By Carol Britton Meyer

An article on the Aug. 31 special town meeting warrant would adjust Hull’s wetlands protection rules in response to a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision, the town’s conservation director told the advisory board this week.

When asked, “Why now?” by advisory board member David Clinton, Climate Adaptation & Conservation Director Chris Krahforst said the issues should be addressed before next year’s annual town meeting.

“There is some urgency to this article,” Krahforst said, explaining that it was due in part to “pressure from the conservation commission” and that a similar warrant article “fell off the radar screen” for last spring’s annual town meeting.

The article addresses a recent Supreme Court decision, Sackett vs. EPA, that restricts how certain land can be regulated under the federal wetlands rules. Krahforst said this could jeopardize the protection of wetlands in parts of Hull.

The ordinance proposed in the special town meeting article would protect wetlands that serve to capture stormwater, overwash, and ocean surge to mitigate flooding.

“This ordinance proposes that town residents value the protection from flooding provided by these wetlands and seek to preserve that protection – which was previously afforded under the Wetlands Protection Act,” Krahforst told The Hull Times in a follow-up email.

The article also seeks to require the conservation commission to consider “cumulative effects” proposed projects may pose on the town’s protected resources. As an example, an activity that may be permittable under the state WPA – such as adding docks over a marsh – would require the commission to consider whether this practice is consistent with protecting the entire resource.

“It’s important for residents to know about these issues due to the importance of storm damage protection and flood control,” Krahforst said.

Also, the conservation commission is seeking to institute a fee structure similar to ones implemented by many Massachusetts communities to administer the Wetlands Protection Act. These fees haven’t changed since at least 2013, according to Krahforst.

The commission is also requesting that these fees be doubled for after-the-fact work that requires a permit or a review.