Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Permits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kingston board declines blanket waiver for treble-fee building violations; inspector urges stricter enforcement
Summary
The Kingston Select Board refused to adopt a blanket reduction for permit violation penalties after the building inspector reported 12 active cases where work proceeded without approved permits and explained the town ordinance requires trebling of permit fees for violations.
The Kingston Select Board on May 19 declined to approve a blanket reduction of treble-fee penalties for building permit violations after hearing from Building Inspector Pedro Avila about a recent wave of unpermitted work.
Avila told the board he had identified 12 properties where contractors began work without an approved permit and that “when there is a violation to the building portion of the ordinance, fees should be trebled.” He said the town’s cloud permitting system automatically applies the trebling when a stop‑work order and violation are entered.
The board’s discussion centered on who ultimately bears the cost when contractors fail to pull permits. Multiple board members and residents said the penalties often end up charged to homeowners who believed their contractor had handled permitting. Avila said he posts legal stop‑work orders on site, documents the violations with photographs and uploads evidence into the town’s permit system, which flags addresses and calculates the escalated fee when a permit is later pulled.
Board member Ellie Alessio opposed leniency, saying, “I’m not in favor of giving them a break. Absolutely not.” Select Board members instead voted unanimously that there would be no general waiver; homeowners or contractors may submit individual, written requests for relief for the board to consider case by case.
Clarifying details presented at the meeting included an example in which a deck job with an estimated job value of $210 produced a calculated treble fee of roughly $615.75, and Avila said the software has limited ability to go below a double fee without board action. Avila also described the public‑facing effect of the system: customers can see contractor histories flagged with past violations when researching hires.
The board asked Avila to continue issuing stop‑work notices and to route any written waiver requests from residents to the Select Board for individual consideration. The decision preserves the town’s current ordinance enforcement approach while allowing the board to hear individual appeals.
The board did not change the ordinance at this meeting; any modification to the trebling requirement would require a future action by the Select Board or ordinance amendment.
