The meeting’s most issue was the financial implications of the new leaching field project for the town’s sewer system. Concerns were raised about the lack of new customers to help offset the costs associated with debt from the new tanks and leaching fields. Participants highlighted the urgency of developing a financial strategy to prevent resource depletion. One individual warned, “If you use the 1.6 in the first two or three four years of the debt, then that’s gone,” underscoring the importance of long-term planning for the sewer system’s financial sustainability.

The potential revenue from new customers who would pay connection fees and betterment charges was a focal point. It was noted that existing users might face additional fees for the leaching fields, prompting speculation about whether new customers would shoulder similar costs. There was a consensus on the need for proactive planning to avoid repeating financial difficulties. A suggestion to raise betterment fees to “support that saying 26,000” was made, with some advocating for a structured approach ensuring fair contribution to the sewer system improvements from both existing and new users.

Logistical challenges regarding the timeline for implementing new fees were discussed. Participants acknowledged that multiple departments must collaborate to integrate these changes into tax bills by July 1. Concerns about formatting necessary data and ensuring billing accuracy were raised, with a proposal to establish a conversation involving all relevant parties, including the assessing department and software contacts, to streamline the process.

A point of debate centered on how costs for the leaching field project would be divided. It was emphasized that “the cost of the leaching fields is not going to be divided by 1600 properties,” indicating that the financial burden would rely on the number of equivalent units (EUs) allocated to each user. This raised questions about how new customers would contribute to debt repayment, especially given projected future users could fill the remaining capacity.

Historical context regarding sewer project debts was also discussed, with references to previous construction phases and how these debts were structured. There was a desire to clarify outstanding debts and ensure new users would not be accountable for costs related to earlier phases. Emphasizing equitable financial responsibility, it was stated that new users should “not be paying for any cost of phase one phase two,” reinforcing that charges should reflect current usage.

In addition to the sewer system discussion, the meeting addressed budget cuts to the Kingston Public Library. The town administrator’s budget proposal reduced the library’s requested amount by $225,000, impacting the books and materials budget. The library director noted ongoing discussions with the Town Administrator about town-wide budget cuts and highlighted an upcoming meeting with the finance committee to advocate for full funding. The director emphasized the importance of meeting state aid criteria and maintaining certification.

The meeting also touched on structural concerns at the Adam Center, focusing on facade issues above the doorway and the absence of gutters potentially affecting structural integrity. The chair of the historical commission is expected to conduct a site visit to assess necessary repairs comprehensively before seeking funding.