The meeting began with a lengthy discussion about whether AHT could discuss a certain matter in an open meeting or if it was required to go into Executive Session to discuss it. The topic (not on the agenda) was a letter about an Adverse Possession lawsuit filed (evidently) against the Town and AHT. (See Editor’s note below) A related matter was whether AHT should have a separate lawyer or should use Town Counsel. In an earlier meeting AHT voted in the affirmative that AHT should have their own separate counsel.
One member pointed out that AHT “is in no man’s land” – that is – AHT is not a part of the Town or Town government the way a board, committee, or commission is. For example, AHT must be audited separately from the town. (See Above the Fold below)
AHT decided to discuss, in Executive Session on February 6, the lawsuit, legal representation, and how or whether to answer the suit.
The first item on the agenda, a report about the grant request submitted to the Community Preservation Committee, was not discussed.
AHT moved on to the report from DPC Engineering LLC about the estimated cost per unit for the sewer work if Glendale Middle Road were developed. It came in at $140,000 per unit. Apparently whether they build 20 units or ten units, that cost is roughly the same.
The consultant explained that the Town has the capacity for the 28 homes extant on Glendale Middle Road, for the development under consideration at 10 or 20 units, as well as Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) if current residents want to build ADUs.
More than one member of AHT pointed out that the figure per unit is sewer only and does not include water, road, or utilities. It appeared to them that predevelopment costs put the production of affordable housing out of reach.
Chair Ranne Warner, the only member of AHT who is/was a developer, explained that pre-development costs – water, sewer, utilities, and roads – frequently put building houses that can be sold at an affordable price out of reach.
Warner continued, that is why the government subsidizes these costs in grants, bringing the final cost per unit down. Grants are available that reduce the pre-development cost to the developer enabling the developer to sell for less.
Lis Wheeler said she preferred to develop in places that have water and sewer like Pine Street.
Editor’s note: During the meeting, the specifics of the adverse possession lawsuit were not shared even though the law states, “In Massachusetts, a lawsuit filed in court is considered public information, meaning anyone can access details about the case, including the parties involved, court dates, and filings.”
In general, an adverse possession lawsuit is a legal proceeding that involves a claim to land owned by another party. The disseisor, a person who takes land without the legal owner’s permission, is the claimant. The claimant must prove they have been in physical possession of the land in Massachusetts for: 20 years.
Requirements for adverse possession include – Open and notorious: The claimant must use the land in a way that is obvious and visible to the owner. Actual possession: The claimant must have actively used the land for the required amount of time. Exclusive possession: The claimant must be the only person using the land. Adverse possession: The claimant must have used the land without the owner’s permission.
Examples of use are: Using a private road or driveway without permission; Developing an unused parcel of land for agriculture; Disputes over property lines or driveway boundaries
