, yes. Mr. Mr. Farro, I'll have to refuse. Sorry. Mrs. O'Hara, yes. Mr. Punchac, yes. Missiles. Yes. Right. Um, open forum. Open forum pursuant to 42-46-60D. Maximum three minutes per person. Anyone wish to speak? No. Anyone? You don't know. Anyone? Okay. All right. I'll take a motion to adjourn the meeting.

Motion to adjurnn. All in favor say I. I. I.