Plympton-Halifax-Kingston Express

You are here: Home / Archives for Featured Story

CPA survives town meeting challenge

By

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.

Halifax ATM: One and Done

By

HALIFAX– On Monday, May 9, Halifax voters gathered at the Halifax Elementary School for the Annual Town Meeting and Special Town Meeting.

The meeting began promptly at 7:30, with an initial turnout of 129 voters, according to Town Clerk Barbara Gaynor. John Bruno, Town Moderator presided over the meeting. All warrant articles for both the ATM and the STM passed except for three that were passed over (not voted on). Two articles warranted enough controversy for a standing vote. Discussion was centered on a handful of financial questions, although as the hours progressed and citizens seemed to get tired, questions and objections quickly died down.

Wage and

Personell

Debate began almost immediately, on Article 2, which had six sub-sections. Curt Maclean of Holmes St. objected to the first section, regarding cost-of-living raises for non-union personnel. The Wage and Personnel board proposed the article, which included a 2% increase in wages, and made minor changes to the Building and Maintenance Department employees’ clothing allowance, the sick leave bank, vacation leave and educational incentives.

Maclean stated that Halifax already had the highest tax-rate in the county, and that senior citizens were being “forced out of Halifax.”

Kim Roy, Selectmen Chairman, countered that insurance rates were going up astronomically for employees, and that even with a 2% increase, most would be taking home less than in FY’16. “We have to retain talented personnel,” she said.

The Finance Committee did not recommend the 2% increase, appealing to voters for a 1% increase instead.

The article passed with the 2% increase, and all six sub-sections passed as well.

Budget

Of the 157 line items in the $21,879,275 budget, only seven were held for discussion. Several residents had easily answered questions, and most of the seven holds did not generate much discussion. Two, however, sparked controversy.

The first involved an approximately $2,000 increase in the wages budget for the Council on Aging, which Director Barbara Brenton said was needed to pay bus drivers and could not be funded in any other way. She noted that the CoA uses up less than 1% of the entire town budget. The finance committee refused to recommend the article despite Brenton’s several pleas that elderly residents with no other means of transit were missing medical appointments.

Despite FinCom’s firm stance against transport for the elderly, the voters passed the increase.

The Snow and Ice budget line item also prompted controversy, with Kurt Boettcher of Hayward St. getting into an involved discussion with Town Administrator Charlie Seelig regarding how snow-removal money is appropriated, which is slightly different legally than with money set aside for other purposes– due to the unpredictable nature of the weather. Boettcher said, “The President of the United States tells us that we have global warming,” and essentially argued that since it didn’t snow much this past winter, it would be foolish to set aside the same amount of money this year as for last year. Another resident wanted money to be recouped after the winter, rather than appropriating it beforehand.

The long arguments didn’t convince the voters, and eventually someone apparently had heard enough to prompt him to “move the question”, which is a vote to end discussion and then to vote on the question at hand, which passed unanimously, as did the rest of the Public Works–Highway section of the budget.

Other notable

articles

Articles 7-12 were all passed unanimously, with the exception of Article 8. They fund the collective bargaining agreements with unionized personnel. Article 8 was passed over because negotiations with Halifax’s three unionized public safety dispatchers have not concluded, although selectmen noted that progress has been made.

Articles 18 and 19 help fund local non-profits. Article 18 asked voters to raise and appropriate $3,500 for the South Coastal Counties Legal Service, Inc., which provides legal services in civil matters to the elderly and low-income families. Article 19 asked the voters to raise and appropriate $3,500 for the South Shore Women’s Resource Center which supports victims of domestic violence and prevention programs. Kurt Boettcher of Hayward St. asked if the town could be sued for supporting a center that only assists women (which according to their website, they do not). The answer from town counsel was an emphatic, “no,” as Halifax was not involved in any of the non-profit’s operations. Both articles passed unanimously.

Article 21 bought the Police Department two new marked cruisers, which they typically ask for each year as they retire older vehicles. Jason Conroy of Jordan Road wanted to know if the town could achieve some savings through fuel-efficiency by using sedan-based cruisers. Police Chief Edward Broderick said that having a fleet of vehicles that were all the same achieved efficiencies, and that it would be going, “a step backwards,” switching from all-wheel drive SUVs to sedans or a mixed fleet.

The Fire Department also received everything on its conservative wish list (Articles 23-27). They annually ask for about $10,000 to replace worn-out gear, but this year they also asked for $5,000 to replace computer equipment that is for emergency medical use. They also asked for and received $45,000 for a new command SUV, to replace the current aging SUV.

Article 34 adopted a state law that gives a yearly $1,000 bonus to the principal assessor for holding and maintaining professional certificates. This is already done for the Treasurer and the Town Clerk. The finance committee did not recommend the article, stating that if the certificates were mandatory for the job, the bonus should be built into the compensation package. The voice vote was too close to call, but the standing vote passed, 39 to 28. Article 35 raised and appropriated the $1,000, which passed by majority, as well.

Article 37 was passed over, which would have “accepted” two roads in a development. The developer has not completed work that the Water Department requested, therefore, the roads cannot be accepted.

.75% Meals Tax adopted

Article 39 passed by majority, with no discussion, implementing a .75% meals tax on restaurant meals.

Article 44 was passed over, which involved a potential land-sale from the SLRSD campus to the Town of Kingston for the purpose of building a new Kingston Police Station, due to last-minute legal confusion over the sale. (See accompanying article).

The marathon meeting ran quite smoothly, and concluded shortly before 11:30 p.m.

Please don’t take my house!

By

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.

Pot project laid to rest

By

PLYMPTON– In a surprise move, on Monday, April 25 Plympton Selectmen voted unanimously to put on hold a decision on writing a municipal letter of support, non-opposition, or opposition for a proposed medical marijuana grow facility that was to be located at a cranberry farm on Ring Road, until a bill before the state legislature settles the matter of whether a zoning exemption, known as Chapter 40A(3) applies to marijuana or not.

The exemption would allow the grow facility in an agricultural/residential zone, according to Plympton’s bylaws, if the facility is in fact applicable for relief under 40A(3). But the bylaws do not allow medical marijuana to be grown in agricultural/residential zones unless the facility meets the requirements for the exemption.

Chapter 40A(3) is a law, also known as the Dover Amendment, which prevents municipalities from interfering with a broad range of certain activities, and to some extent, in this case, agriculture. The bill, H. 4186, is moving its way through the legislative process, and would exclude marijuana from the 40A(3) exemption.

As there is no accurate way to predict what will happen to a bill as it makes its way through the legislative process; the bill may take some time to become law, conceivably years, if ever.

The letter of support, non-opposition or opposition is the first step in the process of participating on the production side of the medical marijuana regime overseen by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. Applicant Jeffrey Randall first came before the Board of Selectmen on January 4, 2016 with a detailed proposal. It is within the full purview of the BOS to make this decision, according to town counsel.

The Board appeared to tacitly support the proposal that night. Selectperson Christine Joy, said she was “personally uncomfortable” and “not a huge fan”, but said that if the townspeople supported it, she would support it. Selectperson Colleen Thompson said she was “not opposed”, but not sure if she would lean more towards a letter of non-opposition or support. Board Chairman Mark Russo was enthusiastically supportive.

As abutters and neighbors learned of the proposal, opposition in town quickly grew. Although Selectmen Russo and Thompson both stated at numerous meetings that there were many in town who supported the proposal, a vocal group opposed formed and began to appear weekly at each board meeting.

Joy quickly seemed to ally herself with those opposed to the proposal, and often spoke out against the grow facility. Thompson repeatedly stated that she was staying open-minded and listening to citizens regarding the application, and Russo remained the voice of enthusiasm for the proposal. The BOS maintained those positions unwaveringly over months.

Board Chairman Russo spoke out against the tactics of those opposed to the proposal and seemed especially frustrated at a recent Public Records Request for some 14 months of his e-mails, written correspondence and meeting notes between himself and Jeff Randall, Randall’s attorney, business partners, associates as well as any emails, written correspondence or meeting notes that mention “marijuana, marihuana or cannabis”.

The request resulted in Russo turning over more than 600 pages of printed material.

The issue has split the town, Russo said on Monday night, and he thought he had enough information to make a decision right then. Saying that the subject was way too divisive right now, and Thompson noting that she wanted some peace, saying it was a motion he hated to make, Chairman Russo moved that the board delay its vote until the bill before the legislature had clarified the zoning issues. Thompson seconded the motion, and the board unanimously put the application on hold.

Randall, his wife and his attorney left the room quickly.

Sullivan charges reduced

By

PLYMOUTH– On Thursday, April 14, Sean P. Sullivan, 25, of Boston was finally arraigned at Plymouth District Court, Plymouth, the Commonwealth’s fourth attempt to hold the proceeding. A plea of “not guilty” was entered on his behalf by the court, and Marshfield-based defense attorney Michael Bergeron, who has been appointed by the court to represent Sullivan, who claimed to be indigent. The case will remain in the District Court, according to officials, who chose not to move the case into Superior Court, where charges and penalties are greater.

Sullivan gained notoriety in Plympton following a dramatic incident in which he left the Brook Retreat, a “sober-living” facility at 55 Brook Street where he had been a guest, and allegedly caused property damage and attempted to gain entry into a neighbor’s home on March 6, around 11:45 p.m. causing an uproar in town over the safety of residents and the safeguards at the group-home, located in a residential neighborhood.

Sullivan, seemed confused when led from lock-up into the courtroom by a court officer, and was expressionless.  He did not appear to have supporters in the courtroom.

Sporting a buzz-cut and an orange Plymouth County Correctional Facility (PCCF) issued jumpsuit, he did seem to know where he was, though, according to his attorney, he was earlier begging to be returned to Bridgewater for mental health treatment rather than returned to PCCF, where he had previously stayed for a brief time prior to the arraignment hearing.

Sullivan was being held for a “15B” forensic psychiatric evaluation at Bridgewater State Hospital (BSH), a secure mental health facility run by the state Department of Corrections at the Bridgewater Correctional Complex, Bridgewater, to determine his “criminal responsibility” (CR) and his “competency to stand trial” (CST). According to public court records, there was at least one period of time where he was on “suicide watch” at BSH.

Visiting Judge Mary Amrhein presided over the proceedings.

Assistant District Attorney (ADA) Sarah Onori represented the Commonwealth. She argued that because the state’s psychiatrist(s) ruled that Sullivan was competent to stand trial, he could be arraigned, although the ADA asked the judge to allow a motion to amend the most serious charge, felony home invasion, to a lesser felony, “Breaking and Entering in the daytime or at night, for felony, armed, firearm, person in fear,” codified under M.G.L. c. 266 s. 17, according to the Plymouth District Court Criminal Clerk’s office. It should be noted that Plympton Police allege Sullivan was armed with an icepick, not a firearm, although this is the wording that the Commonwealth uses to summarize the law.

The statute reads: “Whoever, in the night time, enters without breaking, or breaks and enters in the day time, a building, ship, vessel, or vehicle, with intent to commit a felony, the owner or any other person lawfully therein being put in fear, shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than ten years. Whoever commits any offense described in this section while armed with a firearm, rifle, shotgun, machine gun or assault weapon shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for not less than seven years or in the house of correction for not less than two years nor more than two and one half years.”

The judge allowed the motion to amend the charges– which vacates the original felony home invasion charge and replaces it with the above charge.

Judge Amrhein next heard the subject of Sullivan’s bail in the current Plympton case and in an ongoing case at Chelsea District Court, where he faces charges of shoplifting and possession of a Class E substance. An ADA from the Chelsea District Court had previously filed a motion with the Plymouth District Court asking a Plymouth judge to revoke bail in the Chelsea matter.

ADA Onori noted that Sullivan has an eight-page long criminal record, had several warrants out for him when arrested, multiple past arrests and convictions for larceny and forgery-type crimes, and drug arrests and convictions for possession of class A, B, C, D and E substances. She suggested that there were other offenses and convictions as well.

Defense counsel Bergeron stressed that his client, Sullivan, was severely mentally ill and that he was, “very apologetic for the situation.” Bergeron stated that this was a very sad circumstance, and that his client had not only been diagnosed with major depression, anxiety disorder and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) after time living on the streets homeless and suffering from addiction, but was also in fact experiencing auditory and visual hallucinations, which he said was supported by the Commonwealth’s forensic reports.

He also noted that although the Commonwealth had determined Sullivan competent to stand trial, they came just short of declaring him not criminally responsible, leaving it to the Court to make that call.

Judge Amrhein set bail in the present case at $10,000 cash/$100,000 bond and revoked his bail in the Chelsea District Court case, automatically triggering a 90-day jail sentence for Sullivan for violating the bail conditions set in Chelsea.

Arguing that his client needed further treatment at Bridgewater State Hospital, Bergeron asked the judge to remand Sullivan back into the custody of BSH.

Judge Amrhein did not allow Bergeron’s petition for Sullivan to be sent back to the hospital  saying,  “I’m sure if his medical needs warrant it, that’s where he’ll [Sullivan] end up.”

With that, court officers led Sullivan back to the lock-up in Plymouth District Court. While being removed from the courtroom, Sullivan politely mumbled, “Thank you, your honor.”

The alleged victims, Dean and Marsha Limitone, of Brook Street, waited patiently in the courtroom the entire day for a hearing scheduled for 9 a.m. but that did not occur until well after 3 p.m.  Speaking with the Express after the proceedings, they expressed their disappointment with the outcome, especially the District. Attorney’s office’s decision to downgrade the most serious charge of felony home invasion.

Despite an official from the D.A.’s office telling them that this was in fact a “good” outcome, they stated that they are still living in fear, and that their only comfort at the moment was that Sullivan would be “locked-up” for at least 90-days.

“After that, we’ll have to see what happens,” said Marsha Limitone. “I don’t think people understand the terror we are still living with every day.”

Sunday night, March 6, Shane Sullivan was located shortly after the Limitone’s called the Plympton Police reporting an individual causing property damage to their shed and attempting to break into their home with a weapon. According to the police narrative, Sullivan was making bizarre statements while being apprehended, such as, “I killed Satan,” and, “I killed that whole family,” when he was found wandering barefoot shortly after the call.

Plympton residents testify

By

BEACON HILL– At the prompting of residents, several weeks ago the Plympton Board of Selectmen asked the town’s state legislative delegation to file a bill that would define the language of a state law allowing certain activities, including agricultural activities, to operate unfettered by local zoning by-laws. The law is commonly known as Chapter 40A(3) or the Dover Amendment.

State Senator Michael Brady, D-Brockton, and State Representative Thomas Calter, D-Kingston, did file the legislation, and along with some familiar faces from around Plympton, both testified before the Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government on Tuesday, April 12 at the State House.

Although there has been a certain amount of “mental gymnastics” going on in terms of determining if this legislative action would simply codify an existing definition of marijuana as a controlled substance, as House and Senate counsel argue, according to the legislators, or if it is in fact a significant change to 40A(3), the legislation simply inserts language into the agricultural section of the exemption to local by-laws, and prohibits marijuana from being considered agriculture for the purposes of relief under the 40A(3) exemption.

According to Brady and Calter, Plympton is the first city or town in the Commonwealth to challenge the definition of marijuana as agriculture.

The significance to the Plympton debate is that the Plympton zoning by-laws prohibit the cultivation of medical marijuana in an agricultural/residential zone unless the property qualifies for relief under 40A(3). If 40A(3) were changed to prohibit marijuana, the proposed grow facility would not be eligible to be built on Ring Road, where the applicant, Jeff Randall, wishes to site it.

First Representative Calter, then Senator Brady, testified before the committee, of which seven members were present, and presented the bill. Calter particularly noted the divisiveness the issue has caused, saying it had divided Plympton in a way he had never seen before.

“I’m not looking to make a new law, I’m looking to clarify a law,” he said. He noted that marijuana was already defined as a controlled substance.

He also stated that neither House Counsel nor Senate Counsel believe that the law needs to be clarified, but that the issue is, “of critical importance to people from the town of Plympton.”

Senator Brady presented the joint committee with 30 letters of support he had received in support of the act.

Chris Housley of Ring Road testified as well that the issue is, “tearing the community apart.” He spoke to many of the arguments presented at the previous night’s Selectmen’s’ meeting, and ended by saying it was a very emotional topic.

Stephanie O’Leary of Ring Road had harsh words for the Board of Selectmen, saying that Christine Joy, the only board member present, was the, “only sane member of the board.”

She said that the dangers of the proposal, “all were willfully ignored by two of the three Selectmen.” She later stated, “the willful arrogance of Mark Russo and Colleen Thompson is breathtaking.”

O’Leary believes the proposed grow facility will attract criminals, and therefore should not be in a residential neighborhood. She also noted the small police force in town, and that the Plympton Police Chief has repeatedly expressed his opposition to the project. She also tied the issue to gang-violence.

Sharon Housley testified next, saying that, “we’re here because we’re desperate, we really are.” She did not want to rehash facts, and said she was going to speak from the heart. She did not testify to anything regarding the specific law in front of the joint committee, but spoke to her general opposition and fears of the project, most of which she has expressed at previous Selectmen’s meetings over the past several months. She ended by apologizing, stating she had never done anything like this before, and was lauded for her testimony by the committee’s Co-Chairperson, State Senator Barbara L’Italien, D-Andover. “Good job,” she said. “Sometimes testifying from your heart is the best thing,” she went on to note.

L’Italien stated it was clear to her that the committee would need to further study the issue, and especially how the Department of Public Health, which regulates medical marijuana, feels about the matter.

Applicant Jeff Randall testified next, introducing himself simply by stating, “I’m Jeff Randall. I’m a farmer.”

He said that there is a significant group of residents in town that are supportive of his proposal, and that he has at least 100 letters of support. He attempted to explain the zoning by-laws to the committee, the first to hint at how the legislation would specifically affect him and target the Plympton zoning by-laws, as he thought they were intended to be interpreted.

He asked the committee to carefully study the legislation, not “fast-track” it.

He argued that marijuana was agriculture, using the analogy of hops, which are both processed into alcohol, and used to create a sedative which is a controlled substance. Hops are considered agriculture. So are red peppers, which contain capsaicin, which is also a controlled substance.

L’Italien was not convinced by this argument. She was also concerned about the project’s proximity to the Dennett Elementary School. Co-chairperson State Representative James O’Day, D-West Boylston, also quizzed Randall, especially on his experience and the details of the operation.

A representative of 4Front Ventures, of which Randall is a client, also testified, stating that there have been no known gang-related attacks on marijuana grow facilities in the country, that the facilities are very secure, and in order for marijuana to be valuable it would have to be stolen at exactly the right time in the harvesting season.

He also stated that former Attorney General Martha Coakley’s office had determined for the Town of Halifax that medical marijuana was allowable under 40A(3). He stated that the bill would substantially change the law. He was also grilled by the committee, but on more general aspects of any medical marijuana grow facility, including nationally.

Christine Joy testified last, briefly re-stating her previously known opposition, and that she was, “the only member [of the Board of Selectmen] that doesn’t believe this is an appropriate use of the land.” She stated her firmly held belief that the cultivation of marijuana was clearly not agriculture.

In the end, although only several members of the joint committee present chimed in with questions, they did not seem very familiar with the subject of medical marijuana, the “ins and outs” of the (very complex) rules set up by the Department of Public Health to regulate the industry nor exactly how 40A(3) fit in exactly with the specific situation in Plympton.

Although listening intently, it was quite clear that they needed to do some more homework now that they had solicited testimony. The joint committee co-chairpersons noted that they will have to due further due-diligence in committee.

In a heartening twist at the end of the hearing, everyone who knew each other from Plympton gathered outside hearing room B-2 and began to chat. Within a minute or two, Representative Calter’s legislative aide had gathered the group, ushered us all into a crowded elevator and began to lead us through the legislature.

Adversaries moments ago were now walking together as a group, getting a special tour of the State House, together marveling at the House and Senate Chambers, the Governor’s office, and other areas of the grand, historical capitol building. Just moments ago arguing, now everyone was just a group of fellow citizens, and although it went unspoken, it was a powerful moment.

“At the end of the day we’re all neighbors. Sometimes you have to agree to disagree,” said Christine Joy.

Will Halifax diners digest proposed local meals tax?

By

HALIFAX– Halifax Selectmen held a special meeting on Tuesday, March 30 in order to meet with Robert Bergstrom regarding a music event he is planning for this summer, as well as meet with FinCom members regarding a proposed meals tax. They also held a public street acceptance hearing.

Forking over more money for meals?

The Selectmen are planning a warrant article for this May’s Annual Town Meeting asking voters to approve a .75% meals tax. The small tax, common among neighboring communities, according to Town Administrator Charlie Seelig, would add 75 cents to a $100 dinner bill.

The tax would simply be added to the 6.25% sales tax already paid on meals, the two combined raising the excise tax to an even 7%. The meals tax would be collected with the sales tax by the Massachusetts Department of Revenue, and redistributed back to the town. No extra burden would be put on restaurant owners, other than reprogramming point-of-sales systems to charge 7%, rather than 6.25% in tax.

The small tax is unlikely to drive restaurant dinersfrom coming into town to eat, nor locals leaving for towns without the tax as it is becoming increasingly hard to find nearby communities without a meals tax.

In fact, Seelig recounted a story of a certain franchised coffee shop, whose owner was so accustomed to working in communities with the meals tax, simply assumed Halifax had imposed one as well and thus programmed the point-of-sale systems to collect 7% sales tax. A sharp-eyed resident noticed the extra .75% being charged on their coffee or doughnuts, and Seelig had to go notify the coffee shop that Halifax in fact does not have a meals tax.

The ultimate decision is up to voters at the Annual Town Meeting, but Selectmen and FinCom members were already discussing the meals tax as if it had passed. When they present the article, both boards hope that there is a clear understanding of where the money raised from the tax would go.

Chairman Roy is leaning

owards the capital planning fund, although there will be ongoing discussions with FinCom.

A public hearing on the matter is scheduled for Tuesday, April 19 at 3 p.m.

Questions remain about ‘Music Event’

Robert Bergstrom, known for his MudFest truck racing events, was again before the board to discuss his plans for a possible yet-to-be-named two-day concert that he is planning for the summer. The board seemed as skeptical as ever, and several town officials were present to express their concerns.

The concert, which according to Bergstrom might attract up to 5,000 people per day, is still in its infancy in terms of planning. Kim Roy, Selectmen Chairman noted that the board had asked Bergstrom to begin meeting with different town departments to discuss plans several weeks ago, and he had only begun the process yesterday, with the Police Chief.

He had prepared a preliminary information packet, including names of possible bands, a security expert that he knew– but did not, according to his résumé have experience with crowd control at a concert, and an aerial map of Fieldstone Farms, where he plans to hold the event.

Major concerns that have still not been addressed by Tuesday night’s meeting include working out a public health plan with Health Agent, Cathy Drinan, coordinating with the Police and Fire Departments, and as well as the Building Inspector.

The Building Inspector, Robert Piccirilli had numerous reservations, including whether or not such an event could even be held in an agricultural zone. He also noted that because the owner of Fieldstone Farms has a legal agreement with the town exempting him from certain zoning by-laws, but that in his opinion this event would not “count” for those exemptions because it is not related to agriculture.

Roy said she had been cautiously optimistic that Bergstrom could pull off the “ambitious” proposal, but that she needed to be convinced, a sentiment echoed by other Selectmen, Troy Garron and Tom Millias. All agreed they wanted detailed plans, much more detailed than those provided thus far.

“You’re going to have to sell me,” said Selectman Millias.

Despite Bergstrom and the board having worked well together in the past for MudFest, this event would be on a different scale.

“We can’t just throw the town’s liability to the wind to throw a party,” said Roy. “This is not ready. When you’re ready, come back.”

Apparently because of his good history with the board, Bergstrom was added to the agenda for the April 12 scheduled meeting.

He stated that he could “absolutely meet that date.”

The board’s change in tone from the last time Bergstrom appeared before them did not seem to phase him. It appears, though, that Bergstrom will have to plan very carefully and quickly to appease the Selectmen.

On The Road To Acceptance

A public “street acceptance” hearing was also held on Tuesday, for two roads in the Two River Farm development, off of Walnut Street. This type of hearing comes up less frequently than other types of hearings in Halifax, for example, dog hearings, and therefore Chairman Roy was a bit confused as to how to start the hearing, but Seelig was able to walk her through it.

“We don’t accept many streets in these parts,” she joked.

A two-step process, first the Selectmen and then the voters at Town Meeting must approve any new roads so that the town can take responsibility for their maintenance. Traditionally, the developer comes before the board to address any questions from the Selectmen or the public.

No members of the public were present for the hearing.

A representative of GF Engineering was present, though, and he addressed a concern from the Water Department posed by the Town Administrator. They were concerned that several “water gates” needed to be raised to grade level. Other than some topsoil that needed to be removed, the Selectmen appeared satisfied and voted to accept the road on the condition that the two minor issues were resolved.

Bourne Drive and Danson Lane are now half way down the road to being accepted. Welcome, and best of luck at Town Meeting!

10 Citizens petitions to be voted at ATM

By

Abram Neal

Express staff

PLYMPTON– At a brief meeting on Monday, March 28 Selectmen updated the public on a few ongoing major issues, closed the Annual Town Meeting warrant, but not the Special Town Meeting warrant, and acknowledged ten citizens’ petitions that have been certified by Town Clerk Tara Shaw. Board Chairman Mark Russo was not present, and Selectperson Colleen Thompson was acting Chair in his absence.

Controversies On Hold

Two on-going controversies have been put on hold awaiting further information, according to Selectperson Christine Joy.

Ring Road resident Jeff Randall’s proposal to locate a medical marijuana ‘grow-op’ on his farm, in an agricultural/residential zone appeared to meet the requirements of Plympton zoning by-laws, although he was seeking relief under a state law that prevents local zoning by-laws from interfering in certain activities, including agriculture, known as Chapter 40A(3). Although Plympton by-laws forbid medical marijuana cultivation in an agricultural/residential zone, they specifically exempt proposals that meet the requirements of Chapter 40A(3).

Although different attorneys at different times throughout this months-long controversy interpreted Chapter 40A(3) differently, apparently the Commonwealth has not determined if marijuana cultivation is actually agriculture. (And if it is not, that would stop Randall’s proposal in its tracks as 40A(3) would not apply and his farm is in an agricultural/residential zone).

At the behest of Selectperson Joy, and a unanimous vote by the board, Plympton’s state legislators, Representative Thomas Calter and Senator Michael Brady offered to file legislation  to clarify the law, by introducing a change in wording to 40A(3) explicitly forbidding marijuana cultivation in the definition of agriculture. According to the legislators, Plympton is the first town to challenge marijuana cultivation as agriculture.

Joy reported that there is no news yet from Beacon Hill on the definition of agriculture, at least as it applies to 40A(3) nor on the pending legislation.

Brook Retreat “Sober Living” house

The Brook Retreat, a so-called “sober living” facility located at 55 Brook Street, has also recently been in the news due to a resident leaving the facility and terrorizing a couple neighboring the “sober house” by attempting to break into their home using an ice-chipping tool.  Police report that he succeeded in damaging the house, breaking an outside light and a storm door while shouting threats.

Although the three principal operators of the facility spoke with Selectman Russo, they refused to do so publicly, and have not responded to a request for comment from the Express.

A large number of residents came to the selectmen’s meeting on March 21 to hear a report on the conversation Russo had with the operators of the Brook Retreat. His report did not appear to satisfy those gathered.

At the suggestion of an audience member, the board unanimously voted Selectperson Joy to meet with Town Counsel to explore any action the town could take to improve safety and communication with the unlicensed facility, which, it appears, is not required to be licensed by any state agency.

Joy reported back to the public that she had spoken to Town Counsel, and that they have a few “good options”, but did not say what those were stating that she was waiting for Town Counsel to prepare an official opinion for the board.

The board and the townspeople will have to wait for further information on another controversial topic in town.

10 Citizen’s Petitions for Town Meeting

Annual Town Meeting Warrant Closed; 10 Citizens’ Petitions accepted

The board closed the warrant for the May 18 Annual Town Meeting on Monday evening, although they chose to wait to close the Special Town Meeting warrant in order to give themselves some more time to tweak it.

A large number of citizens’ petitions will appear on the warrant this year, including several addressing medical marijuana grow facilities, another that would end the town’s participation in the Community Preservation Act, two addressing the town’s demolition delay by-law, and two that would order the town to sell certain lots that are in tax-foreclosure status.

The three medical marijuana related warrant articles include one that would ask to see if “the Town will vote to allow the residents of Plympton to vote on the proposed marijuana grow facility on Ring Road that is presently before the Board of Selectmen.”

According to Town Counsel at a previous meeting, any vote of the sort would necessarily be a non-binding referendum, as Selectmen have full decision-making power to oppose, send a municipal letter of non-opposition or a letter of support for any type of medical marijuana operation.

It is not apparent if the measure passes when the referendum would appear on a ballot;  due to time constraints, it could not appear on this year’s annual town election ballot.

Marijuana RMDs

Another warrant article asks the town to vote to instruct the board to oppose any Registered Marijuana Dispensary (RMD) applications located in an agricultural/residential zone until the state makes definitive decisions on whether the agricultural exemption in Chapter 40A(3) applies to marijuana.

The final article asks the voters to amend the town zoning by-law, adding a new article: “Article XXXI…All applications for a Registered Marijuana Dispensary (RMD) in which any of the facilities (dispensary, cultivation, or processing) are located in the Town must be approved or denied through a ballot question to be voted at the Annual Town Election. Passage of the question will authorize Selectmen to provide a letter of support or non-opposition to the applicant, failure of the question will authorize the Selectmen to provide a letter of opposition to the applicant.”

On a different subject, an article asking voters to revoke Plympton’s participation in the Community Preservation Act (CPA), which it accepted at the 2008 Annual Town Meeting, will be on the warrant. The CPA, funded by a 1.5% additional excise tax on real property and matching funds from the state, established a dedicated funding source, “to acquire and preserve open space, parks and conservation land, protect public drinking water supplies and scenic areas, protect farm land [sic] and forests from future development, restore and preserve historic properties, and help meet local families’ [sic] housing needs.”

Two other warrant articles ask the voters to make changes to the demolition delay by-law, which protect houses of historic value from being demolished without significant delays, which are generally used in order for the town officials and property owners to find an alternative to demolition.

The current delay is 18-months, and one article would reduce that to six-months. The other slightly changes language in another section of the by-law, to reflect the change if the voters approve the shorter delay period in the aforementioned article.

Finally, two other articles list several properties that are in tax-foreclosure status and ask voters to instruct the town to sell them. They appear all to be vacant lots, although some are of significant value– one roughly 16-acre lot on Palmer Road was assessed at $203,100 in 2016.

• Animal Control Officer Frank Bush announced a low cost rabies clinic at the Kingston Animal Shelter on Saturday, April 16, from 10 a.m. to 12 noon.  Aimed to assist seniors, the cost is $10.  Contact the ACO at 781-585-9444 with any questions before April 11.    Transportation if needed by COA van.

• The Selectmen will not meet next week, but will meet next on Monday April 11.

Great Hall celebration!

By

HALIFAX– At an otherwise brief meeting of the Board of Selectmen on Tuesday, March 22, Halifax Fire Chief Jason Vivieros presented certificates to two high-school students who completed the Halifax Firefighter’s Cadet program, and promoted two firefighters to the rank of Lieutenant. Selectmen also met with Barbara Brenton, Director of the Council on Aging and Karen Trudeau, Principal Assessor, with an update on the Senior Tax Work-Off Program. Russ Kleekamp, of GHD, a consultant working with the town on Monponsett Lake water-quality issues also updated selectmen.

Firefighters and families celebrate

The Great Hall in the Halifax Town Hall was filled with firefighters, family and friends as students from the Halifax Firefighters Cadets program were recognized with certificates.

The cadet program allows high-school students with an interest in becoming firefighters to explore all aspects of the day-to-day work of firefighters and paramedics, including firefighter safety, EMS, search and rescue, and according to Vivieros, “they were able to play with the trucks a good deal.”

Students Abby Dubraski and Zachary Rossini received their certificates.

Vivieros continued with firefighter promotions, citing Nathan Jones and William Palma as the obvious choices to promote to Lieutenant.

“Both are already natural leaders in the department; they are the guys that others go to for help in solving problems.”

As each was sworn by Town Clerk Barbara Gaynor, their spouses pinned on their new badges to thunderous applause of those gathered.

There were many hugs and handshakes seen around the hall, as the board and the firefighting community congratulated the newly minted Lieutenants.

Senior Tax Work-Off Program

Barbara Brenton, Director of the Council on Aging and Karen Trudeau, Principal Assessor, were tasked last year with bringing to fruition a tax-abatement program for seniors in which, under certain conditions, by volunteering, seniors could abate part of their property tax bill.

The PILOT program allows seniors, over the age of 60 who are homeowners of five years or more, a chance at a lottery for two slots for the program. A maximum of $750 each can be “volunteered” off of their taxes, for example, at the library. The number of hours is capped to the minimum wage.

Nothing prevents anyone from volunteering more, but a restriction is in place so that someone can’t win a lottery position two years in a row. An income means test is imposed as well.

Brenton and Trudeau were reporting back after the inaugural year of the program, and they both stated that it was a little hard to fill the two slots that they started with.

The COA did meticulous research about how this type of program works in other towns, noting that over 100 towns in the Commonwealth have had something similar in place for 15 to 20 or more years.

They recommended to the board that no changes be made in the program for FY’17, as the concept continues to become more well known.

“We need to market it more,” said Brenton.

Monponsett Lake Storm Drains

Russ Kleekamp, a consultant with a company called GHD, is working with the town of Halifax, specifically very closely with the Highway Department, in order to identify and take the necessary steps to reduce storm-drain runoff making its way into both the ponds of Monponsett Lake.

Using grant money from the state, money donated from the Massachusetts Division of Ecological Restoration, and matching town money, the town has been achieving $9 for every $1 spent on the project, which hopes to reduce the amount of runoff into the ponds. This runoff provides extra nutrients to feed the problematic algae, partially leading to the unhealthy water in the lake, according to Kleekamp.

Kleekamp will identify three major “hot-spots”, and work on a detailed conceptual design to mitigate the pollution.  That way the grant money will be spent on the highest priorities first.

“I’m at a point in my career where I’m lucky enough to be able to pick and choose my clients,” he said to the board. “It’s been great working with the town.”

The board was visibly pleased.

Halifax selectmen will next meet Tuesday, March 29.

We’ve got you covered!

By

PLYMOUTH COUNTY– According to Officer Doug Mazzola of the Plympton Police Department, mass shootings, defined by the FBI as when four or more people are killed in an episode of gun violence, have a long history in the United States. Today, though, and in the past two decades, the frequency of such horrific incidents has increased markedly.

More and more regular patrol officers across the country have had to face-down “active shooter” situations, which according to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) are defined as an “individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and other populated area”. FEMA also notes that there often is no pattern or method to victim selection and that the events are unpredictable and may unfold quickly.

For these reasons, Plympton police conducted an active shooter drill on Saturday, March 12, along with seven other area law-enforcement agencies, including the Halifax Police Department, at a large industrial complex in Plymouth County. About twenty officers participated. The costly, but unfortunately necessary training, was incredibly intense and realistic, according to Mazzola, who participated.

He stressed that “interoperability” was a key term for police today, and such joint training drills allow officers to have the same mentality and skills necessary to fall in and assist in whatever scenario might occur, regardless of which department or agency the officer works for.

The training consisted of a classroom portion, emphasizing the history of mass shootings as well as current strategies engaged by police nationwide. They then toured the host facility, and began conducting drills covering multiple scenarios, including a barricaded hostage-taking scenario. Officers and volunteers participated as “victims”.

   Police fired blanks and simulated ammunition, commonly known under the brand name Simunition, which has a dye to mark when someone is shot, in order to create as realistic an experience as possible. The blanks were of the same decibel as live ammunition, which, according to Mazzola, “really got the adrenaline going.”

“We’ve always had mass shootings, but Columbine [the massacre carried out by two teens at a Colorado high school in April, 1999] was a turning point for police, especially in terms of police tactics. It’s no longer surround the perimeter and wait for a SWAT team to arrive. We actively engage the shooter now in these situations, entering as quickly as possible,” added Mazzola.

The trainers were all certified by the Massachusetts Police Training Council and the curriculum used was similar to that used nationally by other law-enforcement agencies, he said.

Plympton and the surrounding area may have some small police forces, but they are highly skilled and trained. Recent incidents across the country have demonstrated that violent incidents can occur anywhere, but the residents of Plymouth County can rest assured that should an incident occur here, our local police are top-notch.