Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Solar Permitting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Worthington approves advisory asking select board to seek independent legal opinion on large solar permitting
Summary
A citizen petition asking the select board to obtain an independent legal opinion about the town’s authority and responsibilities related to large ground‑mounted solar and battery projects passed as a nonbinding advisory; petitioners proposed using applicant‑funded 53G accounts to pay for outside counsel.
A petition presented by local residents asked voters to instruct the Select Board to obtain an independent legal opinion separate from town counsel on Worthington’s authority and responsibilities when reviewing and permitting large ground‑mounted solar and battery storage projects, including long‑term governance and enforcement.
Petitioner Emily Lar briefly summarized the article and said the objective was to reduce litigation risk and ensure the town’s record in permitting is complete and defensible. She cited recent changes to applications (revisions at 190 Ridge Road and related conservation filings) and urged review by outside counsel to identify gaps in the record before decisions are finalized.
Select Board members said they had discussed the request with town counsel (KP Law) and that the firm is the town’s regular municipal counsel. The board noted two practical issues: first, an advisory vote from town meeting is nonbinding and would not itself authorize spending; and second, an outside legal opinion would require funding. Petitioners and some residents said state law provision G.L. c.44 §53G allows applicant‑funded review consultants, and they urged using those accounts to finance outside counsel; Select Board said the legal interpretation of 53G and the town’s bylaw wording may differ and that a mechanism for funding would have to be confirmed.
Speakers who supported the petition described the projects as large and long‑lasting and said an independent review could reduce the town’s litigation exposure and clarify permitting standards. Other residents and the Select Board noted KP Law’s municipal experience and said that if voters want outside counsel, the town should consider an appropriation or a special meeting to authorize funding.
After discussion the meeting voted the petition as an advisory instruction for the Select Board to pursue an independent legal opinion and next steps; the advisory passed by voice vote. Select Board and planning staff said they will follow up on funding options and the 53G mechanism.
