CHRISTOPHER KEEFE
WESTFIELD – The City Council’s Finance Committee referred a bond order in the amount of $758,000 to the Legislative & Ordinance Committee with a recommendation to reject the bond.
Finance Chairman Christopher Keefe said Thursday night that the committee voted 2-1 to file a negative recommendation for the bond which will be used to buy development rights on 120 acres of the East Mountain Country Club.
Keefe and At-large Councilor David A. Flaherty voted against the bond request, while Ward 6 Councilor Christopher Crean, in whose ward the gold course is located, voted in support of the bond request that would benefit one of the largest business concerns in his ward.
The Community Preservation Commission considered the request of the Perez family to purchase the development right by placing a conservation restriction on the golf course area of the country club, but not on the banquet facility and the other golf-related buildings and structures.
DAVID FLAHERTY
The CPC considered that request for more than a year, negotiating a three-year deal to place the conservation restriction on the property which is directly above the Barnes Aquifer and in close proximity to two city wells providing drinking water to residents throughout the city.
The CPC based its decision on its desire to protect the quality of the water in the Barnes Aquifer. The CPC approved the $758,000 which includes three payments of $250,000, as well as $8,000 to provide a survey of the land specifically under the development restrictions and for legal documents which would have to be filed if the City Council votes to approve the bond.
The CPC pledged to contribute CPA funding over the next three years to retire the proposed bond.
Keefe said Friday that he does not have an issue with allowing the land to be developed as a subdivision.
CHRISTOPHER M. CREAN
“I don’t have an issue with it being developed because there is other subdivision in that area over the aquifer,” Keefe said. “I think that 38 houses on 120 acres of land would have a minimal impact, if any.
“If this is truly about protecting the aquifer, then the money should be coming from the Water Resource Department,” Keefe said. “I don’t think this is an appropriate use of Community Preservation Act funds.”
Flaherty said Thursday night that he also does not opposed development of a subdivision on that property.
“I’m concerned about what we are giving up,” Flaherty said. “If that land was developed as a subdivision or as a senior house project it would generate $430,000 a year in new tax revenue.”
