Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Longner Property topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee discusses buying 102‑acre parcel for fields; members warned acquisition will affect taxes and housing pressure
Summary
The committee discussed a warrant article to acquire roughly 102 acres (Longner property) for athletic fields and open space, including use constraints, a $475,000 capital reserve offset, and an estimated $27 peak annual tax impact on a $475,000 home; members emphasized field shortages and the risk of large‑scale development if the town does not act.
Committee members discussed a warrant article proposing purchase of the Longner property (described in discussion as about 102 acres) to provide athletic fields, trails and long‑term community space. One member said the town holds a right of first refusal on the southern parcels and that parts of the land are buildable while other parts lie in an occasional flood zone.
"The total parcel of the Longner property is a 102 acres," a committee member said, describing two owners (siblings) holding north and south parcels and noting the southern parcels are the ones the town could acquire via right of first refusal. The member also warned that, under some development scenarios, the property could accommodate a substantial number of housing units: "it could have at least 400 apartments that could go in there," which the committee said would increase traffic and strain town facilities.
On financing, the committee member outlined available resources and the likely tax effect: the town could apply roughly $475,000 from a capital reserve fund to the purchase and would issue bonds for the remainder; the member estimated the first year would amount to about one penny on the tax rate and said the peak annual impact would be roughly $27 on the property tax bill of a $475,000 home. Committee members asked staff to supply clear bond numbers, a formal tax‑impact calculation and further analysis of flood‑prone areas before the warrant proceeds to voters.
Members framed the acquisition as an affordable means to secure fields and reduce the town's reliance on off‑site facilities (boosters currently rent fields in neighboring Bedford) and to provide a location for community events. The committee also discussed coordination with recreation groups and communications to encourage voter support for the warrant article.
Next steps identified: staff will prepare clearer financing and tax‑impact figures for the committee and public, the warrant article remains slated for the upcoming ballot, and the committee will continue outreach to explain field needs and the proposal's long‑term benefits.
