Committee tables decision on 10.448-acre Mountain Road parcel under Chapter 61; requests legal analysis before June 17

The Development and Governmental Relations Committee on June 2 tabled a decision on a 10.448‑acre parcel on Mountain Road that the owner has offered for sale after enrolling the land in Massachusetts Chapter 61A (agricultural/open‑space tax program). The parcel’s bona fide offer is $215,000. The committee asked City legal staff to review whether the city can (1) exercise its right of first refusal on the whole parcel, (2) transfer the right to a conservation organization, or (3) exercise the right only for a portion of the parcel and allow a different future use for the street‑front acreage.

Yoni (Conservation) summarized the item and said the Conservation Commission took up the matter on May 22 and recommended transferring the city’s right of first refusal to Kestrel Land Trust, which indicated it would be willing to accept the right and proposed either holding the land under a pilot payment agreement or reselling to a private conservation buyer. “They would be interested in purchasing the property,” Yoni said, citing conservation values including a section of Bridal Brook and the East Mountain ridge.

Bridget (Kestrel) told the committee Kestrel’s board had approved accepting the right of first refusal and that the land trust’s plan would be to act as an intermediary and sell to a private conservation buyer; Kestrel said it would explore interim pilot payments to the city and options for placing conservation restrictions on the back acreage while allowing developable frontage to be used differently.

Attorney Michael Bissonnette told the committee the Chapter 61 process gives the municipality 120 days from the owner’s notice to declare its intent to act (acquire, waive or transfer the right) and then an additional 90 days to close if it exercises the right. He said the council should move with care because the statute restricts how the right may be transferred and cited case law requiring careful structuring of partial acquisitions or restrictions.

Councilors asked for a side‑by‑side analysis showing the tax, conservation and legal outcomes for alternatives: (A) city acquisition and subsequent disposition, (B) transfer of the right to Kestrel with conditions, and (C) waiver of the right allowing private sale. Several councilors urged exploring an arrangement that would protect the most environmentally sensitive acreage while preserving developable street frontage for housing to boost tax rolls and residential capacity.

The committee voted to table the item and requested Attorney Bissonnette provide a legal memo and options analysis in time for City Council consideration on June 17 (the committee also noted the 120‑day statutory window).