Section 15A. Whenever a board or officer having charge of land, including land acquired for playground purposes pursuant to the provisions of section fourteen of chapter forty-five, but excluding land acquired for park purposes, constituting the whole or any part of an estate held by a city or town within its limits for a specific purpose shall determine that such land is no longer needed for such purpose, whether such land was acquired before or after the effective date of this section and whether acquired by eminent domain, purchase, gift, devise or otherwise, such board or officer shall forthwith give notice of such determination to the city council of the city or the board of selectmen of the town. At any time after the receipt of such notice, the city council of the city by a two thirds vote of all its members, in the case of a city having a city manager, with the approval of said city manager, and in the case of other cities, with the approval of the mayor, or the town by a two thirds vote at a regular or special town meeting, may transfer the care, custody, management and control of such land to the same or another board or officer of the city or town for another specific municipal purpose, any provision of general or special law to the contrary notwithstanding; provided, that no such transfer shall be valid if it is in violation of any term or condition of the title of the city or town to such land.
In any city or town which accepts the provisions of this paragraph, when land is being transferred for the purpose of constructing low and moderate income housing, the vote required of the city council or the town meeting shall be by a majority vote.
Notes of Decisions
Harris v. Town of Wayland, 466 N.E.2d 822 (Mass. 1984).
· cites it 10× “The plaintiffs argue that Orchard Lane was in the charge of the school committee, and therefore the sale of the property is governed by G. L. c. 40, § 15A, particularly the provision requiring a two-thirds vote of the town before the care, custody, management, and control of the…”
Bd. of Selectmen v. Lindsay, 829 N.E.2d 1105 (Mass. 2005).
· cites it 3× “97 and with G. L. c. 40, § 15A; and that Lindsay’s motion for judgment on the pleadings should be allowed even though there was a disputed issue of fact as to whether she was a bona fide purchaser for value.”
LeClair v. Town of Norwell, 430 Mass. 328 (Mass. 1999).
· cites it 2× “The plaintiffs also claim that the town violated G. L. c. 40, § 15A, with respect to the town’s proposed use of a piece of property that it purchased.”
Seideman v. City of Newton, 452 Mass. 472 (Mass. 2008).
“See G. L. c. 40, § 15A (whenever board or officer having charge of land, with certain exceptions, determines that land is no longer needed for particular purpose, legislative body may transfer care, custody, management, and control of such land to another board or officer for…”
Oliver v. Town of Mattapoisett, 17 Mass. App. Ct. 286 (Mass. App. Ct. 1983).
· cites it 2× “Another statute which requires a two-thirds vote for land disposition is G. L. c. 40, § 15A, as appearing in St. 1954, c.”
Harris v. Town of Wayland, 453 N.E.2d 1062 (Mass. App. Ct. 1983).
“The plaintiffs argue that because the Wayland school committee (committee) was in charge of Orchard Lane, the sale of the property to the authority is governed by G. L. c. 40, § 15A, particularly the provision requiring a two-thirds majority vote before the charge of the land…”
Nickolas v. City of Marlborough, 32 Mass. L. Rptr. 125 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2014).
· cites it 6× “40, §15A Plaintiffs assert in Count I of their complaint that Ward Park was acquired and is being held solely for playground purposes and that therefore no portion of Ward Park may be used to build and operate a senior center unless the Parks and Recreation Commission first…”
Bouchard v. City of Haverhill, 171 N.E.2d 848 (Mass. 1961).
“he petition alleged ‘ ‘ That the determination of the city manager, orders of the municipal council transferring the management, custody, and control of said land to the fire department, and vote of the school committee are conflicting, illegal, and invalid; that they are void…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.