19 January 2009
 
Walpole Land Purchase Stalled
Further due diligence required!
Post a comment (login required)

Ed. Note: This story appeared this morning in the Eagle Times. If anybody would like a free five-week trial subscriptipon to the Eagle Times, let me know! Chuck Bingtaman

Walpole Town Land Purchase Stalled

by Chuck Bingaman, Contributing Writer

       It was back to the drawing board Friday night for the Walpole Conservation Commission's effort to spend $270,000 of town trust funds for  21.45 acres on Rt. 12 to add to the Fanny Mason Forest.
 
      What appeared to be an almost done deal stalled when Town Trustee of Trust Funds Joe Dion read an email received earlier in the day from the Attorney General's office stating conditions under which the trustees could disperse the funds.  In its decision to recommend the sale, the Commission had not followed required steps of getting an up-to-date title search, a land survey, a fair market appraisal and an environmental hazards review.
 
    "Until you satisfy these requirements," Dion said, "We're not writing a check. We'd violate our oath to protect the town's money!"
 
    Conservation Commission Chair Marcia Galloway responded that "this is information we didn't have." But before she ended the hearing, Dion added that any costs of the land purchase--appraisal, land survey, etc.--could not be paid for by trust funds and would have to be fronted by someone else.  And audience member Robert Kimball urged the Commission to hold another hearing on the matter after it gets an appraisal on the land "because I don't think the town trust fund should pay more than the land's worth." 
 
    In truth the Commission's recommendation faced pointed opposition even before Dion dropped his bomb.  Lyn Cooke noted that the current owners of the land, Suzanne and John Hodgkins, had purchased it in July 2006 for $190,000, and "the real estate market has not gone up in the past few years!"  Cooke also took issue with the Commission's argument that the added land would facilitate logging in the Fanny Mason Forest saying that "my idea of conservation is not a lot of activity! I also wonder at this point," she added, "if we can afford to take more land off the tax rolls at a time when we need the revenue.  We just have no reason to spend our funds on an overpriced package like this one!"
 
    Commission members noted that the Hodgkins had improved that property with a three-sided 36' by 22' pole barn, a 700-foot entry road, tree plantings and underground utilities and that future logging in the forest would generate more income for the trust.  Selectman Sheldon Sawyer added that the funds for the proposed purchase had come from an original gift of $10,000 from Fanny Mason put in trust in 1949 and that has grown to more than $600,000 at present.  No tax funds would be involved in the purchase.
 
    But Walpole CPA Robert Kimball argued that the proposed purchase offered "no value" to the town.  He said the parcel's improvements were not needed for the land's claimed conservation uses and the town could do any intended logging in the forest without buying the new parcel.  Kimball added that its location off Rt. 12 might merely encourage problems of illegal activities occasionally seen in a nearby rest area. Finally, Kimball argued that, by leaving the 21.45 acres for residential development, the town could realize $1.5 million over the next ten years through saving and continuing to invest the $270,000 and by collecting property taxes on new residential lots on the land. "For $1.5 million, we don't need 21.45 acres of land!"
 
    Robert Anderson of Old Keene Road, whose land abuts the east side of the parcel in question, spoke in favor of the town's purchasing the land.  "We do enjoy the Fanny Mason Forest.  It's a pleasant, enjoyable place that the town should protect and extend."  Anderson also argued that "we and our neighbors struggle now with having enough water in our wells and prefer the idea of conservation to having additional houses built in the adjoining area. We like the idea of conservation."    Finally Anderson said that he would work with the town to provide public access to the forest off of Old Keene Road and through his land if the new parcel were purchased.  Anderson also read a letter from his next door neighbors, Susan and David Howell, stating their support for the purchase of the parcel that abuts their land as well and for improved access to the Fanny Mason Forest.
 
    Commission Chair Galloway ended the hearing saying "we've got work to do!"
 
                                    --30--
 
    

 

 


 

 

Posted by Chuck Bingaman at 2:10 PM | Comments (2)
 
Subscription Options

You are not logged in, so your subscription status for this entry is unknown. You can login or register here.

Re: Walpole Land Purchase Stalled
I'd suggest that Bob Kimball's theory about future value of tax money from this property is not accurate. There have been over a dozen studies in NH of the Cost of Community Services, and many dozens more around the country, for different types of development. All are very consistent. Residential development is consistently tax negative and the costs are greater than the additional revenues. The one exception in NH was for a community of mostly second homes where the costs were about $0.97 for every $1.00 of taxes paid in.) The methodology of doing these COCS studies is well established and has been used for at least two decades or longer. When such empirical data contradicts a theory it is time to change the theory. (Bob Kimball mentioned the decreasing school population. By the way, despite that observation about our decreasing school population the Education portion of our property taxes have increased at more than double the rate of inflation since 2000.

Posted by melschupack on January 19, 2009 at 2:27 PM

Re: Walpole Land Purchase Stalled
From a far, from reading the Walpolean, it seems voices from the Walpole village are a bit spastic. When a resident decides to subdivide their land for development cries are heard how the land should be left as open space. And now, when someone offers to sell their land to a trust that will keep it in open space, we hear how this will potentially deny the village needed revenue were the land to be developed. What goes here? From David Howell

Posted by howells on January 24, 2009 at 7:54 PM

Post a comment (login required)