Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Upper Cape Range topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Barnstable County commissioners urge governor to halt proposed weapons range in Upper Cape reserve

Barnstable County Board of Commissioners · September 11, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Commissioners unanimously voted to ask Gov. Maura Healey to use her authority to prevent awarding a contract for a multipurpose machine‑gun range proposed inside the Upper Cape Water Supply Reserve and authorized special counsel to file updated legal objections citing statutory and conservation protections.

Barnstable County commissioners voted unanimously Sept. 10 to ask Governor Maura Healey to intervene and to authorize their special counsel to file updated objections to a proposed multipurpose weapons range planned within the Upper Cape Water Supply Reserve.

The motion, introduced by Commissioner Mark, asks the governor “to use her authority as commander in chief to prevent the awarding of a contract or to stop the proposed machine gun range planned for construction within the Upper Cape Water Supply Reserve,” and authorizes special counsel Greg McGregor to submit an updated list of legal and permitting concerns to state officials including the governor’s legal counsel and the Environmental Management Commission. The motion passed on a voice vote with Commissioners Lyons, Forrest and the chair recording ayes.

Mark framed the action as a continuation of the county’s multi‑year opposition, saying the board previously documented “a fairly detailed and comprehensive list of flaws and problems and issues with the project” and arguing the range would conflict with the reserve’s purpose. He cited the reserve’s enabling language in the Chapter 47 Acts of 2002 and state constitutional protections under Article 97 that, in his view, require legislative approval—including two‑thirds votes in both legislative branches—before changing use of protected conservation land.

The county’s written objection, as described at the meeting, raises both statutory and permitting issues and stresses the ecological importance of the reserve. Commissioners said the reserve contains numerous state‑ and federally listed species and argued that permitting and process concerns remain unresolved.

Supporters of the motion emphasized that the request is not opposition to military readiness but to the project’s proposed location. “This has nothing to do with our support of the military,” Commissioner Sheila said; “it’s just the wrong place for this activity,” she added.

The motion also references the existence of a similar range at Fort Devens; commissioners and staff expressed concern that the state might proceed in phases if funding does not cover the full project. The board directed its special counsel to update the county’s September 2021 submission of concerns and to transmit that update to the governor, relevant state agencies and legislators.

Next steps: the county will finalize and file the updated objections and send a letter to the governor’s office. The transcript does not record any immediate response from state officials or a change in the National Guard’s procurement timetable.