Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutPlanning Board Packet 05/27/20PB Minutes 04/22/2020 Page 1 of 2 Brewster Planning Board 2198 Main Street Brewster, MA 02631-1898 (508) 896-3701 x1133 brewplan@brewster-ma.gov BREWSTER PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES Wednesday, April 22, 2020 at 6:00 pm Brewster Town Office Building (virtual) Chair Madalyn Hillis-Dineen convened a remote meeting of the Planning Board at 6:00 pm with the following members participating remotely: Charlotte Degen and Roberta Barrett. Ned Chatelain, Kari Hoffmann, Elizabeth Taylor, and Paul Wallace did not participate. Also participating remotely: Ryan Bennett, Town Planner. The Chair read the Notification: “Pursuant to Governor Baker’s March 12, 2020 Order Suspending Certain Provisions of the Open Meeting Law and his March 15 and March 23, 2020 Orders imposing strict limits on the number of people that may gather in one place, this meeting will be conducted via remote participation to the greatest extent possible. Specific information and the general guidelines for remote participation by members of the public and/or parties with a right and/or requirement to attend this meeting may be found on the Town’s website at www.brewster-ma.gov. For this meeting, members of the public who wish to listen to the audio broadcast may do so via the Town of Brewster website at http://livestream.brewster-ma.gov or on Channel 18. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted, but every effort will be made to ensure the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time via technological means. The Town has established specific email addresses for each board and committee that will be meeting remotely so that residents can send their comments in writing either before or during the meeting. For this meeting, please send comments to planningboardmeeting@brewster- ma.gov. In the event we are unable to live broadcast these meetings, despite best efforts, we will post on the Town website an audio recording, transcript, or other comprehensive record of proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting at http://tv.brewster-ma.gov.” 6:03 PM PUBLIC MEETING Site Plan Review Application #2020-04: Applicant/Owner: Matthew A. and Wendy C. Frazier. Representative: Stephanie J. Sequin, P.E., Ryder & Wilcox, Inc. for property located at 0 Sara Ann Lane and shown on Assessor’s Map 77, Lot 56 in the Commercial High Density (C-H) zoning district. Pursuant to Section 179-66 (Site Plan Review) of the Brewster Zoning Bylaw, the Applicant proposes to store materials (empty dumpsters, empty storage containers, portable restrooms, temporary fencing, trailers, and related equipment) for a business on the site. The site is vacant and no building is proposed at this time. Documents:  09/18/19 Site Plan  02/27/20 Site Plan  03/11/20 Planning Board Application with Project Description  04/17/20 Department Review Comments  Locus Map  Site Plan Review Checklist Attorney Lester Murphy and Stephanie Sequin, P.E. of Ryder & Wilcox, Inc. participated remotely on behalf of the Applicant. The Applicant Matthew A. Frazier also participated remotely. Murphy stated that the use Frazier proposed was questioned by the Building Commissioner as an appropriate use in this zoning district. A neighboring property owner in the same situation appealed the Building Commissioner’s decision to the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) and the ZBA ruled in favor of the property owner. The Building Commissioner has provided a letter dated February 2, 2020 stating that as a result of the ZBA’s decision on the neighboring property, Frazier’s right to store his equipment on his property is recognized and he should proceed with site plan review. Murphy stated that access will be provided as required by the fire department, screening will be provided on the south and east side with Leyland Cypress along with fencing on east side, and the storage of the equipment will not have a detrimental effect on neighboring properties. Murphy also made the Board aware that the portable toilets that are stored on the property are cleaned prior to being returned to the property for storage. Sequin reviewed the submitted site plan. She stated that the property is a 25,000 SF lot that is not in a Zone II and does not contain any wetlands. Sequin further stated that the property has frontage and a curb cut on Underpass Road as well Approved: Vote: PB Minutes 04/22/2020 Page 2 of 2 as an access easement at the back of the property to Sara Ann Lane. The lot is currently vacant and is gently sloping to the east where there is a grass swale that contains an extensive storm water drainage system which was recently upgraded by the Town. There is also an embankment on the south side of the property that drops to a drainage easement. There are planting on the embankment that provide screening to the south. Sequin noted that equipment stored on site such as dumpsters and portable toilets are empty. Customers do not come to the site so there are no significant traffic issues. The Applicant proposes to surface a 20’ wide section of the access easement from Sara Ann Lane, which is currently dirt and gravel, with 6 inch T-base to provide a hard, stable surface for access. Sequin stated that the Applicant proposes screening along Underpass Road to include a 6’ stockade fence with evergreens planted in front of it. There is no building, parking, or lighting planned for the site at this time. Degen sought clarification on the property lines and stated that it appeared dumpsters were currently being stored on site. Frazier responded that there are stakes delineating the westerly property line and the center of the 30’ easement. Frazier stated that at one time there were double the amount of dumpsters on the site than there currently are and he has been working with the Zoning Enforcement Officer on dumpster removal. Degen asked what the Applicant planned to do with the trees along the drainage easement and Frazier responded that he planned to leave those trees intact and add additional trees in the area. Degen asked how the Applicant would keep his storage materials on his lot and out of the drainage easement. Frazier proposed a split rail fence or concrete blocking similar to that used for temporary retaining walls. Barrett confirmed with the Applicant that a row of trees would be planted along Underpass Road. Barrett stated that the screening along the southern boundary is light and suggested a stockade fence. Sequin sought clarification as to where the fence should be placed. Barrett suggested the fence should be placed on the interior if possible as the trees will soften the fence line. Frazier requested the fence be allowed to be placed south of the trees. Barrett stated that she would like to see the fence at the same elevation as the storage area. Barrett asked if any material would be used on the site for dust control. Frazier responded that T base would be used on the site. Barrett recommended a condition that the entire storage area be covered with T base. Hillis-Dineen asked whether an amended plan would be needed and Bennett responded that enough description has been provided in the conditions that an amended plan was not necessary. The Board reviewed three conditions which consisted of the stockade fence along the southern boundary, the split rail fence along the drainage easement, and adding T base to the storage area. Hillis-Dineen also suggested the conditions include the Fire Department comments related to transfer and storage of construction debris and trash. Degen read the Department Review Comments into the record. Bennett noted that no public comment has been received. Bennett stated that she did receive comment regarding screening and access from a board member that could not participate and she believes the Board’s discussion has covered those concerns. Motion by Barrett to Approve Site Plan Review Application #2020-04 with Conditions, as discussed. Second by Degen. Vote: Degen – yes, Barrett – yes, and Hillis-Dineen – yes. Vote: 3-0-0. 6:36 PM PLANNING DISCUSSION Approval of Meeting Minutes: March 25, 2020. The Board reviewed the March 25, 2020 meeting minutes. Motion by Degen to Approve March 25, 2020 Meeting Minutes. Second by Hillis-Dineen. Vote: Degen – yes, Barrett – abstained, and Hillis-Dineen – yes. Vote: 2-0-1. 6:38 PM TOPICS THE CHAIR DID NOT REASONABLY ANTICIPATE The Board discussed their upcoming meeting schedule. No meeting will take place on May 13, 2020 as no applications are scheduled on the agenda that night. Motion by Barrett to adjourn. Second by Degen. Vote: Barrett – yes, Degen - yes, and Hillis-Dineen – yes. Vote: 3-0-0. Meeting adjourned at 6:42 pm. Next Planning Board Meeting Date: 05/27/20 Respectfully submitted, _______________________ Charlotte Degen, Clerk 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2020 KP Law, P.C. Use of Electronic Signatures and “Virtual” Notarization April 28, 2020 One of the challenges inherent in maintaining governmental operations during the current State of Emergency is the difficulty in conducting transactions that require so-called “wet” ink signatures. The ability to use or accept “e-signatures” can vary, depending upon the document at issue. To compensate for the practical obstacles posed by the current partial or total closures of government offices and the conduct of governmental business via remote means, various administrative and legislative measures have been adopted that permit the use of electronic signatures, at least temporarily, and in certain circumstances. This eUpdate summarizes circumstances where electronic signatures can be used in connection with common government activities. The information contained herein is current as of the date of issuance. Where the state and federal governments are regularly enacting new or updated laws, regulations, and guidances in response to the COVID- 19 crisis, we recommend that you consult with counsel regularly to ensure that you have the most up-to-date information. A. General Use of Electronic Signatures: As a starting point, under the Uniform Electronic Transaction Act, G.L. c.110G, an electronic signature is legally binding to the same extent as a handwritten signature. See G.L. c.110G, §7. An electronic signature is defined as an “electronic sound, symbol, or process attached to or logically associated with a record and executed or adopted by a person with the intent to sign the record.” G.L. c.110G, §2. While G.L. c.110G provides some authority for acceptance of electronic signatures, there are exceptions applicable to certain municipal transactions. Indeed, there are a number of state statutes that would not otherwise permit the use of electronic signatures. During the declared State of Emergency, however, the following legislative and administrative actions permit the use of electronic signatures in many (but not all) instances: 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2020 KP Law, P.C. • The permit deadline extension provisions of Chapter 53 of the Acts of 2020 allow municipalities to accept “permit” applications electronically, subject to certain requirements (as explained in our eUpdates entitled “Municipal Relief Legislation Passed by State Legislature “ and “Land Use Permitting Deadline Extensions”). This legislative authorization for the submission of permit applications electronically, coupled with G.L. c.110G with respect to electronic signatures, provide the mechanism to address those situations where a state statute does not otherwise allow for electronic filing of permit applications, and allowing for acceptance of same with an electronic signature, at least temporarily. • The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) has generally authorized the use of electronic signatures on various court filings, including affidavits. • The Massachusetts Registers and Assistant Registers of Deeds Association has adopted an Amendment to the Massachusetts Deed Indexing Standards 2018 (Amendment), effective April 17, 2020, that allows municipal boards to utilize electronic signatures on documents that are filed with Registries of Deeds, provided that the municipal board has followed a specific procedure. As of this date, all Registries of Deeds have accepted this Amendment. Note, though, that the Land Court has not yet authorized the use of electronic signatures for registered land unless a statute, rule, order or court guidance authorizes electronic signatures for specific types of documents Absent such statute, rule, order or court guidance, electronic signatures are permitted for documents pertaining to recorded land only. A copy of the Amendment is attached, and the process for implementing this Amendment is discussed in Section B, below. • The Legislature recently passed “An Act Relative to Remote Notarization During COVID-19 State of Emergency”, which allows attorneys and attorney-supervised paralegals who are certified notary publics in the Commonwealth to notarize documents using electronic real-time video conferencing, subject to certain requirements. This new law is discussed in Section E, below. The use of electronic signatures by municipal boards in particular situations is discussed in more detail, below. Should you have questions about the use of electronic signatures in circumstances not covered in this eUpdate, please contact your primary, land use, or other counsel at KP | Law for further guidance. B. Electronic Signatures by Municipal Boards on Recordable Documents (other than Plans): In an attempt to relieve municipal boards from signing documents in-person, an Amendment to the Massachusetts Deed Indexing Standards of 2018 was adopted to allow electronic signatures on recordable documents (though not for documents pertaining to registered land). That Amendment, dated April 17, 2020, and titled No. 13-7. “Electronic Signatures by Municipal Boards” (Amendment), requires that prior to any municipal board executing documents by electronic signature in accordance with G.L. c.110G, a vote must be made at a properly called meeting, stating that the board recognizes and accepts the provisions of G.L. c.110G, and that executed documents by members with electronic signatures or with wet ink signatures will carry the same legal weight and effect. 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2020 KP Law, P.C. 1. The Council/Board/Commission votes to authorize electronic signatures and a Certificate of Vote is prepared, memorializing the vote. The first step in this process is that the Council/Board/Commission votes to recognize and accept the provisions of G.L.c.110G, and authorize electronic signatures. The matter should be placed on an agenda for a duly noticed meeting in compliance with the Open Meeting Law. • The agenda item can take the following form: “Discussion and possible adoption of M.G.L. c.110G, regarding the use of electronic signatures by Council/ Board/Commission members pursuant to Amendment 13-7 to the Massachusetts Deed Indexing Standards 2018, effective April 17, 2020.” • The motion at the meeting can take the following form: “Moved that the _________ City Council/Board of Selectmen/Select Board/Planning Board/Zoning Board of Appeals/Conservation Commission hereby recognizes and accepts the provisions of M.G.L. c.110G regarding electronic signatures and that its members will henceforth execute documents either with electronic signatures or with wet ink signatures and that both will carry the same legal weight and effect.” Assuming that this matter considered at a “virtual” meeting of the council, board, or commission, the vote must be by roll call, and recorded in the meeting minutes as a roll call vote. If adopted, a Certificate of this Vote is then prepared. 2. The Certificate of Vote is signed, notarized and certified by the City/Town Clerk. This Certificate of Vote, containing the language of the motion and attesting the vote, is signed and then certified by the City or Town Clerk prior to being recorded at the applicable Registry of Deeds. We have attached a sample Certificate of Vote for your use. Once the Certificate of Vote is recorded, electronic signatures may be affixed to permitting or compliance documents such as decisions and/or Orders of Conditions that have been approved by a council, board or commission vote. 3. The Certificate of Vote is recorded at the Registry of Deeds. 4. For each Decision/Approval/Order of Conditions issued, we recommend adding a specific statement regarding the Council/Board/Commission vote to authorize electronic signatures, on the signature page of the Decision/Approval/Order. For instance, the following language can be used: Pursuant to the vote taken by [specify name of council, board or commission] on ______________, 2020, the following signatures are made in accordance with M.G.L. c.110G and pursuant to said Council’s/Board’s/Commission’s electronic signature authorization vote recorded on [DATE] with the ______________ Registry of Deeds. 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2020 KP Law, P.C. C. Use of Electronic Signatures by Conservation Commissions: The Wetlands Protection Act requires that Orders of Conditions (OOC) be signed by a majority of Commission members. G.L. c.131, §40.1 Previously, some Registries had rejected OOCs containing electronic signatures; however, we anticipate that with the adoption by all Registries of the Amendment discussed above, that electronic signatures will no longer be an issue (except for registered land documents, which still require a “wet” ink signature). Thus, Conservation Commissions may wish to consider following the process identified above should they want to execute documents electronically. Note that because state law requires that Orders of Conditions contain the signatures of a majority of Conservation Commission members, in our opinion the Commission could not vote to delegate signatory authority for OOCs issued pursuant to the Wetland Protection Act to a single Commission member or a Conservation Agent or Administrator. D. Use of Electronic Signatures on Plans Endorsed or Approved by Planning Boards: Most land use boards, aside from Planning Boards, do not have a legal requirement that they endorse actual plans of land. Planning Boards, however, may be required to endorse “Approval Not Required” (ANR) or subdivision plans prepared by an applicant’s engineer or land surveyor. Generally, Registries of Deeds require actual mylar plans for recording, and while the process described in Section B, above, could be used to permit the use of electronic signatures on ANR or subdivision plans, there can be a reluctance to provide Planning Board members’ electronic signatures to a third party to actually affix the members’ electronic signatures to the mylar plans prior to recording. Also, plans for registered land may not be signed electronically. As an alternative to using Planning Board members’ electronic signatures on such plans, the provisions of G.L. c.41, §§81P (ANR plans) & 81X (subdivision plans) allow a Planning Board to vote to authorize a single individual to endorse plans on behalf of the Board for recording in the Registry of Deeds. During the current COVID-19 emergency, while the Board is meeting remotely, it may wish to use this mechanism to simplify the logistics of signing plans. While not modifying the Board’s substantive review of the plans, the mechanism will allow the Board to carry out its statutory duties and enable plans to be filed without undue complication. The Board can accomplish this by vote at a properly noticed meeting, followed by letter of notice to the Registry. The procedure here is similar to the process described in Section B, above, and the Board must vote to take action under both statutes. The vote will then designate a single signatory to sign plans on behalf of the Board. The signatory does not need to be a member of the Board; however, since the statute specifies, “name of the person so authorized,” the vote should designate a named individual than that individual’s title (e.g., “Bob Smith”, not “Chairman”). This means, however, that when the person so authorized is no longer employed by the City or Town or a member of the Board, a new designation must be voted and notice of same provided to the Registry. Both G.L. c.41, §§81P & 81X require the signatures of a majority of the Board on the notice sent to the Registry. In ordinary times, this would be accomplished at an in-person meeting, or by having members come 1 “Such order or notification shall be signed by the mayor or a majority of the conservation commission or board of selectmen, as the case may be, and a copy thereof shall be sent forthwith to the applicant and to the department.” 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2020 KP Law, P.C. to Town Hall independently to sign the notice. Current circumstances may warrant a different approach. Instead, each member (of a majority of the Board) could print out and sign a signature page, and send it to the Planning Department or staff to be assembled with the notice and sent to the Registry. When the current State of Emergency terminates, if the Board seeks to revert to the prior practice of in-person plan endorsement, the Board should vote to withdraw its authorization for the individual to endorse plans on behalf of the Board. A second letter should be prepared and submitted to the Registry reflecting this vote and as notification of a reversion to the prior endorsement authorization. E. “Virtual” Notarization: Some municipal real estate transactions, contracts, and affidavits are required to be notarized. Typically, this requires in-person attendance of both the notary and the person(s) whose signature(s) are to be notarized. Under “An Act Relative to Remote Notarization During COVID-19 State of Emergency”, attorneys and attorney- supervised paralegals who are certified notary publics in the Commonwealth are allowed to notarize documents using electronic real-time video so long as specific requirements are met. Those requirements are attached. This temporary authorization of “virtual” notarization automatically expires three days after the Governor rescinds the current State of Emergency. The automatic repeal of the Act, however, will not invalidate any documents executed in accordance with the Act. We will continue to keep you updated on additional developments in the face of this rapidly evolving pandemic. A reminder that we have established a Coronavirus “hotline”, at coronavirusinfo@k-plaw.com. A dedicated team of our attorneys is available through this “hotline” e-mail address to answer the most frequently asked legal questions arising from COVID-19. One of these designated attorneys will respond promptly to your inquiries. In some instances, you may be referred to your primary, land use or real estate contact, and you should of course feel free to contact these attorney(s) directly with COVID-19 related questions. Disclaimer: This information is provided as a service by KP Law, P.C. This information is general in nature and does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice. Neither the provision nor receipt of this information creates an attorney-client relationship with KP Law, P.C. Whether to take any action based upon the information contained herein should be determined only after consultation with legal counsel. 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2020 KP Law, P.C. Massachusetts Deed Indexing Standards 2018 April 2020 Amendment The Massachusetts Registers and Assistant Registers of Deeds Association has adopted the following Amendment to the Massachusetts Deed Indexing Standards 2018. This amendment is effective April 17, 2020 and, as of the date of this eUpdate, applies to recorded land only. 13-7. Electronic Signatures by Municipal Boards – The following procedure is recommended for municipal councils, boards and commissions that wish to execute and record with the Registry of Deeds documents in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 110G (Uniform Electronic Transaction Act). 1. At a properly called meeting, the municipal council, board or commission (hereinafter “board”) should formally vote that the board recognizes and accepts the provisions of M.G.L. c.110G regarding electronic signatures and that its members will henceforth execute documents either with electronic signatures or with wet ink signatures and that both will carry the same legal weight and effect. 2. The board then records at the Registry of Deeds a Certificate of Vote that provides the language of the motion that was made regarding electronic signatures and attests to the vote taken, and obtains the City/Town Clerk’s certification. 3. Board members may thereafter cause their electronic signature to be affixed to permitting or compliance documents that have been approved by a board vote. Such electronically signed documents should also include a statement that the signatures are made in accordance with M.G.L. c.110G and pursuant to the board’s electronic signature authorization vote recorded on [DATE] in [BOOK and PAGE NUMBERS] at the [NAME OF REGISTRY] Registry of Deeds. 4. Any document so executed shall be accepted for recording at the Registry of Deeds electronically or as a paper print of the electronically-executed document. 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2020 KP Law, P.C. CERTIFICATE OF VOTE AUTHORIZING SIGNATURES PURSUANT TO M.G.L. c.110G On __ ________ __, 2020, the ___________ City Council/Board of Selectmen/Select Board/Planning Board/Zoning Board of Appeals/Conservation Commission met in open session through publicly accessible video-conference software, pursuant to the “Order Suspending Certain Provisions of the Open Meeting Law, G.L. c. 30A, §20,” issued by Governor Charles D. Baker on March 12, 2020. At this duly held meeting, the following action was taken: Motion: _________ City Council/Board of Selectmen/Select Board/Planning Board/Zoning Board of Appeals/Conservation Commission hereby recognizes and accepts the provisions of M.G.L. c.110G regarding electronic signatures and that its members will henceforth execute documents either with electronic signatures or with wet ink signatures and that both will carry the same legal weight and effect. Motion was seconded. Roll Call vote: Member Name — Aye; Member Name — Aye; Member Name — Aye; Member Name — Aye; Member Name — Aye; Member Name — Aye; Member Name — Aye Vote was Unanimous The above is a true and accurate account of the proceedings of the City Council/Board of Selectmen/Select Board/Planning Board/Zoning Board of Appeals/Conservation Commission. Name/Title: ________________________________________ Date: ___________________, 2020 Commonwealth of Massachusetts County of ____________ , ss. On this ___ of ____________, 2020, before me, personally appeared _________________, [Chair/Vice- Chair/Member] of said City Council/Board of Selectmen/Select Board/Planning Board/Zoning Board of Appeals/Conservation Commission, as aforesaid, and proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which was ____________________, to be the person whose name is signed on the preceding document, and acknowledged to me that he/she signed it voluntarily for its stated purpose on behalf of the _______________ [city/town] of _______________________. ____________________________ Notary Public My Commission Expires: Certified by Town/City Clerk: _______________________________ Date: _____________________, 2020 [name] 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2020 KP Law, P.C. OUTLINE OF PROCESS FOR “VIRTUAL” NOTARIZATION The Massachusetts Legislature has enacted temporary legislation to allow certified notary publics in the Commonwealth to notarize documents using electronic real-time video conferencing. The following steps are required for “virtual” notarization, which occurs via video conference. Any document executed in accordance with this process will be valid for filing or recording with any state, local, or federal agency, court, department, or office. The signature of all witnesses who participate in the required video conference(s) will be valid as if executed in person. 1) Video Conference(s): the notary must observe the principal (the witness) execute the document in an initial video conference. If and only if the document is executed in the course of closing a transaction such as a mortgage or other conveyance of title to real estate, a second video conference is required. In the second video conference, each witness must verify to the notary public that the document subsequently delivered to the notary public (detailed below) is the same document which was executed during the initial video conference. 2) Oath: the notary and the witness both swear under the penalties of perjury that they are physically present in Massachusetts during the video conference(s). Each witness must identify and disclose any other person present in the room and make that person viewable to the notary public. 3) Satisfactory Proof of Identification: each witness must provide the notary with satisfactory evidence of identity by displaying it during the video calls and by submitting a copy of the front and back of the identification (with the electronic document or separately) by e-mail. The Notary must retain the copy of the individual’s identification for a period of ten (10) years. ''Satisfactory evidence of identity'' includes: 1) a current document issued by a federal or state government agency bearing the photographic image of the individual's face and signature; 2) the oath or affirmation of a credible witness unaffected by the document or transaction who is personally known to the notary public and who personally knows the individual; or 3) identification of an individual based on the notary public's personal knowledge of the identity of the principal. A person who is not a U.S. citizen must, however, produce a valid passport or other government- issued document with photograph and signature. G.L. c.222, §1. For documents executed in the course of a closing of a transaction involving a mortgage or other conveyance of title to real estate where the witness is not personally known to the notary public, the witness must display a second form of identification containing the witness’: 1) name; and 2) photograph or signature, or otherwise be issued by a government entity, during the initial video conference. This second identification may be: a utility bill or municipal tax bill dated within sixty (60) days of the video conference, a credit or debit card, or social security card. 4) Affirmation: each witness must make an acknowledgment or affirmation to the notary public, as appropriate. 617.556.0007 | 1.800.548.3522 | www.k-plaw.com | ©2020 KP Law, P.C. 5) Delivery of Documents: a witness must promptly deliver the executed document to the notary by delivery service, courier, “or other means,” in accordance with the notary’s instruction. The Legislation does not specify whether the document may be transmitted electronically. 6) Stamp and Seal: after the above process has been completed, the notary public may stamp and sign the executed document, completing the notarial act. With respect to any will, guardianship nomination, health care proxy, power of attorney, trust, caregiver authorization, or authorization under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), the document is completed when the original counterparts and the notary public’s affidavit (detailed below) are compiled. Such acts may only be performed by an attorney or an attorney-supervised paralegal. Electronic signatures are not permitted for notary public acknowledgements. 7) Affidavit: the notary public must attach a certificate to the executed document, which will include an affidavit and recital indicating that the document was notarized remotely in accordance with this Act, provided, however, that a failure to include any of the required recitals will not affect the validity or recordability of the document. The affidavit must be retained by the notary public for a period of ten (10) years. The affidavit must confirm under the pains and penalties of perjury that: • Identification was received and visually inspected during the initial video conference; • The notary public obtained verbal assent to record the video conference(s); • The witness(es) attested to being physically present in the Commonwealth; • Note anyone who was in the room with the witness(es) and his/her/their relationship to the witness(es); • The affidavit does not have to be recorded with the executed document, but must be retained by the notary for 10 years. The signature of the witness(es) who participates in said video conference will be valid as if executed in person. This affidavit does not need to be filed with any document recorded in a Registry of deeds or filed with the land court. Additionally, with respect to Land Court and Registry recordings, a witness’s failure to disclose physical presence in the Commonwealth or the identity of others in the room shall not constitute grounds to set aside title to real property acquired by a third-party mortgagee or purchaser for value.