Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Incentives topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Economic Development Commission presents revised tax‑incentive policy; selectmen take no vote
Summary
The Economic Development Commission presented a revised tax‑incentive/abatement policy that raises the dollar threshold and shortens maximum abatement terms; selectmen reviewed the presentation and asked staff to circulate the revised draft to town counsel before any formal action.
Town economic development staff and commission members presented a revised tax‑incentive policy to the Board of Selectmen on June 15. The memo and discussion framed the update as an effort to make the town—s policy more aligned with current conditions and to limit long abatement periods.
Rich Evans, chairman of the Economic Development Commission, said the commission unanimously approved the changes at its recent meeting. "I just want to thank you for that... the commission who unanimously approved what's before you today," he said. Commission member John explained the substantive edits: the dollar threshold for eligibility was raised from a previous low (cited as $150,000), the maximum term for incentives was trimmed (the policy now contemplates three and five‑year tiers rather than a seven‑year maximum), and a jobs test (creation of 10 or more full‑time equivalent positions) and a higher dollar threshold were added as optional triggers for the longer term.
Staff noted that the policy remains discretionary and that any application would come before the board of selectmen for final approval. The presenters said they had run an earlier draft by town counsel and would circulate the revised text for further review before the board considers action at a future meeting. Selectmen asked clarifying questions about square footage references, whether mixed‑use or affordable‑housing projects qualify, and how the policy intersects with zoning and as‑of‑right uses.
No formal vote or adoption occurred; the item was presented as a "phase one" informational briefing with follow‑up to come after further counsel review and distribution.
