00:08The board’s most discussion centered on the amendment regarding ADUs, introduced by Matt Morang. This amendment proposed reducing the minimum lease term from 12 months to one month. The Planning Board had already expressed a strong preference for maintaining the 12-month duration, citing the need to ensure stability in the housing market. Members of the Select Board discussed the potential implications of this change, emphasizing the importance of hearing the Planning Board’s perspective before making any decisions.

Concerns were raised about the impact of reducing the lease term on housing affordability and availability. One board member noted that institutions like Milton Academy and Curry College often require shorter rental terms for families. However, there was apprehension that shorter leases could lead to an increase in short-term rentals, possibly removing affordable units from the market. The board considered developing separate regulations for platforms such as Airbnb, stressing that issues related to ADUs and short-term rentals should remain distinct.

05:55Enforcing any new regulations was also a concern. Members acknowledged that unregulated short-term rentals would persist without established enforcement mechanisms. The potential for property owners to circumvent rules by not formalizing leases was noted, raising questions about the effectiveness of the proposed changes.

11:41Further discussion suggested that existing regulations might serve more as deterrents than actionable enforcement tools. While regulations could raise awareness, actual enforcement might prove challenging. The board agreed on the necessity of gathering more information, particularly from the Planning Board, before proceeding with any votes on the amendment.

14:59Another topic was the proposal of a taxation fund designed to assist elderly and disabled residents with property taxes. This initiative, which had proven successful in other communities by generating $20,000 to $30,000 annually, involves residents voluntarily donating to the fund. The proposed mechanics of implementation were described as straightforward, and the board was eager to distribute copies of the proposal to its members for further review.

16:01The regulation of alcohol sales on town land was also discussed, with proposed rules aiming to align regulations for alcohol in town buildings with those on town land. One-day licenses would be issued only to organizations with a licensed caterer, and applications would require a sketch plan detailing land use. The board emphasized designating specific locations for alcohol sales and consumption to maintain control and ensure public safety.

17:58In addition, the board considered potential exemptions tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for senior citizens, disabled individuals, and veterans. Annual adjustments based on CPI changes announced by the Department of Revenue were proposed, with discussions on increasing current exemptions by a set percentage. Concerns about the financial implications were voiced, as such increases could cost the town approximately $80,000, a sum not currently budgeted. The importance of addressing rising costs for these demographics was acknowledged, with an emphasis on reaching a decision before the fiscal year ends.

20:53Lastly, the issue of non-payment of taxes and the associated timelines were addressed. A 12-month period for non-payment was deemed too generous, prompting members to explore shorter timeframes. The treasurer was tasked with further investigation, and a specific case involving a rental property with significant tax debts was highlighted. While the possibility of taking ownership to recover owed taxes was discussed, it was noted that property owners typically find alternative solutions before reaching foreclosure.