Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surplus Property Disposal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advocate urges permitting municipalities to destroy hazardous surplus property rather than resell
Summary
A witness asked the committee to allow municipalities, when public health risks exist, to destroy surplus property rather than donating or selling it, citing rodenticide, herbicide and other contamination concerns and ambiguity about aggregation of surplus for valuation under Chapter 30B.
A Woods Hole resident and town official told the committee that Chapter 30B — which governs municipal procurement and disposition of public property — should be amended to allow municipalities the option to destroy surplus property in lieu of sale or donation where public‑health or environmental risks warrant it.
Nan Logan testified in favor of H.3391, which would add an option allowing a town or other public body to destroy surplus items rather than enter them into circulation if destruction is in the public interest. Logan cited examples of hazardous materials and contaminated uniforms, rodenticides and certain herbicides as situations where resale or donation could spread harm. The bill would not force municipalities to destroy property but would allow an additional option for local officials to weigh when an item presents a public‑health risk.
Committee members did not take formal action on the bill at the hearing. Witnesses said they would submit written testimony with further examples and urged the committee to consider the public‑health implications of mandatory resale or donation in all cases.
