The Plympton Board of Selectmen declined to authorize a new digital permitting system on Oct. 6, despite having secured a $74,000 state grant to launch the program, after learning the software would cost the town approximately $60,000 annually to maintain—a price tag that prompted concerns from both board members and residents about long-term fiscal sustainability.
Town Administrator Liz Dennehy presented the board with a proposal to implement OpenGov permitting software, which would coordinate applications across multiple town departments including building inspection, Board of Health, conservation, and the assessor’s office. The $74,000 Community Compact grant Dennehy successfully secured would cover startup costs, training, and operation from Jan. 1 through June 30, 2026.
However, the presentation took an unexpected turn when Dennehy revealed the ongoing annual cost. “The annual cost, it would be like a three-year contract that we’d be entering into. They think that the pricing will come in around $60,000 a year,” she told the board. “So that’s not short money.”
The software aims to solve a significant coordination problem in Plympton’s permitting process. Currently, applicants often submit different sets of plans to different departments—one to the building department, another showing wetlands delineation to conservation, and yet another to the Board of Health for septic systems—making it difficult for town staff to verify that all regulatory requirements are being met.
Dennehy cited a recent solar project as an example of the system’s shortcomings. “The plans that they submitted to the fire department did not include wetlands delineation or anything like that. It resulted in a design where the fire department cannot reasonably get apparatus around the entire perimeter of the solar field,” she explained.
When Dennehy surveyed town departments about whether to pursue permitting software or website upgrades with available grant funding, the response was overwhelming in favor of the permitting system. All departments that issue permits—building, health, conservation, and assessors—participated in OpenGov’s presentation.
Vice Chairman Nathaniel Sides pressed on the return on investment. “Other than coordination and efficiency and all of that, which is understandable, I mean, that’s certainly a benefit. Is there another return on investment there?” he asked. “Is there a cost savings labor that we would realize from somebody not having to do a lot of manual?”
Dennehy acknowledged the limitations. “It would definitely save some manpower hours. I don’t think that the savings are that significant that you would be able to make a logical argument that that’s one of the benefits. It’s really just for ease of use for residents and for the town employees,” she said.
Resident Mark Wallis raised a fundamental question about the spending authority. “It seems to me that if you’re going to spend, what was it, $74,000 now, it would be prudent. And where it’s a grant, grants are great, but they cost you money afterwards if they cost you money afterwards,” Wallis said. “If it’s going to be $60,000 a year, I think the town as a whole should be questioned whether they want it or not. And it would be maybe appropriate to go to a town meeting with the knowledge that it’s going to cost $60,000 a year.”
The discussion did yield one notable defense of the software from an unexpected source. Former Selectman John Traynor noted that the same software had been discussed approximately nine years ago. “The legal liability, I think, is what is going to save you the money. When these things don’t agree, we already see it in some of the court cases in front of the town now that may have been solved because everybody knew they were playing on the same playing field,” Traynor said.
Dennehy expressed her own reservations about the pricing. “I was a little alarmed with the $60,000-ish estimate, given that we were going to start off, like, baby steps,” she said. The pricing is based on municipality size and the number of departments participating. Some larger communities integrate police and fire departments and digitize all historical permits into the system.
The board directed Dennehy to return to OpenGov to explore options for reducing costs or adding more departments to justify the expense. “I think that’s definitely worthwhile to look and see what we can do with it and see what other options there are,” Chairman Dana Smith said. The grant deadline extends to July 2026, giving the town time to evaluate alternatives before committing.
In other significant financial news, Dennehy announced that Plympton has been awarded a $200,000 grant from the state’s Rural Development Fund for a water security study. The project, which requires no town match, will be managed by Conservation Agent Brian Vasa and will work with regional partners including the Taunton River Stewardship Council. “It’s going to basically look into some different things and establish some parameters so that we can ensure our water quality and security for many years to come,” Dennehy explained. The study will examine potential threats to groundwater, map aquifer locations, and recommend any necessary updates to local conservation bylaws.