HAVERHILL — During its meeting on Tuesday, May 5, 2026, the Haverhill City Council voted to approve a revised request from Broco Energy to store an additional 30,000 gallons of propane in an aboveground storage tank at 168 Hale Street, after area residents raised safety concerns during a public hearing.
The original request also included three new propane transport trailer trucks, each with a 12,600-gallon capacity, totaling 37,800 gallons of truck storage, along with 8,000 gallons in miscellaneous empty customer tanks, in addition to the proposed 30,000 gallons of propane storage in an aboveground tank.
Robert Brown, president of Broco Energy, told the council the company has grown far beyond its original five-year plan of three trucks and 3,000 customers, making the additional storage necessary.
“When we started the company there was no grand plan,” Brown said. “The five-year business plan was to have three trucks and serve 3,000 customers, and we’re grateful that we’ve had the growth that we have had, but with the growth comes a lot of capital investments that we’ve made. Coming into Haverhill has been great. This is a necessary evil for our company to have alongside our heating oil, as heating oil is kind of getting pushed off.”
Brown said the company was working with the fire department on fire suppression and other safety measures. He also said the project would create about six to eight jobs, including opportunities for trade school graduates and apprentices.
During the public hearing, Michael Russo, of Burke Street, said the area has changed significantly since his family bought a home there in 1962.
“Today, it is a densely developed high intensity industrial site operating in the middle of a residential area,” Russo said. “The change alone demands much higher level of scrutiny before any further expansion is approved.”
Judy Hinkle, also of Burke Street, said she was not speaking from a place of opposition to Broco Energy, but out of concern for public safety and the neighborhood.
“Expansion introduces a cumulative risk,” Hinkle said. “It’s not simply a matter of adding additional storage. It’s also an increase in the volume, the frequency, the complexity of operations involving hazardous materials, that this inevitably raises the potential for accidents and issues to occur. I’ve seen that firsthand, just living in the neighborhood, there have been some fires.”
Haverhill Fire Chief Christopher Cesati then addressed the council, starting off by stating that he was not at the hearing to support or oppose the request, but to answer questions about fire safety.
Chief Cesati said there have been “a couple of fires” at the Hale Street site, including one that came in off the CSX rail line and was not related to anything Broco had control over, and another involving an oil truck that was fueling.
On Dec. 14, 2021, a fire at the company’s Hale Street fuel oil terminal destroyed seven vehicles after overflowing oil accidentally ignited when vapor came into contact with a tanker truck’s hot engine, according to WHAV.
Chief Cesati described the oil truck fire as “a learning curve for all of us,” but said safety measures were put in place afterward and department members were shown where those safeguards are now located.
“We were proactive after the fact, but it took some actions to improve on that,” Chief Cesati said.
With respect to whether Broco Energy was meeting code compliance with national firefighting standards, Chief Cesati said, “Without meeting code, they would never get a permit.”
After the public hearing was closed, the council took up Broco Energy’s request for deliberation. Ward 1 Councilor Ralph Basiliere questioned Brown about the company’s expansion, specifically Brown’s earlier statement that there was “not a grand plan here,” saying he wanted the record to reflect that Broco had intended to grow its Haverhill operation.
“If you bought a company and you started marketing it and you were mindful that you could expand the capacity and you were applying for SPUR grants, and you are actually clearing land, and here we are eight years later, would you agree that that looks like a business plan, but I won’t even call it a grand plan,” Basiliere said.
Brown replied stating that he was referring to the company’s early days, when he was a firefighter who started a side business. “I just retired from the fire department back in July of 2025,” Brown added.
Basiliere responded stating, “It just seems to me, sir, that if you bought a business in town and you are mindful of a higher capacity, and you were applying for grants to expand your business, be it bringing in biodiesel or whatever, that there was a plan to expand. Can we agree on that?”
“Oh yeah, yeah,” Brown replied, adding, “I was talking about inception of the business and how we don’t grow beyond our means. So when I say ‘grand plan,’ we don’t know what this landscape is. And to tell you the truth, three, four years ago, the landscape wasn’t looking very good for a company like ours, and we almost threw in the towel.”
Basiliere said he had a “hard time supporting” the request and considered whether the matter should be continued so neighbors could review additional emergency plans. The discussion ultimately moved forward.
As councilors continued discussing the scope of the request, Brown agreed to narrow the proposal. The amendment removed the three additional propane transport trailer trucks and the 8,000 gallons listed for miscellaneous empty customer tank inventory, leaving the request limited to the 30,000 gallons of aboveground propane storage. The council approved the amendment 10-0, with one councilor absent.
Then the council voted on the revised main request for just the additional 30,000 gallons of aboveground propane storage, with the fire department’s conditions attached. That final vote passed 6-4, with one councilor absent.
