PLYMPTON- Monday, June 19, Plympton Selectmen further discussed Carver “urban redevelopment” plans. They also held a hearing regarding Jeff Randall’s gravel permit, and other businesses.

Traynor takes the lead liaising with Carver politicians

With a development on the Carver/Plympton line moving forward, and Plympton residents to be affected, some even with eminent domain seizure of parts of their properties, newly-elected Selectman John Traynor has taken the lead in liaising with Carver officials.

Traynor told the board that his meeting with Carver Selectman Alan Dunham, Carver Town Administrator Michael Milanoski, and Carver Redevelopment Authority member William Sinclair was productive, albeit chilly in tone at first.

Although no concrete measures were agreed on, according to Traynor the officials were receptive to Plympton’s concerns– to some extent.

Many of the suggestions that Plympton residents have come up with to avoid traffic and eminent domain concerns were shut down entirely– for example using an on/off ramp from Route 44 for traffic– as that would necessarily encroach into Middleboro.

The Board’s strategy at this point is to work cooperatively with Carver officials to minimize the impact of the development on Plympton abutters and neighbors in order to protect their interests. It still isn’t clear what more the Board can do to assist residents at this time.

Gravel Permit hearing, or something else?

Jeff Randall, who has variously proposed building a medical marijuana grow facility and a Chapter 40(B) development on his Ring Road farm, also operates several other businesses from his property, including several cranberry bogs, a gravel removal business and a composting operation whereby horses he boards produce manure that is then mixed with dirt to produce compost.

According to officials, there has been a recent uptick in complaints regarding truck traffic to and from this property. Randall’s gravel permit restricts the amount of truck traffic to a specific time period – 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. For that permit, which he says he accidently let lapse for several months but that the town offered him a renewal, a particular map was attached. Due to a possible clerical error, it may or may not have been the most recent property plan.

Once this matter was settled, the hearing pivoted to his composting business.

Randall says he does not need to be licensed for his composting business, so his trucks can run at all hours. As a courtesy to his neighbors, he said he was willing to restrict his trucks to operating from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday.

Randall, supposedly there to explain himself to the Board for operating outside the hours of his permit, was explaining the rules to the Selectmen, not the other way around, and Selectman Christine Joy stated she wasn’t sure the Board had the authority to limit Randall’s composting business.

A resident in the audience mumbled, “What are we even talking about?”

Then Joy pivoted again, and stated that the Board was trying to determine whether the farm was actually a farm or a “contractor’s yard.” When asked what a contractor’s yard was, the answer was more in what it was not– an industrial property that isn’t allowed in a residential zone.

It is not apparent why the gravel permit issue, which was listed on the agenda, morphed into a composting issue and finally into whether Jeff Randall is actually engaged in agricultural ventures vs. industrial ones on his property, and what rules, if any, he is expected to follow.

The Board of Health next meets Tuesday, July 5, at 5 p.m.

PLYMPTON– On Monday, June 13, Selectmen held an at times emotional meeting where many residents expressed further concerns regarding Carver’s “Urban Redevelopment” plans.

“Urban Redevelopment” appears to move ahead

At a meeting held in Carver the week before, without public comment, according to a video record of the meeting, the Carver Redevelopment Authority voted to move another step forward with its “urban redevelopment” plans, sparking renewed outrage from the public.

The project, affecting North Carver and Plympton abutters along the Plympton/Carver line in the area of Montello Street and Heather’s Path, near Route 44, would see a mixed-use development and even has plans for a hotel in the industrially zoned area.

To date, the plans appear to be preliminary at best, where the hotel is shown on a river that doesn’t exist, or there is no hotel at all on various iterations of the plans. Several residents from Carver or who are landowners in Carver but have Plympton addresses have had their properties threatened to be taken by eminent domain for the commercial development.

This had Plympton residents back before the Board Monday, begging them to do something. Despite the apparent unanimity of the Selectmen against the project, the Board has little authority to do anything but attempt to negotiate with Carver to mitigate the impact of the development on Plympton residents, which they vow to do.

“They said they are going to ‘move’ my well. Where to? My front yard is septic,” said Melissa Singletary, whose property may be one of the most affected if the project were to move forward. “They are going to take my whole back yard…I’m going to have to walk away from that house.”

The Board has said that they are going to meet with Carver selectmen to discuss the project, and as well look into asking Carver to mitigate the project so that it doesn’t become a cost to Plympton tax-payers– through traffic calming measures, or signage, or whatever they can come up with.

When asked if traffic mitigation would really solve the problem, Selectman Christine Joy said she didn’t know, but that they are going to try to work something out with Carver to help the affected Plympton residents.

(Lack of) Town House Security

Officials have given out too many keys to Town House, and the time to change the locks is here, say Selectmen.

The practice of giving out keys to whole committees or casually copying keys is now a relic of the past as security concerns over Town House are prompting the re-issuing of keys. No specific incident was mentioned, just a generally “loose” policy on who has keys.

In the future, only those who work in the building or chair a committee will be given keys that will be expected to be turned in at the end of a chair’s tenure on a committee or an employee’s work with the town.

The idea of a more modern card reader, such as one found at hotels, or an RFID card reader that one might find in a workplace, was floated. Dale Pleau, Town Coordinator, will look into the expense of such a system.

The advantage of such a system would be that keys could easily be deactivated without an employee or chairperson having to physically turn in the key, and that access can be logged on a computer.

The Board of Selectmen will next meet on Monday, June 20, at 6 p.m., Town House.

PLYMPTON– On Monday, June 6, the Plympton Board of Selectmen met and discussed just a few issues. Town Counsel Ilana Quirk was present to answer questions that the board had about a proposed “redevelopment” plan on the Plympton/Carver line that has concerned some Plympton residents who may abut the proposed industrial park. The board also approved a modified Memorial Day ceremony to be held on June 14, Flag Day.

Carver

“Redevelopment”

concerns heard

The board asked Town Counsel Ilana Quirk to come and speak with them about ideas she has for residents who are concerned about a proposed industrial park in Carver that if built, may negatively affect some Plympton residents and their property.

Although Carver’s plans are in the preliminary stages, they have mentioned taking land by eminent domain, and several Plympton residents near the proposed development have Plympton addresses but portions of their property lie in Carver.

Although eminent domain seems to be the topic that has upset Plympton residents the most, residents of Montello Street and Heather’s Path are also concerned about increased traffic that any development might cause in their area, and this was the focus of Town Counsel’s advice.

Quirk offered a variety of ideas. She focused on “traffic calming” measures that Plympton could unilaterally impose on streets under their jurisdiction, and possibly ask for Carver’s cooperation. This might be a speed bump, or simply in the way an intersection is designed, maybe a narrowing of the road, in order to send a message to drivers to slow down.

Physical barriers are illegal, according to Quirk– at least in the sense of blocking off traffic from one community to the other.

Signage could be used, she said in response to a question posed by Selectman John Traynor. Signs like “No Trucks” might be used to discourage traffic through Plympton, although Quirk noted that it then becomes an issue of enforcement.

Quirk also suggested that the state Department of Transportation, who has jurisdiction over Route 58, could be asked to consider putting in a light at the intersection of Montello Street and Route 58, although this is in Carver.

The board agreed that it was time to bring Highway Surveyor Jim Mulcahy before them to ask his advice on exactly who has jurisdiction over the roads in the area and any other ideas he may have.

Modified

Memorial Day

Due to safety concerns, Memorial Day ceremonies in Plympton were cancelled. That hasn’t stopped the Memorial Day committee from quickly coming up with a new plan to honor veterans and service members.

Selectmen approved that plan to hold a ceremony on Tuesday, June 14, Flag Day, at 6:30 p.m. on the Town Green. Although there will be no parade, a variety of activities have been scheduled, according to the committee.

There will be a reading of the names of Plympton’s fallen soldiers and veterans, pinning of Vietnam Veterans, essay readings of “What Memorial Day Means to Me” by Dennet School students, as well as recitations of “Flanders Fields” and “The Gettysburg Address”.

Participants are

still welcome

To participate, contact the Selectmen’s Assistant, Briggette Martins at Town House by phone at 781-585-2700 or by email at [email protected]

PLYMPTON– On Monday, May 23, Selectmen met and welcomed their newest member, former Town Moderator John Traynor. The Board reorganized, electing Colleen Thompson chairman, Christine Joy, vice-chairman, and Traynor as clerk. Thompson, who at times shies away from the spotlight, appeared confident as Chairman, and moved the meeting along through a lengthy agenda. Traynor, who has served on the Finance Committee as well as Town Moderator for nine years, did not seem shy at his first BOS meeting, frequently giving his thoughts and opinions.

Filling vacancies and creating new committees

One of the new board’s first priorities is to fill vacancies on various town boards and committees, as well as create several new ones. The full list of vacancies is being prepared, but the board discussed creating a “by-law review” committee, which as the name implies would study the current by-laws and make recommendations.

Selectman Joy recommended a five-member committee, and Town Coordinator Dale Pleau suggested that the selectmen task the committee with a specific by-law or set of by-laws to study to keep them focused.

Selectmen also created an Economic Development Committee, something Joy has been researching and supporting. The board also felt that five members would be an appropriate number of residents for this committee, which would be charged with marketing the community to make it more attractive to businesses as well as make recommendations to the board to make town government more business-friendly.

Joy also has been looking to form a committee to study affordable housing in Plympton and make recommendations.

The Board of Selectmen was in unanimous support of the creation of these committees, and the discussion centered around what mix of people with what types of expertise would be of best use. Selectman Traynor suggested sorting the annual street list by occupation to identify residents with specific expertise, though noting this may leave out those who list their occupation simply as “retired”.

Brook Retreat Follow-up

The selectmen also discussed a follow-up to a letter sent by the owners of the Brook Retreat to the board in response to a scathing letter the board sent them. The selectmen wrote in a letter dated May 5 that they were disappointed in the handling of an incident that occurred at the sober-living facility on Brook Street where a resident left after curfew and allegedly attempted a home invasion while in an apparent drug-induced psychotic break. The man, Shane P. Sullivan, is in state custody pending trial.

The owners of Brook Retreat have refused to appear publicly before the board although they did meet with-former Selectman Mark Russo. The letter also suggests they have not demonstrated sincerity or comprehension of the situation by not appearing before the board and even went so far as to use language from Alcoholics Anonymous literature and encouraged the owners to make a list of people harmed and make direct amends.

The board suggested as well, that the sober-living facility look into the voluntary accreditation program offered by the state for such facilities. The board also seems, from the May 4 letter, to be concerned that fencing around the property promised by the Brook Retreat after the incident has not yet been put up.

Both Selectman Joy and Chairman Thompson acknowledged after the meeting that they really weren’t sure what the fencing was supposed to do in terms of security, noting that it was the owners’ idea.

The board asked the selectmen’s assistant to write a follow-up letter to the facility to ask them to keep the board up-to-date on their fencing situation.

The Brook Retreat owners wrote a brief response, noting that fencing was more expensive than they originally believed, and that the non-profit is currently raising funds for fencing. They also note that they are following the law. Brook Retreat was recently, as the law requires, inspected by the Building Inspector who certified that they do still qualify as an “educational institution,” a requirement for the zoning exceptions they used when siting the facility in a residential neighborhood, and an annual inspection to the sprinkler system is pending.

“What next?” asked Selectman Traynor, after Selectman Joy asked, “What now?”

Software/Website

Two IT related issues came up at the meeting, and Selectman Traynor, a retired software sales representative, had strong opinions about them: municipal permitting software to help move projects requiring permits smoothly through Town House without getting lost or tied up in “red-tape”, and revamping the town website.

Town Coordinator Pleau mentioned that a vendor had demonstrated some software earlier, and Traynor immediately stated that it was too soon to commit to a vendor without seeing at least three options, and getting all departments together to ascertain their needs as well as make sure they are committed to learning and using the software.

Traynor also spoke at length to the faults of the town’s website. The vendor for the website, Virtual Town Hall, provides municipal government website portals to many towns in the Commonwealth, but this website suffers from a confusing interface, strangely alphabetized lists, outdated information and information appearing on one part of the website and not another.

Posted documents also appear online for a time, then disappear, only to reappear after manual intervention, according to the Town Clerk.

Traynor suggested forming a committee to study what may be done about the situation in a cost-effective manner.

The Plympton Board of Selectmen next meets on June 6, 2016 at 6:30 p.m.,Town House.

PLYMPTON – Voters at Wednesday night’s Annual Town Meeting voted to keep the Community Preservation Act in Plympton, despite an attempt to put the question on the ballot in the next town election. 

Citizen’s Petition Article 23 could have put the end of Plympton’s involvement with the  Community Preservation Act by putting it on the ballot in November for Plympton voters to reconsider.  While the printed warrant which meeting members were mailed and/or given Wednesday night had one date, John Henry, speaking to the article, made the motion with another date. This prompted much confusion as to when the motion would ask voters to vote – 2016 or 2017?

Selectmen Chairman Mark Russo noted that of the 160 cities and towns in the commonwealth that participate in CPA, none have ever left. The Finance Committee also noted that CPA often undertakes projects in the town which would not likely be funded in the regular budget, thereby saving taxes.  Voters who were concerned about the surcharge and lowering taxes were reminded of the various exemptions in place and the help for qualifying mid to low income senior citizens and individuals. The article failed.

Of the 10 Citizen Petitions on the warrant, only two prevailed.

The lengthy warrant of 40 articles was completed in one night.

Moderator John Traynor stated at the beginning of the meeting, “We’ve come here as friends and neighbors and we’ll leave as neighbors,” to laughter from those gathered. While some controversy was apparent throughout the evening, the meeting was quite civil.

Selectperson Colleen Thompson began the meeting with a tribute to outgoing Selectmen Chairman Mark Russo, who also spoke a few words, saying that he had been thankful to have had the often thankless job of being a selectman, and pleaded with voters to think about the medium and long-term trajectory of, “the town we adore,” when they vote.

The Finance Committee presented an operating budget with a 1% increase, noting that savings were found in the Vocational and Special Education budget requests from the Silver Lake Regional School District, but that those numbers can’t be counted on year to year as students requiring these services move in and out of town. They also noted a 15% health insurance rate increase for the town.

Most, but not all, employees received an overall 2% increase in salaries, and the FinCom says they tried to level fund all departments. Voters Jack Doyle, of Main Street, and Maureen Springer, of Granville Baker Way, were frequent voices of even further fiscal conservatism throughout the evening.

Doyle questioned why there was a 20% increase in assessors’ expenses (maps are being updated this year), and Springer several times questioned why various employees were receiving more than a 2% wage increase.

Other than a few similar questions, the approximately $9.8 million dollar budget passed with a super-majority.

All of the STM articles passed, except for Article 8, which would have authorized the Board of Selectmen to enter into a “payment in lieu of taxes” agreement with a solar company. These PILOT agreements allow the company to spread their property taxes evenly over a 20-year period, rather than paying diminishing taxes over time, which provides a steady revenue source for the town. Several other PILOT agreements were authorized in the STM, but voters were concerned with this particular project as the details have not yet been negotiated.

The Fire Department requested Article 14, which generated some controversy. The department asked for $8,130 to be appropriated for energy efficient upgrades to the lighting in the aging station. Yet this did not go over well with voters. Stephen Bentley, of Annasnappitt Drive, asked if this was a safety issue. Chief Warren Borsari hedged on committing to an answer. Jack Doyle, of Main Street, said he did not support, “putting a dime,” into the old station, saying the town needed a new one. The article failed.

The voters passed Article 15 unanimously and passed Article 16 by majority, both of which fund the Community Preservation Committee and its activities, then later heatedly debated a citizens’ petition to place a vote to not participate in the CPA at all on the ballot in November, 2016, Article 23 chich failed.

Article 20 was passed over, which involved a potential land-sale from the Silver Lake High School campus to the Town of Kingston for the purpose of building a new Kingston Police Station, due to last-minute legal hurdles with the sale. Maureen Springer, a Silver Lake School Committee member, stated that the article would be back for a  town meeting to consider.

Next came the ten citizens’ petitions, which prompted Selectmen Chairman Russo to plead with voters to be cautious, asking them to allow their town government to work through proper processes. “Citizens’ petitions are a risky prospect,” he said, noting that there are elected officials for a reason. This apparently caused some voters to bristle, with Dawn Hastings of Ring Road, noting, “Our voices matter…and they can be taken away…”

Article 21, a citizens’ petition, would have made required special legislation to change the way the Capital stabilization account funds authorized to be spent.. The article failed, 37-105.

Article 22, also a citizens’ petition that would have funded planning, design and construction of a police station, was passed over, as this is being, “handled in a different way,” according to Art Morin, of Granville Baker Way.

Articles 24 and 25 would have changed the demolition delay by-law used by the historical commission to encourage preservation from 18 months to 6 months. Article 24 failed, leaving the by-law as is, and Article 25 was passed over as it was closely related.

Two non-binding articles, again both citizens’ petitions, asked voters to vote to ask the selectmen to put a non-binding referendum question on the next ballot regarding Jeff Randall’s proposed Ring Road marijuana grow facility and the second to instruct the Board of Selectmen to wait until current legislation modifying Chapter 40(A)3 agricultural zoning regulations at the state level is settled before making any decision on whether to not oppose, support (or oppose by taking no action) the grow-op. Both closely passed– Articles 28 and 29.

A more far-reaching marijuana related by-law change did not pass, as Town Counsel noted that it would be non-binding and unenforceable and it would usurp power the state has granted the selectmen, not Town Meeting. Ethan Stiles, of West Street, stated that the town had updated its marijuana by-laws in 2013 and didn’t see the need to change anything at the moment.

Article 33 passed, and the “Highway Surveyor” position, if the state grants the home rule petition, will be appointed and not elected in the future.

Article 34 passed, and created, but does not fund, a future Town Administrator position, with more responsibilities than the current Town Coordinator position.

Article 35 passed, paving the way for the town to acquire land adjacent to the current municipal campus for a future public safety complex or other municipal needs. Article 36 passed and funded a sum of $125,000 for a consultant for initial plans for the complex.

Finally, the Dennett School will receive $30,000 for a high-tech security system, which the police and fire department, as well as the school committee, feel is extremely important, according to both chiefs.

The meeting concluded at about 11:30 p.m.

PLYMPTON– On Monday, May 2, a new controversy reared its head before the Board of Selectmen. Increasingly, issues in Plympton that the board has no jurisdiction over end up before them at informal hearings, allowing the public to voice their opinions, but leading to little in the way of concrete action.

The major issue before the Board on Monday involved a commercial development project  entirely outside the town limits of Plympton, and it is not clear why Plympton abutters to the Town of Carver appealed to Plympton selectmen, but none-the-less the meeting room was full.

Commercial Development

A developer who own property in Carver, Route 44 Development, has proposed several projects over the past year that would be assisted with state urban redevelopment grant money.  Residents who live near the Plympton/Carver border on Montello Street and Heather’s Path are concerned.

The latest iteration of the proposal, which includes a hotel and a mall, made some residents nervous because, they say, at a Carver Planning Board meeting the words, “eminent domain” were used in conjunction with the project, and 12-16 properties were listed. Eminent domain is when the government takes a property for public use, or in this case, commercial development.

According to residents, a U.S. Supreme Court case involving New London, CT, granted this expansion in eminent domain powers of governments, allowing private property to be taken for commercial development if it benefits the city or town. Although only two Plympton residents have properties which straddle the Plympton/Carver line that were on the original list of properties being considered for seizure by eminent domain, they are fearful, as are their neighbors, that their properties could be the ones selected.

Carver Selectman Alan Dunham was in the audience to allay some resident concerns, and the Plympton board allowed him to address the room. While he noted that the Carver developer has a right to build on his property, he said that 0-3 properties would be considered for seizure via eminent domain. He also noted that Carver would have no power to use eminent domain to take property physically in Plympton.

Dunham says that the project will not include a hotel, and is still in the early stages of planning. As the Carver Redevelopment Authority is providing assistance, the plan must first go from that board to the Planning Board to assure that it fits in with the town’s master plan, and then to the Carver selectmen, who would hold a hearing, and only then on to the state for approval for urban redevelopment funding.

Brian Cherry, of Trout Farm Lane, a candidate for Selectman, asked Dunham whether he was ready to support a project that would take, “half of this man’s property,” referring to one of the two border-straddling residents. Dunham was careful in his response, stating that he couldn’t lock himself in as he hasn’t seen a final plan. He also noted he was speaking personally, not on behalf of his five-member board.

The neighbors opposed the development in general, although from what they said it seemed as if many of them could have accepted living with the original, smaller plans for a two-building distribution facility in their backyards, which they were first notified about in May of 2015, they say.

The scale of the current plan is what appears to have struck a chord with so many, despite Selectman Dunham’s assurances that the current plans are a stretch– although the eminent domain issue certainly looks to be a real fear.

Lisa Maffioli, of Heather’s Path, characterized the project as a “monstrosity,” as well as a, “safety issue.” Jean Winslow, also of Heather’s Path, said she had received a notice from the Carver Planning Board that up to 30-50 trucks would pass through the Plympton section of Montello Street during the construction phase.

Some residents even suggested physically blocking off Montello Street at the Carver line, essentially creating a very long cul-de-sac from Route 58 to the end of Heather’s Path, but Town Coordinator Dale Pleau said that this could not legally be done for safety reasons. He also mentioned a statutory limit for the length of cul-de-sacs.

He did mention that the functional equivalent could possibly be achieved with signage designating the Plympton portion of Montello Street as forbidden to “thru-traffic”.

What began with residents and a lone Carver selectman arguing in the hallway ended in a civilized, if passionate discussion, and residents were respectful to each other, the board and to the visiting selectman.

There was a palpable sense of relief from those gathered that their concerns were being heard, even though the Board of Selectmen has little to no authority over the situation.

As the selectmen were also meeting the next day to finalize preparations for Town Meeting, much of the rest of the agenda was moved to Tuesday, and the meeting ended shortly after the hearing.

• The Plympton BOS next meets on Mondays, May 9, May 16, and May 23 at 6 p.m.