An increase in boating fees proposed by the Mattapoisett Board of Selectmen was met by internal and external concerns from the town clerk and the owners of the Mattapoisett Boat Yard on January 26.

Town Clerk Catherine Heuberger raised concerns that the proposed methodology for ensuring that excise taxes, sticker permits, and mooring fees for boaters using boatyard facilities – a process now primarily handled by her office – would become more complicated if handled by commercial marinas and similar businesses. She said new software employed in the last year had made it easier to collect data needed to bill boaters more thoroughly and accurately.

“Bills are just about ready to go out now,” said Heuberger. “How do we back out the boatyard customers?”

The proposed new process, which had been vetted and discussed for months in public meetings held by the Marine Advisory Board and the selectmen, would set a flat fee of $200 for boaters using commercial marina moorings. The fee would include the sticker permit and be issued by the marina itself. But Ned Kaiser and Carla Edwards of the Mattapoisett Boat Yard didn’t agree with the change.

“Why does this become our responsibility?” Edwards asked.

The new plan would require marinas to pay the new fee upfront, a whopping $30,000 increase over previous years.

Selectman Jordan Collyer said, “In Marion, it works really well!”

Town Administrator Michael Gagne explained that the waterfront enterprise fund had been subsidized by general fund appropriation for years, and fee increases were necessary to allow the department to operate independently.

“It is not a pure waterways fund at this point,” he said.

“I’m worried about the process,” Heuberger said.

After discussing the list of increases, Selectman Paul Silva suggested Gagne pull a committee together of marina owners and town employees to further iron out the process that would allow increases to roll out for the coming season.

“Work it out, be cooperative and get the thing done,” said Silva.

Selectman Tyler Macalliser reminded everyone, “Fees have not increased in fifteen years.”

Proposed new fees are: sticker fee for residents – $2 per foot, non-resident – $5 per foot, resident seniors – $1 per foot; mooring fees, flat rate – $60; commercial mooring fees – $200 including sticker; commercial slip spaces, flat fee – $210; slip fee at timber pier – $50 including sticker; skiff fee, flat fee – $150, resident seniors – $75; small boat fee, flat fee – $50; dinghy dock fee, fate rate – $100.

Fees will be set at the February 9 meeting of the Board of Selectmen after the new committee meets.

Earlier in the evening, Goodspeed Island residents Daniel DaRosa and Tony Campbell came before the board to request snow plowing of Railroad Avenue and trash collection.

DaRosa said that when he first moved to his home at 3 Goodspeed, the road was plowed and trash was collected. He said that for the past several years, plowing had stopped, as well as trash collection. DaRosa said his main concern was safety and the ability of emergency vehicles to reach his and Campbell’s home if the road wasn’t plowed.

Collyer began the discussion by saying, “In theory, you get the benefit of a private road,” but went on to say it was in fact a public road over which the Goodspeed Island residents enjoyed an easement to reach their property.

“We restrict vehicles, giving the impression of a private road,” Collyer added.

Highway Superintendent Barry Denham was present to handle plowing questions. He said, “It was plowed from time to time, but it’s not part of the plan.”

But DaRosa said the town was plowing all the way to the sewer pump station, a mere 500 feet from the entrance to his private driveway.

“If they are going to plow to the pump station, it’s only a little ways down the road,” to his house, DaRosa said.

“It is town property but not a public way. It has not been approved by town meeting,” Silva said, adding that it is “public property that you have an easement over.”

Macallister interjected, “If you are going to get it plowed, you’re going to have people going down there.”

The conversation shifted to future possibilities of opening the beach area up to public parking and preparing the road, especially in light of the plans for a bike path traversing the area.

“Times have changed,” said Collyer. “I’d have no problem going before town meeting to get funds for parking and road maintenance.” He continued, “If the abutters want the road plowed and understand the public would have access, maybe we need to take a step back.”

Regarding DaRosa’s and Campbell’s concern about emergency services having easy access to their homes, Denham eased their minds, saying, “I have trucks located throughout town in strategic locations … we are sometimes closer than the police and fire departments … oftentimes we have to plow right into the front yard.”

Gagne said he would work with Denham on the bigger issue of opening the area up to public traffic noting, “I think we can do some things there that can benefit the public as a whole.”

Denham was quick to add, “Let’s do some planning first. We have a ways to go before people can drive down and park there.”

Regarding town meeting, Silva said, “Let our residents decide how they want to spend money.”

On the matter of trash collection for Goodspeed Island residents, Gagne said he had already asked the Board of Health to speak with ABC Disposal. However, Collyer pointed out that their trucks were too heavy for the old culvert under the roadway.

In other matters, Gagne recently met with members of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation to coordinate various aspects of the bike path Phase 1B.

He said the current appeal of a recent Conservation Commission decision to allow test borings would most likely not negatively affect funding expected to be released this year. Gagne reported that the DOT has given permission to proceed with permitting and that a Notice of Intent would be forthcoming for the test borings.

Gagne also invited the public to attend a meeting on February 4 at Center School to discuss the continuation of improvements to roads and sidewalks in the village.

The next meeting of the Mattapoisett Board of Selectmen is scheduled for February 9 at 7:00 pm in the Mattapoisett Town Hall conference room.

By Marilou Newell

The Rochester Planning Board was unwilling to wait – a second time – for a tardy arrival of the engineer of the large-scale solar farm slated for the center of Rochester. Instead, Planning Board member Ben Bailey suggested the board cease waiting for him and continue the January 26 meeting until February 9.

This came just moments after the board denied Amelia Tracy of Renewable Energy, LLC her request that the board issue a positive vote that evening in order to meet a recently accelerated deadline of a state program for financial incentives on solar energy investment projects in Massachusetts.

Tracy said she learned only ten minutes prior about the abrupt change in the solar regulations of the solar program, which she said often change without notice. The new deadline, she said, was next week.

“We are now on a tight timeline to finish this project,” said Tracy. “That’s the reality of our industry. For us to get a vote tonight would be the best possibility for us.”

Bailey was unsympathetic. He suggested the program was all about tax credits and “government handouts.” When Tracy stated that the program would qualify the project for a “solar renewable credit program,” Bailey called it “baloney.”

“Dress it up, it’s still a pig,” said Bailey.

“It’s incredibly important for us to get a permit tonight if possible,” Tracy reemphasized. “It’s a really big deal for us. I just wanted you to know that this is the reality for us.”

Planning Board Chairman Arnold Johnson told Tracy the board had still not received the peer review reports from its hired engineer and, given that Renewable Energy changed engineers only recently in the middle of the application, there was no room for any “give and take.”

In addition, said Johnson, the Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program concerns were still pending. Johnson reiterated that the board’s policy is to refrain from making decisions before Natural Heritage finishes its own matters, lest the approved plan be subsequently changed.

“We could get through all our stuff. We could close the public hearing,” and the board could wrap up all loose ends of the project, Johnson said, “but we still won’t be able to take a formal vote on it until Natural Heritage is done.”

Furthermore, Johnson said decommissioning concerns still lingered and, with the project’s addition of a landscaping architect into the mix, a hasty vote was impossible.

“We don’t like to waste anyone’s time,” Johnson said sounding sympathetic. “When our time is right, we like to write very good decisions.”

Johnson said that, realistically, Tracy would be looking at a final vote in March.

Abutters and neighbors in attendance expressed frustration over a Rochester Board of Health public hearing that residents reported was held back on January 13, just one day after the prior Planning Board hearing when Tracy first learned the project would require a Board of Health waiver pertaining to the proximity of the project to a nearby septic leaching field.

Resident David Watling said that when he inquired with the Board of Health about Renewable Energy’s public hearing, he learned that Renewable Energy was never placed on the agenda, the public hearing was not legally posted, and no abutters were notified – contrary to what Town Counsel Blair Bailey told residents the night of the last Planning Board meeting on January 12.

One resident said she was called two hours before the Board of Health meeting and informed about it. Others said the meeting happened without them knowing.

By that point in the meeting, Tracy was unable to tell the board when she expected the engineer to arrive. Bailey called the situation rude, and he quickly motioned to continue the hearing until February 9. Some residents expressed subdued joy, and the meeting was adjourned.

Also on the agenda, the public hearing for a special permit for Melink Corporation for a solar energy facility off Snipatuit Road was immediately continued until February 9 at the request of the applicant.

Johnson quickly referred to yet another application being tentatively submitted for another solar farm in Rochester, this time on Marion Road by the old airport property. This, said Johnson, would make solar farm number six for the town.

The next meeting of the Rochester Planning Board is scheduled for February 9 at 7:00 pm at the Rochester Senior Center on Dexter Lane.

By Jean Perry