A couple of cases in point: When we voted to construct a new town hall on Evergreen Street, that action served to render two buildings – the Faunce School on Green Street, as well as its across-the-street neighbor, our Town House – essentially vacant.

All will agree, I imagine, that the new Town Hall is a vast improvement over what was previously used to conduct town business. Yet, the end result is that we have two structures with an uncertain future. Why didn’t we include the disposition or eventual use of these buildings in the overall Town Hall construction plan?

Unfortunately, this problem is not limited to just two buildings.

Another case: Some years ago we acquired the brick building on Green Street from what was at the time New England Telephone. And, with that move, our library was upgraded. Yet, the Summer Street structure that was known as the F.C. Adams Public Library for so many decades was vacated, and is in fact today the subject of much debate among activists who want to convert it into a museum.

Add the Maple Avenue School and the Reed Community Building to this list and you see a pattern developing. We are a town that, when it comes to new structures, takes two steps forward and then five steps back.

We have at least five buildings that are vacant or nearly vacant – and no definite plans for their future. This is something we as taxpayers should insist is in place before we continue our building plans.

In several instances, the town’s hands are tied. The original Adams Library building, deeded to the town, stipulates that the building must be used in certain ways – a library or museum. So that eliminates the possibility of hanging out a "For Sale By Owner" sign.

As for the Town House at 23 Green Street, some complicated land disputes between the town and the Unitarian Universalist church over who owned the building and who owned the land would have made attempting to sell that structure a difficult if not impossible task.

I’m not a selectman, and have no immediate wish to add that distinction to my resume, but if I were, I would absolutely say "thanks but no thanks" to any donations of land or buildings that come with strings attached. I wasn’t around when these two deals were struck, but in my view, if a building isn’t ours to do with as the taxpayers freely decide, it’s not worth having.

This whole process is akin to buying a new car every two or three years without trading the existing one as part of the deal – and then keeping all those old, unregistered vehicles in the driveway. Kingston has a law forbidding that; we should have a similar policy where town-owned buildings are concerned.

The buildings that the town owns which are unencumbered – that is, buildings with no restrictions as to their use – should be disposed of if we do not have any immediate use for them. And we should make that a part of the equation before going too much further ahead with construction projects.

I don’t know, for example, if the Reed building is suitable for conversion into a Senior Center. It’s certainly spacious enough, and with the ballfield in the back, there is probably enough room for parking. But if it isn’t, and there is no other use for it on the horizon, we should sell it. Same for the Maple Avenue School; if we don’t have a use for it, why are we hanging on to it?

Regarding the F.C. Adams Public Library (the original), it’s a stately building that I agree would make an excellent museum – hopefully without an impact on taxpayers. Maybe we could use the proceeds from selling some of our vacant buildings to make that a reality.

I understand that there are zoning considerations, and the wishes of the neighborhoods to be considered in evaluating options for any building. And trust me, I’m not suggesting that we open a pizza parlor up on Maple Avenue or Green Street. But perhaps office condominiums or some other use could provide new life for the buildings and new revenues for the town.

You’ve heard of our federal government’s "no child left behind" policy? May I humbly suggest that we adopt a "no building left behind" program here in Kingston. We’ve made a good start in upgrading facilities for the town. But let’s not forget to pick up after ourselves.

Join Discussion: TKO Talk Back! - Readers Respond to the News