Bonnie Christie

To: House Municipal and County Government Committee From: The Hopkinton Conservation Commission Date: February 10, 2026 Re: HB 1691: relative to limitations and qualifications for land placed in current use. Thank you, Madame Chair and Members of the committee for the opportunity to comment on HB1691. The Hopkinton Conservation Commission opposes this bill and asks that you vote Inexpedient to Legislate. As a member of the New Hampshire Association of Conservation Commissions, we share the concerns expressed in their written testimony and add five concerns specific to the town of Hopkinton. 1) If it’s not broken, don’t try to fix it. In 1973, the NH Legislature passed RSA 79-A, declaring it to be “in the public interest to encourage the preservation of open space, thus providing a healthful and attractive outdoor environment for work and recreation of the state's citizens, maintaining the character of the state's landscape, and conserving the land, water, forest, agricultural and wildlife resources.” It was “further declared to be in the public interest to prevent the loss of open space due to property taxation at values incompatible with open space usage.” It was acknowledged that “open space land imposes few if any costs on local government and is therefore an economic benefit to its citizens. The means for encouraging preservation of open space authorized by this chapter is the assessment of land value for property taxation on the basis of current use. It is the intent of this chapter to encourage but not to require management practices on open space lands under current use assessment.” The Current Use Program has been successful in achieving its goals and continues to be a useful tool for open space preservation. In Hopkinton, some of our farms have been owned and managed by the same family for generations. This would not have been possible without current use. Our residents repeatedly list the rural atmosphere and beauty of the landscape as what they love best about our town. This is a product of current use taxation. We don’t see it as broken, so we aren’t convinced it needs to be fixed. 2) HB 1691 undermines municipal self-determination. Each town knows best its land use needs, which are reflected in the Master Plan. Creating the Master Plan is an open process that includes multiple opportunities for public participation in creating a vision for the future. Hopkinton has some iconic farms and forests that shape its character and are always near the top of the list in surveys of what our residents want for the present and future of the town. NH has experienced a massive reduction of farms since the agricultural peak in the 19th century, with over 60,000 acres of farmland lost to development, urbanization and forest succession. This is true for Hopkinton, where almost all land that was not forested was originally in agriculture. Although over 66% of our land is identified as farmland, including USDA prime farmland soils, farmland soils of statewide importance and farmland soils of local importance, we are now down to only 15 farms. Opening this land to development would not result in the highest and best use of these acres, especially considering how much productive agricultural land has already been squandered. 3) HB 1691 takes away individual property rights. In the same way that we support the right of towns to create master plans without predefined restrictions and qualifications, we recognize the right of individual landowners to manage their property without such limits. For example, HB 1691 would eliminate a landowner’s option to participate in current use where the limits on acreage have been maxed out in that zone. Why would we want to say to property owners, “Sorry, no current use for you because we already have the maximum allowed acreage in the program?” This creates a disadvantage for property owners who want to keep their land open but need the current use tax rate to make that possible. 4) A bias against open space? The Hopkinton Conservation Commission is concerned that protecting open space, which by statue has been declared to be a public purpose, is being cited as a barrier to solving the housing crisis. There are numerous reasons why we have a crisis and limiting the amount of land in current use will not address them. Zoning restrictions, for example, are often the primary limitation on a town’s ability to expand its housing options. The Hopkinton Housing Committee has identified many such restrictions and our Planning Board is looking at multiple options to increase housing opportunities. It should be noted that keeping land out of current use doesn’t mean it will automatically be turned into housing developments. Many acres of land in current use are simply not buildable. Wetlands and steep slopes are examples. Most prime agricultural land lies in the floodplain along the Contoocook River. This is also not the place for building housing. 5) HB 1691 would create a burden for towns to implement. The Hopkinton town planner has expressed concerns about this bill. She points to the complicated and subjective formula that would burden our one-person department, our assessors and our property owners. In conclusion, for all the above reasons, the Hopkinton Conservation Commission joins the NHACC in opposing HB1691 and asks that you vote Inexpedient to Legislate. Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony, Bonnie Christie, on behalf of the Hopkinton Conservation Commission