Wellesley residents urge Select Board to keep 40‑acre MassBay forest off surplus list; board moves to executive session on potential litigation

Dozens of residents urged the Wellesley Select Board on Jan. 6 to remove 40 acres of MassBay Forest at 40 Oakland Street from the Commonwealth's surplus‑land inventory, and the board voted unanimously to enter executive session to discuss strategy for potential litigation over the land.

Lisa Moore, a Wellesley resident and environmental educator, told the board she had written to Governor Healey and asked the town to “remove the 40 acres of MassBay Forest at 40 Oakland Street from the surplus land inventory list,” saying the proposed sale contradicts the Governor’s 25‑year biodiversity initiative and stressing the value of “preserving mature forests rather than trying to rebuild destroyed ecosystems.”

Other residents raised similar concerns. Philip Hahnfeldt of Chestnut Street questioned whether non‑sale options, such as acquisition by a conservation trust supported by the public, had been explored. Christine Duvivier of Pine Street said the town faces two “false trade‑offs” in the discussion — that the forest must be destroyed to fund a MassBay building and that it must be cleared to produce affordable housing — and described the site as a Metro‑Boston resource used by residents of surrounding communities. Ellen Fine (Needham) raised climate and potential indigenous historic/cultural concerns, while Caroline Wilson and Paul Derrickson described heavy local recreational use and the rarity of an urban‑proximate reservation.

After public comment, Chair Marjorie Freiman made a motion at 7:45 p.m. to enter executive session “to conduct strategy for potential litigation with the Commonwealth regarding the disposition of surplus MassBay Community College land,” citing Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 30A, §21(a)(3). The motion, made by Colette Aufranc and seconded by Thomas Ulfelder, passed by roll call vote, all aye (5–0). The board invited Town staff and outside counsel to join the executive session and said it would return only to adjourn in open session.

The executive session motion records that the chair had concluded discussion in open session would be detrimental to the town’s position. No formal decision on the disposition of the land was announced in open session; the motion moved the matter into closed deliberations with counsel.

The Select Board is scheduled to meet next on Jan. 13; the public record from the executive session will be limited to the statutory disclosures required when the board returns to open session.