Category Archives: Open space

CPA – Medfield is missing out

This week I got the letter below from the Register of Deeds, Bill O’Donnell, which highlights how Medfield loses twice by not having adopted the Massachusetts Community Preservation Act (CPA):

  • first because our residents paid $45,290 in 2014 in Registry of Deeds surcharges to support the CPA, money that then got distributed to other towns, and, then
  • second because Medfield has not adopted the CPA it does not share in the matching state monies given to communities that do participate.

The CPA is akin to a town savings account for three specified areas:

  • historic preservation,
  • affordable housing, and
  • open spaces or recreational uses.

Once a town adopts the CPA, it taxes itself 1-3% extra each year, and the state provides matching monies.  The match started at 100%, but as more towns opted in the match has dropped to around 30% – still free state monies.  A town committee would decide on what to spend the CPA monies.  I heard about lots of uses for CPA funds in other towns at the MMA annual meeting last weekend

For me it is crazy not to pick up the free state monies, if we think/know that we will be spending monies on the three covered areas any time in the future.  It is one clear way to save on our property taxes. The only reason for someone not to want to adopt the CPA is if they do not intend to continue living in Medfield.

Therefore, I will ask that a warrant article be placed on the warrant for the Annual Town Meeting about adopting the CPA.

For more information on the CPA click through to http://www.communitypreservation.org/


COUNTY OF NORFOLK
COUNTY OF PRESIDENTS
REGISTRY OF DEEDS
NORFOLK REGISTRY DISTRICT OF THE LAND COURTWILLIAM P. O’DONNELL
REGISTER OF DEEDS
ASSISTANT RECORDER OF THE
LAND COURT

January 2015

Medfield Board of Selectmen Osier L. Peterson 10 Copperwood Rd. Medfield, MA 02052

Dear Selectman Peterson.

As Register of the Norfolk County Registry of Deeds. I thought the reverse side chart that illustrates the amount of funds generated from the Community Preservation Act (CPA) would be of interest to you. This revenue is based on recorded real estate filings from your community in calendar year 2014.

The Registry, at no cost to the Commonwealth or local communities, collects these revenues for the state when a document is recorded. These monies are then forwarded to the Massachusetts Department of Revenue on a monthly basis. The funds collected by the Commonwealth are then redistributed to communities that have adopted the CPA through a variety of formulas.

The Norfolk County Registry of Deeds which is located at 649 High Street, Dedham. is the principal office for real property in Norfolk County. The Registry is a resource for homeowners, title examiners. mortgage lenders, municipalities and others with a need for secure, accurate, accessible land record information. For assistance please contact our Customer Service Center at (781) 461-6101. or visit our website at http://www.norfolkdeeds.org.

I hope you find this information informative and useful. If I can ever be of assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact me at 781-461-6116 or by email at registerodonnell@norfolkdeeds.org.

Sincerely yours.
William P. O’Donnell
Norfolk County Register of Deeds
WPO/aag
649 HIGH STREET. DEDHAM. MASSACHUSETTS 02026 TELEPHONE: 781-461-6116 FAX: 781-326-4246
EMAIL: registerodonnell@norfolkdeeds.org
http://www.norfolkdeeds.org
You
facebook.com/NorfolkDeeds
twitter.com/NorfolkDeeds □ youtube.com/NorfolkDeeds linkedin.com/company/Norfolk-County-Registry-of-Deeds


NORFOLK COUNTY REGISTRY OF DEEDS
COMMUNITY PRESERVATION ACT (CPA) SURCHARGES BY TOWN FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2014

TOWN TOTAL
AVON $14,950.00
BELUNGHAM $58,070.00
BRAINTREE $116,160.00
BROOEUNE $163,040.00
CANTON $83,640.00
COHASSET $38,980.00
DEDHAM $80,070.00
DOVER $26,170.00
FOXBOROUGH $53,420.00
FRANKLIN $101,410.00
HOLBROOK $37,250.00
MEDFIELD $45,290.00
MEDWAY $44,910.00
MTU IS $26,370.00
MILTON $85,270.00
NEEDHAM $109,060.00
NORFOLK $39,010.00
NORWOOD $79,800.00
PIATNVILLE $26,610.00
QUINCY $244,340.00
RANDOLPH $90,080.00
SHARON $59,550.00
STOUGHTON $94,330.00
WALPOLE $81,880.00
WELLESELY $95,300.00
WESTWOOD $53,710.00
WEYMOUTH $172,260.00
WRENTHAM $44,500.00

 

Hunt Club history lecture next Monday

This from Gil Rodgers of the Norfolk Hunt Club –


David Lewis, Jr., ex-MFH, to Speak on the History of the Norfolk Hunt Club

The featured speaker at the Medfield Historical Society meeting on Monday, November 3, 2014 will be David W. Lewis, Jr. , ex-Master of the Fox Hounds (MFH) (1973 – 1980) and member of the Norfolk Hunt Club.   The narrated slide presentation will be held in the basement of First Parish Unitarian Universalist Church, 26 North Street, Medfield beginning at 7:30 PM.

David is the editor of the definitive book on the history of Norfolk Hunt Club, “The Norfolk Hunt: One Hundred Years of Sport,” 1995. He will talk about the history of (drag) fox hunting with the Norfolk Hunt Club since its origins in 1895 interjecting entertaining stories about some of its prominent members — such as Henry Vaughn (MFH) and Miss Amelia Peabody, and notable events of the Club over the last 100 years — such as annual Farmer’s Day celebration and the traditional Thanksgiving Day hunt.

This is an opportunity to learn first-hand about a tradition that is emblematic of the rich and distinctive culture of Medfield, Dover, Sherborn, and surrounding towns.

Bonds written at 2.577%

Medfield, MA $7,200,000 General Obligation Bonds Net 2.577%

Georgia Colivas, Town Treasurer, received competitive bids from bond underwriters on Wednesday, October 1, 2014, for a $7,200,000, 20-year bond issue. UBS Financial Services Inc. was the winning bidder on the Bonds with an average interest rate of 2.577%. The Town received a total of 10 bids. Bond proceeds will be used to finance land acquisition and water main replacement projects.

Prior to the sale Moody’s Investors Service, a municipal bond credit rating agency, assigned a rating of ‘Aa1’ to the Bonds. The rating agency cited the Town’s sound financial position with healthy reserve levels, stable tax base with strong wealth levels, and history of voter approvals for overrides and exclusions of Proposition 2 ½ as positive credit factors.

The bids for the Bonds were accepted at the offices of the Town’s Financial Advisor, First Southwest Company, at 54 Canal Street in Boston, Massachusetts.


These bonds finance the purchase of the Red Gate Farm property and teh construction of the new water tower at the MSH and the new water main along Hospital Road.

 

 

CPA update

This summary update on the Community Preservation Act from the state Department of Revenue’s Division of Local Services’ e-newsletter:


CPA: Past, Present and Future
Zack Blake – Director of Technical Assistance

Nearly two years ago, Governor Patrick signed into law a number of changes to the Community Preservation Act (CPA). These amendments expanded the acceptable uses for CPA funds and offered communities more flexibility in how these funds are raised. Reflecting back, we thought we would reintroduce readers to CPA by briefly highlighting some of those changes and ways in which communities are taking advantage of them. We also delve into recent collection trends at the state level that impact the distribution of matching funds.

Enacted in 2000 as MGL c. 44B, the CPA enables adopting cities and towns to raise additional revenue beyond the tax levy for community preservation purposes that include providing community affordable housing, protecting open space, preserving historic resources and developing outdoor recreational opportunities.

Under the CPA an adopting city or town elects to implement up to a three percent surcharge on its real estate tax bills. The revenue is deposited into a special revenue fund along with an annual distribution of matching funds from a state trust derived from a surcharge on Registry of Deed recordings. At a minimum, the city or town must spend or reserve ten percent of its annual CPA revenue towards each of the community preservation purposes of open space, historic resources and community housing. Revenue can also be appropriated to a discretionary budgeted reserve, providing the flexibility to fund any CPA purpose until the end of the fiscal year.

Once the CPA is adopted, the community must establish a Community Preservation Committee (CPC). Whether elected or appointed, CPC members are selected from the community’s conservation, historical, planning, park and housing authority boards. The city or town can also choose up to four additional at-large members for a maximum total of nine. Overall, the committee’s role in administering the program locally involves studying the community’s needs, possibilities and resources as they relate to community preservation; accepting and reviewing project proposals; and making recommendations to the legislative body for spending, citing the reasoning behind each choice. Both an affirmative recommendation of the CPC and a legislative body appropriation vote are required to expend CPA funds on a project.

Throughout the last 14 years, CPA has been amended eight times. Early changes largely clarified various aspects of the law or added minor modifications. More recently, however, Chapter 139 of the Acts of 2012, Sections 69-83, contained several significant changes, including an expansion of the allowable CPA spending purposes and the creation of a new option for local CPA funding.

Before the 2012 amendment, communities could use CPA funding to rehabilitate recreational lands only if the recreational land was acquired or created with CPA funding. Today, however, because of the 2012 amendment, communities have the ability to appropriate funds towards previously prohibited recreational-related projects. In expanding the program, these new CPA funding purposes allow cities and towns to rehab existing outdoor recreational spaces and invest in capital improvements to make them more functional for the intended recreational use, including the replacement of playground equipment. Changes in the law also now credit spending on recreational projects towards meeting the annual ten percent open space spending (or reservation) requirements.

In exploring ways in which these changes are expanding CPA spending, we found funds being appropriated to purchase ADA accessible playground equipment, construct a new skate park, resurface outdoor basketball courts, install lighting for a multipurpose athletic field, rebuild a dock landing and create community gardens.

The second significant change in the law offers communities an alternative funding method to supplement the surcharge on real estate tax bills. A community may now adopt CPA, pursuant to MGL c. 44B, s. 3(b1/2), which allows it to approve at least a one percent surcharge on the levy and to appropriate additional revenues up to two percent of the levy from other general fund sources, such as meal and room occupancy taxes. The total surcharge and additional revenue cannot exceed three percent. To date, Somerville and Salem have adopted the CPA through Section 3(b1/2), sometimes referred to as the “blended” method. Quincy and Littleton recently amended its original CPA acceptance by adopting Section 3(b1/2) so that it can appropriate other local revenue into the Community Preservation Fund. Communities that have already adopted CPA, but wish to appropriate other general fund revenues to CPA as described above, must amend their CPA acceptance under MGL c. 44B, s. 16(a) and seek voter approval at a town-wide referendum.

Lastly, a new provision in the law added an optional surcharge exemption for commercial and industrial properties on the first $100k of property value to mirror the existing exclusion for residential property. To add this exemption, an existing CPA community must follow the CPA amendment process, MGL c. 44B, s. 16(a). The law also now requires that preservation restrictions be recorded as separate instruments regarding property acquired with CPA funds to better protect CPA long-term interests, MGL c. 44B, s. 12.

Future Outlook

As of May 2014, 155 communities have accepted CPA with over a billion dollars appropriated to more than 6,000 projects. It is also worth noting that CPA funds have allowed communities to leverage funds from other outside sources that might not otherwise have been available.

This year also marks a point where a larger number of communities are scheduled to vote on whether to adopt CPA than in the past. Several communities are even seeking to increase their levy surcharge, with at least one looking to reduce it. This renewed interest may be the result of the $25 million infusion of surplus state revenue from the Legislature last year along with the potential for more this year. Another motive could be the recent changes in the law expanding the recreational-related purposes cities and towns can fund.

Ria Knapp, Communications Director for the Community Preservation Coalition, says the combination of these two factors sparked the interest of communities that otherwise might not have considered CPA in the past. She adds that “many communities are embracing the new provision in the CPA legislation allowing the rehabilitation of existing parks, playgrounds, and athletic fields,” with “over $40 million in such projects approved recently, and many more proposals being voted on during this spring’s municipal budget process.”

Despite amendments to the law and renewed interest, local advocates are concerned that this year’s state match could be significantly less. Current Registry of Deed collection trends reported by the Department of Revenue are lagging collections of the previous three years. Concern in the real estate market over high home prices and low inventory levels could also continue to hamper buying over the coming months, creating further uncertainty. The rising number of new communities participating in the program also further dilutes the initial distribution of state matching funds.

CPA Trust Fund Collections as of May 2014
.
.
In FY2014, 148 participating communities were eligible for a state match that totaled $54.9 million. Funded through Registry of Deed revenue collections and a one-time infusion of $25 million in state budget surplus, these combined sources allowed for a first round state match of 52.2 percent. Without the additional $25 million appropriation added to the trust fund, cities and towns in the program would have received a first round match of less than 31 percent based on total state funding of $32.7 million.

Although the recent drop in collections at the state level is cause for concern, CPA advocates are applauding the Legislature’s inclusion and the Governor’s signing of the FY2015 budget, which transfers $25 million in state budget surplus to the CPA Trust Fund. Because this additional funding is coming from the state budget surplus, the amount will not be known until the state closes its books on October 31st.


 

TTOR to town – bear it

The letter below from the Trustees of Reservations (TTOR) President and CEO tells Medfield residents that we have to just put up with more mosquitoes because TTOR has decided to not allow spraying on its properties.

Norfolk County Mosquito Control (NCMC) is telling the town that without the larvicide spraying early in the summer, that there will be no effective way to control the large numbers of mosquitoes that we can expect to get later in the summer if there is a flood and the many eggs hatch into mosquitoes.  NCMC also tells the town that teh larvicide they use is some sort of thing that acts only on the mosquito larva, and is bonded to corn I believe it is, so that there is really no risk.

Norfolk County Mosquito Control tried to have its scientists speak to the TTOR scientists, but that does not seem to have resolved things so as to allow spraying on TTOR lands.


Dear Medfield residents,

 

For those of you who frequent our local properties, Rocky Woods, Noon Hill, Rocky Narrows or others in the Charles River Valley area, you may know us and may even be a member.  For those of you not familiar with us, The Trustees of Reservations is the world’s first regional land trust and one of Massachusetts largest conservation organizations with over 113 properties spread across more than 26,000 acres statewide. Our mission is to “hold in trust” (preserve and protect) “reservations” (properties) of scenic, cultural and natural significance for public use and enjoyment.

 

Recently, we have received several requests from Medfield town officials to allow preventive mosquito control on The Trustees of Reservations’ Medfield properties. We have considered these requests seriously since the health and safety of our visitors is of utmost importance to us, as are the fragile ecosystems and wildlife habitats located on our many reservations. We acknowledge that mosquitos are a nuisance and that there may be health risks associated with them in certain areas of the state, including Medfield.

 

In our recent conversations with selectmen, public health officials, and county mosquito control agencies we discussed our decision to opt-out of the town’s chemically-based control measures.  This decision is guided by our own science-based mosquito control policy as well as the guidelines of the Mass Department of Public Health and the Norfolk County Mosquito Control District.  We understand that chemically-based measures may become important in the case of a public health emergency declared by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH), and our policy supports this action should it be necessary.

 

In summary, we are concerned about the potential health risks associated with the mosquito population and will continue to be in dialogue with public health officials and review available data that might inform our policy going forward. We appreciate your patience and understanding as we evaluate next steps.

 

In the meantime, we hope you have a healthy, safe and active summer and remember to use necessary precautions and protective measures when enjoying our properties and being outdoors in general.  Outdoor places contribute to the overall quality of life in our communities and we remain committed to caring for our special places so that they are safe and enjoyable for everyone. For more information on upcoming area events, programs and fun family activities please visit: www.thetrustees.org.

Thank you,

 

Barbara Erickson

Trustees of Reservations President and CEO

Medfield trails maps

Rob Gregg pointed out to me the trail maps (click here) put together by David LaFreniere, formerly of Medfield, for his group, Friends of Medfield Forest and Trails.  Dave has moved from Medfield, but Medfield still has the benefit of his nice website with the maps he put together.   Thanks Rob for that information.

ATM warrant articles

The town is in the process of getting the warrant articles prepared for the annual town meeting (ATM) on April 28.  Click here for the attached is the current iteration of the warrant articles for the ATM.   Some of the articles –

  • authorize leasing the Holmquist land for farming
  • funds to complete the design and pricing of the new public safety building
  •   funds to build the new water tower at the former Medfield State Hospital site
  • whether to regulate public consumption of marijuana
  • whether to use lot 3 on Ice House Road for fields by Medfield Park & Recreation Commission or to lease to a private party to build a Forekicks type facility (Council on Aging has also expressed interest in having housing for 55+ individuals build there as well)
  • whether to fund the Medfield Cultural Council with $4,250 (matching its state grant monies)
  • create a solar photovoltaic zoning district in the existing Industrial Extensive district
  • whether to adopt the stretch building code, so as to allow Medfield to become a Green Community (and get a grant of $148,000)
  • whether to accept a gift of land that would allow for a path from Wild Holly Lane to the Holquist land and Wheelock School
  • whether to adopt the local option meals tax of 0.75%, in order to provide property tax relief

Please also schedule the special town meeting (STM) on March 10 on your calendar, at which time the town will be asked to make the biggest decision of its history, whether to buy the Medfield State Hospital site for the $3.1 m. price the state has offered it.

MSH visioning

Last Saturday the State Hospital Advisory Committee (SHAC) held a visioning session to engage residents in a discussion about the future of the Medfield State Hospital.  Attached is the Agenda and Handout from that session.  The session was spectacularly successful, far exceeding my expectations.  There were many, many ideas floated and discussed, and the final report should make for fascinating reading.  These were my favorite take aways  –

  • per DCAMM, demolishing the building would run the town $11-14 per sq. ft. (all in) and there are about 658,000 sq. ft. of building, so $724K to $921K for the town to demolish all the buildings, including all costs.  Demolition would be cheaper if as planned it was done by the developer, who does not pay prevailing wages.  Everyone agrees the Lee Building should be saved.  The rest could be saved, but probably only at such high costs that Medfield residents will be unlikely to want to pay to save them, as residents would have to do via property tax increases
  • housing for older residents was a common theme
  • much open green space was a common theme, especially the square in the midst of the campus development.
  • include an outdoor public amphitheater – I suggest we locate the gazebo in Medfield at the back of the property so that the guests would actually be seated in the Dover on land that will not otherwise be used
  • Tom Sweeney’s idea to relocate Hospital Road to where it was formerly located (the current access road to McCarthy Park), so as to enlarge the grass expanse and vista at the front of the site

Below is the preliminary report on Saturday from SHAC visioning subcommittee member Ros Smythe, one of the primary planners of the event –

=======================

Visioning Session write up

 

Over 100 residents, including Medfield Selectmen and the Town Manager, and State Senator James Timilty, attended a Visioning Session hosted by the State Hospital Advisory Committee (SHAC) on Saturday, January 11 from 10 AM to 3 PM.   The purpose of the meeting was to educate townspeople on the issues and opportunities surrounding the potential $3.1 million purchase of approximately 137 acres of the hospital property, and to hear what the participants envision for the use of the land, if purchased.  Professional consultants, Ted Brovitz of Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates and Peter Flinker of Dodson and Flinker ran the session.

 

The morning was comprised of many presentations about different aspects of the history of the property, the condition of the land and buildings, and current considerations regarding the possible purchase of the property.  Participants formed into break-out groups in which they voiced the issues and opportunities they saw regarding the possible purchase of the land.  The overriding and major opportunity identified was the Town’s ability to control the re-use of the property.

The major issue was the uncertainty over additional costs to the Town beyond the purchase price.  The main expenses identified were: renovation or demolition of the structures; asbestos and lead paint removal; and maintenance and security costs until disposition.

 

The afternoon was devoted to scenario-building and at the end of the session each group presented a “vision” for the property, if purchased by the Town.  Although every plan was different. some common ideas were apparent. Consistent themes were: a Park and Recreation building on the approximately 37 acre sledding hill parcel; a desire to keep the view across the sledding hill as open space; height limitations of any reuse to allow the continued appreciation of the natural setting; the use of legislation to guarantee that the parcels adjacent to the core campus, which are to be retained by the State, remain as open space in perpetuity; paths and walkways throughout the whole parcel allowing connectivity between the various parcels of land and to adjacent open space properties;  maintaining the core campus village square feel; the development of a community space, utilizing the Chapel Building if suitable, for cultural activities; development of some commercial/professional space; and, fulfillment of 40B housing requirements and construction of “empty nester” homes through a mixed use development.

 

The SHAC would like to thank all the participants who attended the session.  We are grateful for your time and thoughtful comments.

 

For more information regarding the Medfield State Hospital, please go to mshvision.net or www.facebook.com/MSHVision.

POCKET PARK NAMING CONTEST

This from Jean Mineo –
POCKET PARK NAMING CONTEST
Deadline: Thursday Jan. 23, 2014 at 5 pm
The Town of Medfield owns a small 5,352 square foot parcel of land between Zebra’s and Starbuck’s that has affectionately been called the Pocket Park for lack of an official name. The Pocket Park Steering Committee was appointed in Oct. 2013 to initiate a public planning process to both propose a design for the park and establish its name.
Naming Contest
Medfield residents are invited to vote on, or propose, a name for the Pocket Park by completing an on-line survey here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/PocketPark
History of the site is included in the short survey.
As an added incentive, Woodland Theater has generously donated two tickets to a Jan. 24 – 26 performance of Spelling Bee, one of Broadway’s most buzzed about Tony award winning musicals. The winner for the tickets will be selected at random from among all entries. The performance takes place in the Lowell Mason Theatre at the Medfield High School and additional tickets may be purchased at www.Woodland-Theatre.com.
The Pocket Park Steering Committee will select the name from among the entries and forward for approval at Town Meeting. Thank you for participating in this exciting opportunity to name our Pocket Park!
For questions or more information, please email JeanMineo@aol.com

CPA

I was just looking over a great source of information about Massachusetts’ Community Preservation Act (CPA).  The CPA is the opt in system in Massachusetts that gives towns state matching monies once adopted.  See the Community Preservation Coalition’s website – http://www.communitypreservation.org/   Unfortunately, to date, Medfield has yet to opt in, so while we continue to pay in, we are leaving the state monies on the table.

This is the Community Preservation Coalition’s summary description of the CPA –

CPA is a smart growth tool that helps communities preserve open space and historic sites, create affordable housing, and develop outdoor recreational facilities. CPA also helps strengthen the state and local economies by expanding housing opportunities and construction jobs for the Commonwealth’s workforce, and by supporting the tourism industry through preservation of the Commonwealth’s historic and natural resources.

Over a decade of work went into the creation of the CPA; it was ultimately signed into law by Governor Paul Cellucci and Lieutenant Governor Jane Swift on September 14, 2000. Read more about the history of CPA.

CPA allows communities to create a local Community Preservation Fund for open space protection, historic preservation, affordable housing and outdoor recreation. Community preservation monies are raised locally through the imposition of a surcharge of not more than 3% of the tax levy against real property, and municipalities must adopt CPA by ballot referendum. View a map of all CPA communities, or learn more about CPA adoption.

The CPA statute also creates a statewide Community Preservation Trust Fund, administered by the Department of Revenue (DOR), which provides distributions each year to communities that have adopted CPA. These annual disbursements serve as an incentive for communities to pass CPA. Learn more about the distribution amounts received to date by CPA communities.

Each CPA community creates a local Community Preservation Committee (CPC) upon adoption of the Act, and this five-to-nine member board makes recommendations on CPA projects to the community’s legislative body. To explore CPA projects completed to date, visit our CPA Projects Database.

Property taxes traditionally fund the day-to-day operating needs of safety, health, schools, roads, maintenance, and more. But until CPA was enacted, there was no steady funding source for preserving and improving a community’s character and quality of life. The Community Preservation Act gives a community the funds needed to control its future.

CPA Accomplishments To-Date

  • 155 communities have adopted CPA (44% of the Commonwealth’s cities and towns)
  • Close to $1.2 billion has been raised to date for community preservation funding statewide
  • Over 6,600 projects approved
  • Over 7,300 affordable housing units have been created or supported
  • Nearly 19,200 acres of open space have been preserved
  • Over 3,200 appropriations have been made for historic preservation projects
  • Nearly 1,000 outdoor recreation projects have been initiated
Enhanced by Zemanta