The Hudson Planning Board met on Dec. 10 to hear public input from a resident concerned about rising property taxes and their connection to local development decisions.
“I believe it’s quite appropriate, and I’ve received phone calls from people, to discuss property taxes with the Planning Board,” said Jim Dobbins. “The Planning Board has a direct impact on residents’ property taxes by the decisions that it makes here.”
While the Planning Board is not directly involved in setting property taxes or the town budget, it does oversee and review new projects, subdivisions, and site plans. The Board also plays a role in updating and drafting the town’s Master Plan.
“My town taxes are up 95 percent over the last ten years. They’re up 45 percent over the last five,” claimed Dobbins. “Over the past decade, we’re looking at a 37 percent inflation rate for the town, but a tax rate that’s up 95 percent, so we have a little bit of a discrepancy. My understanding is that this year the town is using $1.3 million in cash reserves to lower the property taxes and minimize the impact. Now, that’s just kicking the can down the road.”
He went on to say that town growth was not enough to justify the increased taxes and questioned why rates continued to rise so sharply.
“What is this board doing to truly understand the infrastructure needs and costs on the plans it approves and the revenue needed to cover those costs for the next five, ten, twenty years?” asked Dobbins. “Increased costs are being driven by CRI development: commercial, industrial, and retail, not population. When was the last time this board did a comprehensive review on impact fees for these types of developments? Are the rates sufficient to cover the costs that they’re creating? Are they increasing at or above my tax increase rate? Please tell me you don’t use a simple inflation rate, as my 95% tax rate increase does not equal a 37 percent inflation rate. Residents lose and developers win. The state allows us to set our own impact fees as a town.”
As is typical for public comments related to non-agenda items, the Planning Board did not directly respond to Dobbins’ remarks. However, Board member James Crowley later noted that the Planning Board should place more focus on community development when discussing new projects, including the impact those projects might have on local infrastructure.
The meeting also saw several deferrals for expected presentations, including a site plan for a proposed new car wash at 9 Morgan Road. Erik Poulin of Jones and Beach Engineers apologized for the second deferral of the plans.
“We have no intention of wasting the Board’s time or any member of the public’s time,” said Poulin. “With that, we do respectfully request a continuance on this application.”
He asked to make a new presentation at the Planning Board’s Jan. 28, 2026, meeting – a date also set for a 12,000-square-foot, multi-tenant retail building at 1 Bockes Rd. Due in part to high public turnout related to the retail building, Planning Chair Tim Malley announced that the Planning Board would relocate the meeting.
“We will be relocating this meeting to the old library,” said Malley. “It has a much larger room capacity.”