To the Editor:
Tanks…tanks…tanks. The Select Board voted unanimously on February 8, 2021, to grant a license to replace the current underground fuel tanks with two 6,000 gallon above-ground tanks to be located between two existing DPW garages approximately 75 feet from our neighboring residential properties.
At the time this vote was taken, no detailed cost-benefit analyses had been provided for either the proposed tank installation or for any alternate tank configurations or sites. Several alternatives had been suggested by concerned residents, including my suggestion of (1) installing one smaller dual-compartment underground tank at either the same site or another more remote location in the DPW Yard; (2) consolidating our fueling operations with one of Belmont’s neighboring communities, for example, Watertown, which maintains a fueling station less than two miles away; and (3) contracting with a Belmont gas station to provide fuel for all town vehicles.
Besides possibly being more cost-effective for the town, such alternatives would likely be more environmentally friendly by reducing our carbon footprint and providing greater flexibility as we transition to the use of more electric vehicles. Nevertheless, such alternatives were rejected, seemingly out of hand.
When the suggestion came up prior to the vote at the February 8 meeting to consider a suitable alternate site on the DPW property further away from the neighborhood, Jay Marcotte, the DPW director, stated that the decision had already been made in July to install the two above-ground tanks at the selected location and that it would be cost-prohibitive to install them anywhere else. Given that the public had never been informed about this decision, at either the August 2020 or any subsequent hearing or discussions, it is difficult not to conclude that those public hearings and discussions were held merely to comply with existing legal requirements and were not actual opportunities to provide meaningful input to the fuel tank decision.
Fast forward two months: in early April it was revealed that the long-awaited written proposal for the fuel tank installation had been submitted and that the proposed cost had nearly doubled, from the $540,000 approved by Town Meeting last spring, to $1.033 million.
Moreover, at the Capital Budget Committee (CBC) meeting on Thursday, April 8, two days after the $6.4 million property tax override, described by officials as critical for maintaining even a minimal level of town and school services, had failed, Marcotte and assistant town administrator Jon Marshall suggested that there might be a way to fund this additional half-million dollars by using Enterprise Funds. (Imagine my surprise that the Select Board would not need to hold a bake sale to raise the needed half-million-dollar funding.)
Once again, we residents have asked for additional detail. As of this writing, we are waiting for Marcotte to obtain written proposals for both two underground tanks and one dual compartment underground tank.
Assuming the CBC approves the additional funding, Town Meeting will again be voting on this project at the June Town Meeting. Last year, Town Meeting members were mistakenly told that underground tanks were no longer permitted; in fact, that is not the case. This year’s vote should provide an opportunity for a more thorough and fact-based discussion of the issue.
This is not over.
Judith Ananian Sarno,
Town Meeting Member, Precinct 3
To the Editor:
I just read the article in Belmont Citizen Forum about replacing the underground tanks “Local Residents Challenge Tank Location, Planning,” BCF Newsletter, March/April 2021.)
As an alternative can we consider switching all Belmont vehicles to electric types and eliminate the need for storage tanks. I am sure this would be a lot more expensive in the short run but could save the town money over time. If feasible the best alternative would be for Belmont to issue a long-term municipal bond at today’s very favorable rates to fund such activity.
Shashi Rajpal
Oak Avenue, Belmont
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.