To the Editor:

We are once again writing to voice our concerns about the economic and land ownership impact that 2025 town meeting 2025 warrant article 17 will have on Hull and its residents. This same article, then listed as Article 33, was defeated by the voters at the May 2024 annual town meeting.

Article 17 once again addresses the eminent domain takings of the same three properties as last year. Its impact, if adopted, will impose a significant financial burden on the town and give the town implied approval to continue this course of action with other properties.

In one of the cases addressed by Article 17, the town seeks to take privately owned property with the contention that the owner’s use of the land contributes to flooding and destruction of the dune along North Nantasket Beach. This is not supported by wetlands experts, nor the history and projection of sea level rise, storm flooding and damage in the town. In fact, in this case, the homeowners at 169 Beach Avenue have spent considerable time and money at their expense to demonstrate that the town’s concerns can be addressed by measures which will, in fact, improve flood and dune resiliency. Based on the town’s refusal to even consider the homeowners’ proposals, the homeowners presented their case to the Department of Environmental Protection, which agreed that their proposal addressed the town’s concerns about flooding and dune resiliency.

The town then took the case to Land Court to test the homeowners’ title, and on August 15, 2024, the Land Court found in favor of the homeowners. The town is now appealing this decision, and nonetheless, still seeks to take their property by eminent domain.

In cases like these, where a city or town takes privately owned property, it is required by law that the owners be compensated in an amount equal to the fair value of the land. This amount is not known at the time of the taking and may be significant since the portion of the property targeted for taking will preclude the homeowners from direct access to and from the beach portions of their property. In addition, the process of determining this compensation is often time-consuming and expensive for both the town and the homeowners.

Article 17 presents three cases where the town will be required to pay just compensation to the owners. Instead of making such takings, saddling the town with unknown financial obligations, we urge the town to resolve these issues with owners in a way that addresses the town’s concerns about protecting against flooding, while allowing the homeowners to continue to own their land and commit to being good stewards for the benefit of the town and its citizens.

Respectfully,

Donna Larson, Cathy Bilodeau, Amy Abrams, Shelia Weinberg, Nancy Bilodeau, Nancy Martens, Nowell Bloomenthal, Debra de Bastos, Judith Isenberg, Eileen Weinberg, Larry and Gail Handler, Vasilia and Atha Mitropoulos, Ric and Kathy Callahan, Max Callahan, Casey Callahan, Ken Kansky, Gail and Bernard Kansky, Steven and Beth Currie, Bart and Christie O’Connor, Mark and Krista Handin and Dave and Wendi Ellison

Like what you’re reading? Stay informed and support our work with a Hull Times subscription by clicking here.

Do you have an opinion to share? Click here to write a Letter to the Editor.