Kingston Annual Town Meeting: Open Space, Conservation, Environmental Articles on Warrant
Plus: April 22nd Kingston Town Election Results
(KINGSTON) — Kingston will hold its Annual Town Meeting today, Saturday, April 29th, starting at 9 a.m. at the Kingston Intermediate School. The Annual Town Meeting is generally the most important event in the political calendar of any New England Town; this year, decisions around budgets, a sewer leaching field, the wetlands protection bylaw, clear-cutting, open space, and sand mining/filling will be made by the directly democratic legislature of Kingston, the Town Meeting.
The Town will consider a number of Articles on tomorrow’s warrant.
( The view from Gray’s Beach; photo credit — J. Benjamin Cronin. )
Fiscal Articles; Leaching Field; Community Preservation
Articles 1 through 30 are, in the broadest sense, fiscal measures, in which the Town will be asked to raise and appropriate sums of money for public purposes.
Article 8 asks the Town to borrow $12 million for the creation of new leaching fields on a parcel owned by the Town known as the Davis Property. Kingston’s Boards were divided on the question, with the Board of Selectmen voting to support the Article by a 3-2-0 vote. The Finance Committee supported the Article, by a vote of 5-0-0, and the Capital Planning Committee voted 3-2-0 to support it, as well.
The Article was placed on the warrant by the Sewer Commission, who argue that it will help reduce the Town’s nitrogen loads.
However, some environmentalists in Kingston have expressed concern, noting that one of the few limiting factors in Kingston that stands in the way of several massive developments is sewer capacity. The concern is that the funding of a leaching field will remove a critical check that currently stands in the way of economically powerful development interests.
The Article must pass by a two-thirds majority.
Article 20 relates to Community Preservation Act funding and projects, and must pass by a majority vote. Among the projects contemplated by the Article are: providing funding to the Kingston Affordable Housing Trust; funding restoration of both the Adams Center and the Powder House; restoration of the graves of Civil War and Revolutionary War veterans in the Old Burying Ground, and headstone and monument restoration in the Evergreen cemetery; the purchase of Mass. Dept. of Transporation land for a conservation parcel; funding a parking project at the Calista Farm; the placement of a sign at Triphammer Park; funding the Jones River Riparian Corridor; and funding the replacement of the municipal boat ramp, which is the only publicly owned boat ramp for the many recreational boaters, oyster farmers, and other marine traffic in the Town’s waters.
Article 21 would, if passed, bring about a significant change in the government of Kingston, changing from two elected positions — Treasurer and Tax Collector — to one combined, and appointed, position. Ken Moalli, the Kingston Tax Collector, was elected Town Treasurer in the April 22nd Kingston Town Elections (see below). The Select Board voted 4-0-0 to support the Article, while the Finance voted 2-1-1 to support it.
Article 23 deals with the compensation schedule of Town employees, while Articles 24 through 29 deal with contracts with unions representing the same, including Kingston police officers and firefighters.
Article 31 would increase the property tax exemption for seniors and veterans, while Article 32 would reduce the interest rate on property tax deferrals.
Article 34 is quite complicated and detailed, and would create special legislation defining and enumerating the role, rights, duties, and responsibilities of the office of Town Administrator.
Wetlands Protection, Conservation Land; Attempt to Legalize Fill Operations
Article 37 is a significant amendment to the Town’s Wetland Protections Bylaw, placed on the warrant by the Conservation Commission. It passes on a majority vote of the Town Meeting. The Article rewrites the Kingston Wetlands Protection Bylaw (Kingston General By-laws Ch. 13) in accordance with the Massachusetts Association of Conservation Commissioners model Wetlands Protection Bylaw. It was supported by the Board of Selectmen, by a 5-0-0 vote.
The bylaw will be laid out differently, in a fashion that makes it easier to read and interpret. There are a few changes, including a change in descriptive language (“incremental activities, significant or cumulative effect” is the language in question); further establishes Home Rule Authority by explaining how the Town’s Bylaw gives protection greater than that provided by statutes and regulations of the Commonwealth; increases the abutter notification distance from 100 to 300 feet, and extends straight line jurisdiction a further 100 feet “for projects where removal or addition of earth will be greater than than ten feet.”
The description of Article 37 from the warrant states:
“This extension of jurisdiction should only effect large-scale projects likely to negbatively impact wetlands beyond the typical buffer jursidctional areas, allowing a bit more oversight of such projects so that the impacts to wetlands may be best avoided or mitigated. It should have no effect on the average homeowner or construction project.”
The statement explained the increase in buffer zones: “We often hear from residents just outside the 100 feet abutter range that feel as though they’re close enough to be impacted by a project, and that they should be notified.”
Article 38 seeks to curb destructive clear-cutting that has accompanied development across the Town and the region (off the top of my head: the Cherry Street Rountree Hyundai being built on the Kingston-Plymouth line, proximate to 50% of Kingston’s water supply; the development on Lincoln Street in Duxbury; clear-cutting directly to the shore of Great Ponds, like Monponsett Pond in Halifax, and the Great Herring Pond in Plymouth; this clear-cutting increases runoff, driving algal blooms). Indeed, there is considerable probability that some of Kingston’s neighbors may find the bylaw instructive and useful, and that some of its features may be replicated in Kingston’s sister Towns.
Article 38 would add Chapter 26 to the Town’s bylaws (attached in the warrant). The motion, put on the warrant by the Planning Board and the Conservation Commission, received unanimous support for all boards. It is described in the warrant thus:
“The idea of this by-law is to prevent unpermited or unnecessary destructive development practices in Kingston, which typically starts with clear-cutting. The hope is to maintain tree cover for the benefit of the residents of Kingston. Tree cover maintains rural character, provides shading, cooling, better air quality, improves climate resiliency, and provides wildlife habitat and forage.”
Article 39 would establish standards for the naming of Town-owned properties.
Article 40 concerns the transfer of Town-owned property to the Conservation Department. The parcels, located south of Monk’s Hill Road (the Monk’s Hill Moraine is one of the most prominent geological features of Kingston), are proximate to Camp Nekon, as well as the Dept. of Transportation parcel being considered as a Community Preservation Act purchase under Article 20.
( Monk’s Hill and the Monk’s Hill Moraine; photo credit — US Geological Survey. )
The Article, according to the description in the warrant, “permanently protects roughly 50 acres of pristine Atlantic Coastal Pine Barrens habitat…. One of these parcels also contains the DCR-staffed fire tower on Monk's Hill, the highest point in Kingston.”
Article 42, brought by citizen’s petition, proposes a 3-way stop sign at the intersection of Maple Street and Landing Road.
Article 45, another citizen’s petition article, transfers Town-owned land to the care of the Conservation Department; the Select Board voted 2-3-0 not to support the Article.
Article 46, brought by citizen’s petition, would see if the Town would vote to reject Eversource’s desire to place lines over roadways in Tall Timbers Estates.
Articles 47 and 48 are articles that would allow the placing of fill on properties in the Town’s commercial/industrial park district. These Articles appear to be brought by sand mining and other industrial interests. One reliable source, and, indeed, the plain language and intention of the Articles, suggests it comes from individuals associated with Mary O’Donnell, owner of the large property proximate to the Kingston Collection (Independence Mall) and and MBTA commuter rail station.
A second reliable source indicates that Ms. O’Donnell — whose interactions with the Town of Kingston have formed a steady backdrop for most of my life — actually lives most of the year in Ecuador.
The Articles are quite likely a response to the unanimous, October, 2022, decision by the Kingston Zoning Board of Appeals to uphold the building inspector’s cease and desist order directed at O’Donnell et al. and her sand mining operation, which was filling the mine pit with debris from urban construction projects from across eastern Massachusetts, with little regard for potential contamination of the aquifer.
The petitioners evidently seek, now, via the legislative branch, to legalize this filling activity that the ZBA specifically prohibited; it is, in short, a transparent attempt to evade the existing bylaws. If Kingston votes yes on these Articles, anyone owning property in the commercial/industrial park district could legally dump contaminated soil — including contamination by heavy metals and PFAS, chemical compounds that are sometimes called “forever chemicals” — on that property, with dramatically reduced legal recourse by the Town.
The commercial/industrial park district, located at the heart of the Monk’s Hill Moraine, is a critical aquifer recharge zone not just for Kingston, but for her neighboring Towns, who likewise use the 199 square mile Plymouth-Carver Sole Source Aquifer for their water supply. These Articles quite clearly financially benefit an extremely small number of individuals, while endangering the drinking water for well over a hundred thousand people across the aquifer.
The Select Board and Planning Board both voted unanimously to reject both Articles.
Town Election Results: Alcombright, Crone, Moalli Elected
Meanwhile, last Saturday, April 22nd, was Kingston’s Town Election, and the Town Clerk’s posted results confirm that Selectman Donald J. Alcombright was reelected, and Eric J. Crone was elected to fill the seat on the Select Board vacated by Jessica M. Kramer.
Mr. Alcombright received 398 votes, and Mr. Crone received 358 votes.
For the office of Treasurer, Kingston Tax Collector Kenneth B. Moalli was elected in his contested race with Selectwoman Jessica M. Kramer. Mr. Moalli received received 360 votes, while Ms. Kramer received 258 votes.
There were no other contested races on the ballot.
The Kingston Town Meeting begins at 9 a.m. this morning, Saturday, April 29th, at the Kingston Intermediate School, at 65 Second Brook Street.
Great article and glad to see Kingston is slowly moving in the right direction. It's square center in the sights of the developers.
Thanks Ben - I enjoyed reading about what's happening in Kingston town government. It's amazing how similar the issues are between towns!