SCITUATE - January 6, 2026 - A citizen petition filed by State Representative Patrick Kearney to redefine “commercial fisherman” sparked a philosophical and economic debate about the future of Scituate Harbor, while the Select Board unanimously approved a five-year plan to increase mooring and slip fees to fund critical infrastructure.
The Full Story
The soul of Scituate’s working waterfront took center stage Tuesday night as State Representative Patrick Kearney presented a petition to amend the town’s general bylaws. The proposal seeks to broaden the definition of “commercial fisherman” to include for-hire charter captains who hold specific federal and state permits. Kearney argued the change is necessary to ensure “equity” and access for the “blue economy,” including charter boats that bring tourism dollars to the town but are currently often relegated to long recreational waiting lists for moorings.
“This article isn’t about me today,” Kearney said. “It’s about protecting opportunities for the next generation to engage in commercial fishing and the maritime economy in this harbor.” [55:18]
The proposal drew sharp pushback from traditional commercial fishermen—lobstermen and groundfish trawlers—who fear that expanding the definition will dilute the limited pool of commercial moorings. Speakers argued that “true” commercial fishing involves selling a catch to make a living, distinct from carrying passengers for hire. Several commercial fishermen expressed concern that wealthy hobbyists could buy the requisite permits to jump the line for a mooring, displacing those whose livelihoods depend solely on the catch.
“If we only have a few moorings, they go to the guy who is going to actually make this his career, not do a dozen [charter] shots a year.” — Kevin, Commercial Fisherman [01:30:14]
While no vote was taken on the petition itself—it will head to the April 13th Town Meeting as submitted—the Board encouraged all stakeholders, including the Waterways Commission and Harbor Master, to continue the dialogue. Board members noted that while the petition highlights a valid problem regarding harbor access and the changing economy, the current language might need refinement to avoid unintended consequences.
Waterways Fees to Rise In a move with immediate financial impact, the Board unanimously approved a five-year rate structure for harbor fees. Starting in FY26, mooring fees will increase by $1 per foot every other year (FY26, FY28, FY30). Slip fees at Cole Parkway and Scituate Marine Park will rise by approximately 8-10% in FY27, FY29, and FY31.
The plan also introduces a new “Premium Slip” designation for specific outer slips that can accommodate larger vessels, which will see an additional $10 per foot increase annually for the next two years. Vice Chair Susan Harrison explained the hikes are necessary to keep up with inflation, fund rising electricity costs, and build reserves for major capital projects like dredging and pier reconstruction without relying on a Proposition 2½ override.
Other Business
Glades Road Exercise Zone: Residents of the Minot and Glades neighborhoods debated a petition to create a permanent “exercise zone” on Glades Road. Proponents argued the narrow road is heavily used by pedestrians and cyclists and needs protection from traffic. Opponents and the Board noted that the area is a public way and that recent striping changes were made to improve safety. The Board agreed to conduct a traffic study during the summer peak season before making final decisions.
Alcohol License Fees: For the first time since 2016, the Board updated the fee schedule for liquor licenses, approving an approximate 10% increase to bring Scituate in line with neighboring towns.
Five Corners Traffic: The Board discussed engaging a consultant to study the “Five Corners” intersection (First Parish, Cudworth, and Beaver Dam roads) to prepare for potential traffic impacts from future affordable housing developments at the Senior Center site.
Why It Matters
The definition of a “commercial fisherman” dictates priority access to scarce harbor moorings. Expanding this definition could shift the demographic of the harbor from traditional trawlers and lobster boats to sport fishing and tourism vessels, fundamentally altering Scituate’s identity as a “heritage harbor.” Meanwhile, the approved rate hikes ensure the town can maintain its aging maritime infrastructure but will increase the cost of boating for residents and commercial operators alike.
Official Minutes & Data
Key Motions & Votes
Motion: To approve the five-year schedule for mooring, slip, and user fees, including a $1/ft biennial increase for moorings and the creation of “Premium Slip” rates.
Vote: Unanimous (5-0) [02:38:43]
Motion: To approve increases for liquor license fees (approx. 10% increase) and remove the “cordial and liqueurs” fee.
Vote: Unanimous (5-0) [01:16:11]
Motion: To award contracts to TL Edwards (roadway management) and WL French (debris disposal).
Vote: Unanimous (5-0) [02:45:48]
Motion: To appoint members (Matthew Goehlert, Laura Joyce, Matt Morrow, Caroline Meehan, Liam J. Slein, Kathleen Eustace) to the Cushing School Site Land Reuse Committee.
Vote: Unanimous (5-0) [03:03:52]
Public Comment
Jordan: Thanked the Board for the Egypt Beach sanitation facility and requested a similar facility for Peggotty Beach in 2026. [01:22]
Kyle: Advocated for the Glades Road Exercise Zone to protect walkers and cyclists. [32:38]
Multiple Fishermen/Captains: Spoke during the petition hearing regarding the commercial fisherman definition, debating the costs of operation, the validity of “for-hire” fishing as commerce, and the scarcity of moorings.
What’s Next
April 13, 2026: The “Commercial Fisherman” definition petition and the “Glades Road Exercise Zone” petition will appear on the Annual Town Meeting warrant for a voter decision.
Summer 2026: A traffic and safety data study will be conducted on Glades Road.
Source Video: Scituate Community Television Scituate Select Board Meeting - 01-06-2026
The scarcity economics here are really what drives the whole debate. Limited mooring spots create a zero-sum game where expanding one group's access automatically reduces another's. Grew up near a similar harbor where the commercial vs recreational tension played out over decades, and it always came down to whos livelihood depends on direct waterfront access. The concern about wealthy hobbyists gaming the permit system is legit, but the counterargument about tourism dollars supporting the broader economy isnt wrong either. What's missing from the definition debate is maybe some kind of tiered priority system that weights actual economic dependence on the resource. The pier reconstruction funding linkage to fee increases is smart politically, hard to argue against maintainence when infrastructure is crumbling.