Share This Article
Article 34 at Sudbury’s Annual Town Meeting in May will ask voters a simple question, but the circumstances surrounding the article are more complicated.
This warrant article asks voters to allow the Select Board to lease Haskell Field parking lot land (on Fairbank Road) for new solar canopies. If approved, the town will be authorized to enter into a minimum 20-year agreement to buy the generated power, aiming to lower the town’s electricity bills without spending any municipal funds on construction. The result would be a covered parking lot that creates significant cash savings on electricity over the life of the agreement.
There are two other solar canopy projects on the draft warrant for Town Meeting, including one at the police station and one at Ephraim Curtis Middle School. However, the Haskell Field canopy is more complicated due to open questions about land use, jurisdiction, and purview.
Land Use
Town counsel recently provided an opinion to the Select Board explaining that the solar canopy could be considered a change in use for recreation land. Article 97 & An Act Preserving Open Space in the Commonwealth of the Massachusetts General Laws “also declares the conservation of natural resources a public purpose and provides that land or easements subject to Art. 97 shall not be used for other purposes or disposed of without a two-thirds roll call vote of the Legislature.” In short — if you want to change the use of land covered by Article 97, you have to go through a long process that involves the State Legislature. (Discussion with Town Counsel at 3:22:00 below)
However, the first step is for Town Counsel to find out more about the proposed project from the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA). It’s possible there’s a path for qualifying energy generation projects under a new, streamlined siting process released by the Healey administration this year, but much remains to be determined with Sudbury’s Haskell Field project. More information is expected before Town Meeting in May.
Jurisdiction and Purview
If the Town were to identify a viable path through the State laws and processes, it still has to contend with the Sudbury Park and Recreation Commission, which has not supported the project to-date.
In their most recent meeting, the commissioners voiced frustration with how this project came about, and the process it has followed. The Commission was not consulted about the project until after it was proposed for a Special Town Meeting in December 2025.
While the commissioners did voice many concerns about aesthetics, among other aspects of the project, in their meetings last fall, a clearer picture emerged during their March 23, 2026 meeting. Chair Mara Huston and member Ben Carmel emphasized that they are elected to represent the recreational interests of Sudbury residents. Insofar as Haskell is recreation land in Sudbury, they were frustrated that the Commission was not consulted earlier. They also were uncertain if they would be involved enough to represent recreational interests if the project gets the nod at Annual Town Meeting in May.
During a discussion with Select Board Chair Lisa Kouchakdjian, who is the board liaison to the Commission, Carmel concluded his feedback on the process with “I still am someone who is elected to represent the recreational interests of the citizens of Sudbury.” (2:21:00 below)
Huston later added that the Commission’s aesthetic concerns may very well be addressed by the design of the canopy. A smaller, flat canopy (as opposed to a “v-shape”) would interfere less with site lines. However, she raised concerns about coordinating other planned projects and designs for the property and process for Commission input after Town Meeting. “As elected officials, to represent recreation in this town, that we’re not getting the opportunity to be part of the decision. And Lisa, we need us to be part of the decision. And Sudbury residents who voted us into office need us to be part of these decisions.”
Member Bobby Beagan responded “I couldn’t have said it any better than you just said.”
Huston wanted a commitment from the Select Board, by way of a motion and vote, that the Commission would be involved in the decision making process if the project moves forward after Town Meeting. Kouchakdjian committed to bring the feedback to the Select Board, but could not commit to making any motions without the full board having a discussion first.
The discussion begins at 2:13:20 below.