Sam Little, a Brookfield resident, asked the Selectmen to help clarify public ownership of a small state-owned access lot on Kingswood Lake after he said he and his family were confronted by an on-site property owner while using the state-owned lot.

At the meeting Little described the incident as “jarring” and said the person who confronted him was an elderly man who “yelling at me to leave.” Little said he recorded the encounter and asked the Selectmen to consider placing a sign marking the state-owned lot or to endorse a letter he would send to state officials asking them to mark the property.

Little told the board the parcel is identified in local records as Town Lot Number 11, Town ID 323, Map Sheet 17 and is about 0.3 acres. He said the state took ownership of the lot in 1967 and cited state materials he said identify Kingswood Lake as publicly accessible. Little said he was not seeking to litigate easement rights at the meeting but wanted the town to help make the ownership clear so residents could point to evidence when confronted.

Selectmen and staff responded that the town is not in the practice of placing signs on property owned by others and that the Ellis Hatch Wildlife Management Area signage, for example, was placed by the State of New Hampshire. A Selectman noted that the state retains the parcel in part to allow equipment access for dam maintenance, and another participant said the state would not deed the lot to the town for that reason.

Board members also noted that the town previously considered purchasing or acquiring additional access or easements for this location. A board member recalled a warrant article in 2020 proposing town acquisition or funding related to access on Cates Lane; the town vote on that article, the speaker said, was about 54 against and 14 in favor.

No formal motion to place signage on the lot or to draft an endorsement was recorded. The discussion concluded with the board suggesting Little could draft a letter for their consideration or pursue fundraising for signage, but the board declined to place signs on state-owned property at the meeting.

Why it matters: Public access to waterways and clarity about property ownership affect recreational use and safety. The resident requested action intended to prevent future confrontations, but the Selectmen described legal and practical limits on the town’s authority to place signage on state or private land.

Next steps: The Selectmen suggested the resident may submit a draft letter for the board to consider endorsing and discussed potential non-town-funded signage or state action; no specific follow-up commitment or schedule was set at the meeting.