Wayne select board moves to commission appraisal, warns of cost to retain 100 Acre Wood

The Town of Wayne select board on June 24 authorized the town manager to solicit proposals from licensed real‑estate appraisers to produce a market appraisal of the foreclosed “100 Acre Wood” property, a step officials said is needed to calculate the amount the town would have to pay prior owners if it retains the parcel for conservation.

The appraisal is “the first step” to determine the town’s financial exposure under recent changes in state law and a U.S. Supreme Court decision that officials said limit a municipality’s ability to retain excess proceeds from tax‑foreclosed property. Town select board member Henry, summarizing legal background, said, “I believe it’s around a $140,000, with interest,” when asked about the current tax and interest total associated with the parcel.

Why it matters: Wayne voters in 2019 passed a warrant article directing the select board to manage the tract for long‑term conservation and recreation. Under the law described to the board, if the town keeps a tax‑acquired property for a public purpose it must obtain a licensed appraisal, substitute that value for sale proceeds, and pay any excess to the prior owner or their heirs. The appraisal will allow the town to present a concrete price for a special town meeting to decide whether to raise and appropriate funds to keep the property.

Select board member Henry recounted the chain of events: the town foreclosed on the parcel in 2014, pursued a quiet‑title action, and the town meeting later directed conservation use. He told the board the state legislature amended Maine law following a U.S. Supreme Court decision (referred to in the meeting as Tyler v. Hennepin) and that the current Maine statute (effective August 2024, as described by staff) requires appraisal and payment to prior owners if the town retains the land. Henry said the town attorney’s written opinion is that, if the town retains the property, it must hire a licensed appraiser and would likely be required to pay the Pettengill estate the difference between the taxes, fees and expenses the town is entitled to retain and the appraised market value.

Residents and conservation volunteers urged the select board to preserve the land. Margaret, who said she lives across the road from the property, told the board it is “a gem” and that she would “do whatever I can to help raise money.” Ed Ford, another neighbor, noted the parcel’s steep, largely nonbuildable topography and said that could reduce market value. Conservation volunteers and others told the board they can help gather documents and historical records for the appraisal and cost accounting.

Board and staff discussion focused on next steps and timing. Shannon, the town manager, said staff would put an RFP together and seek metrics for choosing an appraiser including cost and turnaround time; one board member noted some appraisal bids received so far ranged “as much as $14,000” depending on the appraiser. Board members also emphasized the statutory timing constraints: appraisals used for the town’s calculation must be current (the packet flagged a 120‑day window and asked for an option for a low‑cost update if a year passes) and fundraising to cover any payment to heirs will take time.

The board directed staff to assemble the town’s out‑of‑pocket costs related to the property (legal fees, taxes, maintenance, advertising, recording and other expenses), noting attorneys had advised volunteer hours are unlikely to be counted as incurred municipal costs under the statute. Conservation commission volunteers offered to assist in locating records, surveys and receipts.

Next steps: staff will issue an RFP for licensed appraisers, compile a detailed accounting of town costs and bring those results back to the select board. The board expects a special town meeting next year to present voters with the choice to raise and appropriate funds to retain the parcel or to authorize disposition per statute. Community members and board members repeatedly noted that any negotiated settlement with the prior owners would remove the statute’s requirements if both parties agree.