Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Conservation Chapter 61 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hubbardston assessors review Chapter 61 land applications, flag consistency and posting questions
Summary
The Board of Assessors reviewed dozens of Chapter 61 (chapterland) applications and discussed inconsistent past practice about subtracting the residential "zoning lot," forest management plan requirements, posting rules for Chapter 61B parcels and a request for aerial images of a disputed property on Gardner Road.
The Board of Assessors in the Town of Hubbardston spent the bulk of the meeting reviewing Chapter 61 applications and discussing how the town has applied program rules in recent years.
Board members and staff reviewed multiple 61A (agricultural), 61B (open-space/recreation) and 61 (forestry) applications and flagged several recurring policy questions: whether the town should continue the practice of subtracting a residential "zoning lot" from enrolled acreage, how the board should treat applications that report more than 50% nonproductive land, and when posting of Chapter 61B parcels limits public access.
Why it matters: Chapter 61 classifications affect tax assessments and public access rights. Changes in local practice can alter tax burdens and recreational access for neighbors and hunters, and can affect whether large parcels qualify for preferential tax treatment.
Staff began the section by presenting a batch of applications and repeatedly told the board, "Everything looks good, and I am confident in accepting granting all of it," when recommending approval of straightforward filings, including an application from the Pinecrest Property Association related to its clubhouse. (Staff presentation excerpted in meeting materials.)
Marina Keating, a chapter-land specialist who supplied a written recommendation for one applicant, advised the board on a more complicated application from Matthew Ordolino. Keating's letter, read aloud by staff, said the program "requires a minimum of 5 acres that has been in agricultural use for at least 2 years before applying" and noted that "landowner needs to exclude their residence, other structures, and any land occupied by a dwelling or regularly used for family living." Keating recommended approving Ordolino for the upcoming fiscal year provided he either obtains a forest management plan for wooded acreage by next December or applies for a different chapter program, since more than half of his enrolled acreage appeared nonproductive in GIS review.
Board members debated how strictly to apply an apparent past local practice of deducting a zoning lot (commonly about 1.8 acres in town examples) from applicants' enrolled acreage. One assessor said the town had been removing a zoning-lot area from enrollment calculations "for 10 years," but the board noted it had not found a written policy in the town archive and agreed consistency—and documentation—would be useful going forward.
Members also raised public-access questions tied to Chapter 61B classifications. Resident Mike Stahl (5 Lombard Road) quoted the program guidance during discussion and said the booklet indicated different posting rules depending on the subcategory: "Chapter 61A, agriculture, posting allowed. Chapter 61B open space and recreation ... posting allowed under the recreation category for organizations with paying members." Stahl and others noted that some Pinecrest parcels are in the recreation category and could be posted while retaining tax benefits, and that public understanding of who may legally enter enrolled lands varies among hunters and neighbors.
The board discussed evidence collected for specific parcels. In a separate exchange about a property listed near Gardner Road (addresses referenced as 68/69), a staff member said a recent company flyover showed no buildings on the lot "as of this past spring," and the board asked staff to provide a dated printout of that aerial imagery at the next meeting. The board agreed it would also arrange occasional drive-by inspections to better respond to resident questions about particular parcels.
Board members repeatedly emphasized caution in changing long-standing practice without a documented policy. One member said the town's handling of small parcels under 61A/61B is an "assessor option" and recommended the board consider formalizing the approach in writing.
The assessors did not record formal votes on individual Chapter 61 applications in the transcript. Staff recommended approvals for many routine applications; several applications with shortfalls (for example, applicants reporting slightly less income than the handbook threshold) were discussed with a suggestion to approve this year and require full compliance next year or to notify applicants before the next mailing.
Looking ahead, the board asked staff to: provide copies of the flyover photos for the Gardner Road parcel, draft clearer written guidance on zoning-lot deductions for Chapter 61 applications, and ensure application mailings next year clearly state the per-acre income thresholds and the $5-per-acre figure that applies beyond the first five acres for 61A applicants.
The discussion combined routine approvals, case-by-case recommendations, and a broader policy review the board said it will continue in a future meeting.
