Duxbury Selectboard Confronts Controversial Residential Battery Storage Proposal as Community Demands Action
DUXBURY - October 6 - In a packed Senior Center meeting room Monday evening, the Duxbury Selectboard heard impassioned testimony from dozens of residents opposing New Leaf Energy’s plan to build a 20-megawatt-hour lithium battery storage facility on West Street in a residential neighborhood. The proposal, which was denied by the town in 2023 but approved by a land court judge under the Dover Amendment, has ignited fierce debate about state overreach, public safety, and the true meaning of “green energy.”
The Full Story
The proposed battery energy storage system (BESS) would be located at 711 and 0 West Street on a five-acre lot, using approximately half an acre for the facility itself. New Leaf Energy has secured a favorable land court ruling that overturned the town’s denial, arguing that the project qualifies as an accessory use to renewable energy under the Dover Amendment despite not generating any power itself.
Chris Ziomek, representing an informal neighborhood group called “Stop the Battery Farm 25,” opened the discussion by explaining that residents are not opposed to renewable energy technology, but rather to the location of this specific project. “We oppose the location, the logic, and frankly the carelessness of this project,” Ziomek stated. He emphasized that New Leaf’s own website previously recommended such facilities only be built in industrial or commercial zones.
The presentation detailed significant safety concerns about lithium-ion battery fires, known as thermal runaway events. Steve Walsh, a fire protection specialist living at Tussock Brook Road, provided expert testimony about the dangers. “These facilities, there’s nothing you can do to put the fire out once they go,” Walsh explained. He noted that lithium battery fires are classified differently from standard fires and can burn for days, citing examples from East Hampton, New York, where a facility fire burned for over 30 hours, and San Diego, California, where fires lasted multiple days.
Matt Koenig, a resident of Eagles Nest Road who works professionally with battery storage systems and has 16 years of industry experience, offered a unique perspective. “I make my living with this stuff,” Koenig acknowledged, but expressed bewilderment at the site selection. He referenced the McMicken facility explosion in Arizona, which he co-authored the root cause analysis for, explaining that even with technological advances since then, firefighters primarily focus on “let it burn and guard against detonation” when responding to battery storage fires. Koenig questioned why the facility couldn’t be sited at the substation located half a mile away, calling the residential location choice “very puzzling.”
Attorney Sean Sullivan from West Street provided a legal update on the case status. The town’s appeal of the land court decision is now before the Massachusetts Appeals Court, with the town’s brief due November 3 and New Leaf’s response due December 3. Sullivan explained that the land court judge ruled Duxbury had an “outright prohibition” on stand-alone battery storage systems, meaning there would be no remand back to the town for further review. “Every town around us” is struggling with similar issues as Attorney General offices reject or heavily scrutinize proposed bylaws, Sullivan noted, because “no one knows what to do with this.”
The legal complexity centers on the Dover Amendment, a 1985 statute originally designed to protect certain uses like schools and hospitals from overly restrictive local zoning. Recent court interpretations have expanded it to cover energy storage, but Sullivan emphasized that towns retain authority to impose restrictions for “health, safety, and welfare” purposes. He explained that New Leaf’s business model is to develop projects to the point of permits and agreements, then sell to an independent power producer who builds and operates the facility long-term.
When New Leaf Development Director Erin Kendrick joined the meeting remotely, she faced pointed questioning from board members and residents. Selectboard member Fernando Guitart challenged the residential siting decision directly: “Why are you siting this project in a residential area?” Kendrick responded that the state identified the specific electrical feeder running through the site as a priority for grid reliability and renewable energy integration. When pressed about alternative industrial sites, Kendrick stated there were no suitable locations on that particular feeder within Duxbury’s industrial areas.
Selectboard member Amy MacNab questioned New Leaf’s characterization of the project as renewable energy storage, asking what percentage of stored energy actually comes from renewable sources. Kendrick acknowledged approximately 22% of Massachusetts’ current grid energy comes from solar, with the remainder from conventional sources. “So it’s a small amount of renewable which is... I’m just trying to make the point that it’s not all renewable energy that is being stored,” MacNab emphasized.
Revelations about New Leaf’s business model particularly troubled residents and board members. When Guitart learned that New Leaf plans to sell the project after securing permits rather than operate it long-term, he expressed frustration: “So you’re making promises about safety and performance and operation for somebody who’s not in the room?” Kendrick responded that all commitments would be “memorialized in the project designs and agreements” and transferred to the buyer.
Fire safety expert Walsh challenged Kendrick’s claims about fire suppression systems, asking specifically about the facility’s construction and fire prevention plans. When Kendrick mentioned HVAC systems and clean agent suppression, Walsh flatly contradicted her: “There is no clean agent that can put out a fire. There’s nothing that can put out a lithium fire.” He explained that thermal runaway is self-sustaining because it generates its own oxygen, and only massive amounts of fresh water can eventually extinguish such fires. Walsh concluded with a personal appeal to Kendrick: “I don’t know if you have kids. Would you want this in your backyard?”
Ann Malowitz, a retired Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection section chief who spent her career cleaning up hazardous waste sites, added professional concerns about long-term contamination. Living on Lincoln Street for 35 years, Malowitz warned that a fire would create a hazardous waste site with the property owner bearing legal responsibility for cleanup. “Once that fire happens on his or her property, that’s a hazardous waste site. Guess who’s responsible under the law to clean it up? That property owner,” she explained. She emphasized that lithium is a heavy metal that would persist in soil, air, farmland, and the nearby bogs, potentially affecting neighborhoods far beyond West Street including Pembroke and Marshfield.
John Higley of Acorn Street, who has industry experience with energy site remediation, drew parallels to past failures in energy infrastructure planning. He cited Texas Instruments building a semiconductor plant in rural Richardson, Texas, that became surrounded by homes as the town grew, creating ongoing conflicts over truck traffic and emissions. “We have a history of rushing into different energy projects,” Higley warned, referencing gas station underground tank contamination issues. He advocated for the town to host any public information sessions rather than letting the developer control the narrative.
Sheila Lynch-Benttinen of West Street, who lives at the edge of the proposed one-mile evacuation radius, revealed important regulatory developments. She informed the board that Massachusetts DEP Commissioner Bonnie Heiple issued an 18-page letter in August 2025 providing guidance on BESS facilities, including provisions giving local fire departments priority status to evaluate and report on whether such facilities are appropriate. “It can become part of the record and a lot of towns are doing this early as they’re fighting in land court,” Lynch-Benttinen explained, suggesting Duxbury’s fire department should prepare such a report for the appeals court case.
State Representative Ken Sweezey addressed the crowd, characterizing the situation as “a complete policy failure at the state level.” He announced three bills recently filed in the Massachusetts House—House Dockets 4556, 4557, and 4558—that would create a statewide moratorium on residential BESS projects, establish mandatory buffer zones, and most significantly, require the state to accept local board decisions on siting. “Here in the Commonwealth, the towns have sovereignty and the towns have rights and our residents have rights,” Sweezey declared. He committed to fighting for public hearings on the bills despite their late filing date.
The community group made two formal requests of the Selectboard: first, to adopt a town-wide moratorium on the project while the appeal proceeds, and second, to work with the planning board on bylaw changes establishing reasonable regulations for battery storage facilities. Board members expressed support for the residents’ concerns but questioned whether a moratorium could legally apply to an application already filed. Chairman Brian Glennon suggested consulting with town counsel on the moratorium issue and noted that the Massachusetts Association of Health Boards has submitted comments to DEP suggesting local boards of health may have jurisdiction over such projects.
Selectboard member MacNab articulated what many residents felt: “I don’t necessarily think that zoning hasn’t caught up. I think zoning is what it is. Zoning is what our community wants it to be. And we have, as a community, decided we want to be residential.” She emphasized that the problem isn’t local zoning but state creation of loopholes under the guise of renewable energy for what is essentially a for-profit energy trading operation.
New Leaf had scheduled a public information session for October 20 from 4-6 p.m. at the Duxbury Free Library, but residents immediately objected to the timing as conflicting with work schedules. Following sharp exchanges, New Leaf representative Carolyn Spicer agreed to make the meeting later in the evening, with details to be communicated to Town Manager René Read.
The appeals court process will likely take six to eight months or longer, with briefs due in November and December, oral arguments typically four to six months after briefing concludes, and a decision approximately 130 days following oral arguments for a full court panel. Meanwhile, residents expressed concern that New Leaf continues advancing permit applications with other town boards, including conservation commission review of an access road, effectively moving the project toward the “one yard line” while the legal appeal proceeds.
Why It Matters
The controversy over the West Street battery storage facility represents more than a single development dispute—it exemplifies the collision between state clean energy mandates and local control over residential neighborhood character and safety. Residents within the one-mile emergency evacuation radius view the stakes as potential exposure to toxic fires that cannot be extinguished by conventional means, possible groundwater contamination affecting private wells and the town water supply, and property devaluation due to proximity to an industrial facility. The case has become a test of whether Massachusetts communities can maintain meaningful zoning authority when state agencies and courts interpret decades-old laws to override local decisions. With over 60 similar moratoriums enacted across 12 states in the past year alone, Duxbury’s fight may influence how battery storage facilities are regulated statewide, potentially preventing similar projects from being developed in other residential neighborhoods without adequate community input. The outcome will also determine whether towns can require appropriate industrial siting for energy infrastructure or must accept residential placement.
Meeting Minutes
Key Motions & Votes
Motion: Enter executive session pursuant to general law chapter 30A section 21A(3) to discuss strategy with respect to collective bargaining for seven employee groups and section 21A(2) to conduct strategy sessions for town manager negotiations, to reconvene in open session at approximately 7 p.m. Outcome: Approved. Vote: 5-0 (roll call). (Timestamp: 5:20)
Motion: Adjourn executive session and reconvene in open session. Outcome: Approved. Vote: 5-0. (Timestamp: 1:27:17)
Motion: Approve sister town partnership agreement between the Town of Dorking, England and the Town of Duxbury, MA. Outcome: Approved. Vote: 5-0. (Timestamp: 1:46:31)
Motion: Appoint Nicole Lee to the Duxbury Affordable Housing Trust for a term to expire June 30, 2027. Outcome: Approved. Vote: 5-0. (Timestamp: 3:32:23)
Motion: Grant Mr. Mickey White, representative of Harvard Lights Theatre, one-day wine and malt licenses for Halloween theater performance events from 5 p.m. to 9 p.m. at South Shore Conservatory on October 30 and 31, 2025. Outcome: Approved. Vote: 5-0. (Timestamp: 3:33:55)
Motion: Adjourn the Selectboard meeting. Outcome: Approved. Vote: 5-0. (Timestamp: 3:36:22)
Public Comment
No traditional open forum public comment was offered during the designated public comment period. However, extensive public testimony occurred during the battery storage facility discussion, with approximately 10-12 residents and professionals speaking, including fire safety experts, energy industry professionals, environmental specialists, attorneys, and affected neighbors. Residents expressed unanimous opposition to the residential siting of the facility, citing safety concerns about lithium battery fires, potential groundwater contamination, inadequate emergency response capabilities, environmental impacts, and lack of community benefit. Several speakers challenged New Leaf Energy’s characterization of the project as renewable energy storage and questioned the company’s business model of developing then selling projects without long-term operational responsibility. Representative Ken Sweezey announced state legislation to address BESS facility siting statewide.
What’s Next
The town’s appeal of the land court decision remains pending in Massachusetts Appeals Court with the town’s brief due November 3, 2025, and New Leaf Energy’s response due December 3, 2025. Oral arguments are expected four to six months after briefing concludes, with a decision approximately 130 days following arguments. New Leaf Energy will reschedule their public information session originally planned for October 20, 2025, from 4-6 p.m. at Duxbury Free Library to a later evening time to accommodate working residents. The company committed to providing updated session details to Town Manager René Read. The Selectboard indicated they will consult with town counsel regarding the feasibility of a moratorium on the project and potential involvement of the board of health, which may have regulatory authority over the facility. Stop the Battery Farm 25 neighborhood group will continue advocacy efforts including potential letters to Department of Public Utilities commissioners, the Attorney General, and the Governor. State Representative Sweezey committed to pursuing public hearings on three recently filed bills (House Dockets 4556, 4557, 4558) that would create a statewide moratorium on residential BESS projects and establish mandatory buffer zones. MassDOT will host a public meeting on the Powder Point Bridge replacement project on October 21, 2025, from 6-8 p.m. in the Duxbury High School cafeteria.