A review of river marks, town gauge notes and the shared warning schedule finds a gap between the total in the public summary and the conditions recorded at the shared flood board at South Ferry. The difference does not prove that anyone misstated the file. It shows what the public count leaves out: the upstream mark arrives one bell before the lower town gauge.
The river marks, town gauge notes and the shared warning schedule lists 90 warnings issued with both town readings attached; the previous window lists 93. Marek Stone checked both against posted terms set beside signed receipts and final invoices. The source was checked against a second copy held by Tomas Reed. No dated correction to either copy was present when the comparison closed.
Upper towns want a warning as soon as their mark rises. Lower towns want a second reading before closing the ferry. The office has not supplied a separate measure that would settle the disagreement, so the two explanations remain competing accounts.
This report supports a narrower finding: the count is repeatable, but it is not enough to decide how neighboring towns can share a warning before their readings align.
Workers and residents submit accounts before the public hearing closes. The Year first, high summer window 3 file remains open for its scheduled decision. The joint table will publish a two-reading rule with the decision time recorded.
