Acton assessor outlines who gets tax relief, highlights new state option to incentivize affordable rentals

CJ Carroll, Acton’s principal assessor, told the Select Board on Sept. 8 that the town provided just under $670,000 in tax relief in 2025 through a suite of exemptions for seniors, veterans, surviving spouses and other qualifying residents.

Carroll said the town’s “circuit breaker” program — which piggybacks on the state income-tax credit — helps residents whose property tax exceeds a share of their income. “Here in Acton it ensures that real estate taxes do not exceed 10% of the adjusted gross income of the individual,” Carroll said, adding that the exemption is capped at 50% of the taxes charged in a year. He said Acton receives about 20 circuit-breaker applicants annually, and the average applicant receives roughly $2,000; he noted the town paid about $42,000 under that program last year.

The circuit breaker requires applicants to have claimed the state’s circuit-breaker credit on the prior year’s Massachusetts tax return (form CB‑1), Carroll said, and that the assessor’s office and Council on Aging provide tax‑return assistance to seniors who need help completing documents.

Why it matters: Carroll framed the presentation as an inventory of tools the town already uses and as background for considering a newer option created in 2024 by the state. The new statute could give Acton a way to encourage long-term affordable rentals without creating deed restrictions.

Carroll described Chapter 59, Section 50 — the 2024 option — as an incentive the town could adopt to reduce taxes for property owners who rent portions of their property at rates aligned with HUD affordability guidelines. Under the statute, any exemption amount must be no greater than the percentage of the structure’s qualifying square footage (for example, renting 50% of a home at qualifying rents limits the exemption to 50% of the tax reduction). Carroll said the law also caps income limits at 200% of area median income and that the town can set local terms and verification requirements.

Carroll said he had spoken with the Division of Local Services databank and learned that Harwich has used the provision in a way to discourage short‑term rentals and encourage owners to lease long term to local workers. He said Acton would need to study how to structure a local program so the economics work for property owners and produce real affordable units.

Next steps: Carroll said he will meet with the Board of Assessors and conduct a study with the regional housing services office (RHSO) on affordability numbers and potential program design. If the board and assessors support a local approach, the measure would require adoption at Town Meeting before it could take effect.

Carroll stressed practical verification concerns raised by Select Board members: the most straightforward documentation to establish tenant income is an income‑tax return, which could complicate applications because the exemption is earned by the property owner but depends on tenant income. "When the application is taken in by our office... the two main [documents] would be the lease and potentially income‑tax returns of the tenant," Carroll said. He said he would explore whether other forms of verification might be permitted.

Board reaction and concerns: Select Board members expressed interest but urged caution about logistics and unintended consequences. Jim (Select Board member) asked who would verify tenant eligibility; Carroll said the assessor’s office would require documentation and he would follow up on allowable documents. David (Select Board member) suggested encoding key terms — such as the local percentage or dollar cap — in a bylaw rather than relying only on policy, so the rules are transparent. Alicia (Select Board member) and others raised practical concerns about tenants signing leases in expectation of a post‑hoc rent reduction and landlords potentially shifting costs to non‑qualifying units; Carroll and other board members said those are questions the study should address.

Carroll’s summary: “It’s very flexible the way the law is written,” he said, and emphasized the need for local study and RTR (regional housing services) input before bringing language to Town Meeting.

Ending: The Select Board asked staff to continue work with the assessors and the RHSO and to return with a study and draft implementation options before any final local adoption.