Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Conservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge keeping conservation reserve tied to grand list as board debates funding change
Summary
Residents and conservation commissioners urged the Select Board not to convert the conservation reserve fund from a tax‑rate formula to a flat amount, arguing the current mechanism preserves purchasing power with changing property values; the board did approve converting the Old Red Mill reserve fund to a flat $18,560.
Residents and members of Jericho’s conservation commission pressed the Select Board on Jan. 15 to leave the conservation reserve fund tied to the grand list rather than convert it to a fixed dollar amount, saying the original mechanism preserves the town’s ability to leverage funds for land conservation.
"The funding structure for the CRF as it stands now was specifically created for its annual funding to remain proportional to the grand list," Sabina Ernst, a commission member and co‑author of a written comment, told the board. She urged the board to delay any change and work with the conservation commission to set an agreed approach.
Board members and residents debated the mechanics and timing. Several speakers explained that some reserve funds in the town are structured as a tax rate (a percentage of the grand list) to grow with property values, while others historically were set as flat amounts or limited‑term assessments. Members said the choice affects how the FY27 budget presents increases following a reappraisal.
The board did take one immediate action: it approved a motion to change the Old Red Mill Reserve Fund from a small rate‑based assessment to a flat annual amount of $18,560 for the remainder of its 10‑year term (through 2031). That motion was seconded and adopted by voice vote.
On the larger conservation reserve question — a proposed change from 0.005 of the grand list to a fixed $35,000 — the board did not finalize a change. Several members said the proposal raised process and voter‑intent questions and recommended more time and consultation with the conservation commission before asking voters to approve an alteration to a mechanism originally adopted at town meeting.
The discussion underscored broader confusion among residents about how certain town charges appear on tax bills and how reappraisal affects line items differently; several board members asked staff to prepare clearer budget documentation and a timeline of legal and printing deadlines so voters and officials can weigh options ahead of the town meeting.
