Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wenham resident urges town to address service gaps for 55+ developments
Summary
A Wenham resident told the Select Board that three 55+ developments pay full property taxes but receive limited municipal services — no town trash, recycling or sidewalk snow removal — and asked which town body can revisit the subdivision agreements that created that status.
Sanford Kellerer, a resident of 32 Pin Hill Road, told the Wenham Select Board on March 18 that people living in three 55‑and‑older developments pay full property taxes but do not receive routine municipal services such as trash pickup, recycling, sidewalk snow removal or road maintenance.
"It just seems wrong, unfair, unjust," Kellerer said, asking the board who to contact to pursue changes to the arrangements that leave those communities with private contractors for basic services. He added that the issue felt especially urgent while the town is preparing to fund an expensive school project.
Board members and staff directed Kellerer to consult the Planning Board and the subdivision decision documents that approved the developments. The Town Administrator and others explained that a flexible‑development or special‑permit decision at the time of subdivision typically determines whether a roadway is public (and therefore eligible for municipal services) or private, and that prior Select Board choices about right of first refusal and land purchase can also be relevant.
Planning Board Vice Chair Dan Pascarell and staff members said the Planning Board’s records and the town planner’s office are the appropriate places to start. The board suggested Kellerer contact Margaret Hoffman, the town planner, for guidance on how to request an amendment or a review of prior subdivision approvals.
The Select Board did not make any immediate policy changes at the meeting; members encouraged the resident to gather the subdivision documents and pursue the Planning Board process if the group wishes to seek modifications to earlier approvals or the status of roads and associated services.
Kellerer’s remarks punctuated the public‑comment period and prompted staff to outline where the legal and administrative records live rather than promise an immediate change.
