Why does the Methuen City Council have an Unaccepted Roads Task Force?

Why does the Methuen City Council have an Unaccepted Roads Task Force? The phrase “task force” suggests an urgent crisis — as if the world’s about to go to hell in a hand basket unless we launch a full-blown review. 

Enter the Methuen City Council’s Unaccepted Road Task Force. This group, led by Chair Marsan and Vice Chair Soto has met 4 times since February 2025. Their agendas, minutes, and recordings are here: https://www.cityofmethuen.net/333/Unaccepted-Ways-Task-Force-Committee

But why, what is the crisis?

Do you know whether the road in front of your house is accepted, unaccepted, private, or a paper road? Most people don’t — and why would they? You look out the window, you see a road, it gets plowed in winter, there’s water and sewer under it, and your driveway connects to it. Who cares what it’s called? 

Well, you should. But do we need a task force? Absolutely not. 

Most streets labeled “unaccepted” are generations old — often named for the original property owner through whose land the road ran (think Nelson Way, Brown Court). 

You show up at City Hall, or call your councilor, hoping your little ol’ street was just forgotten and you’re doing your civic duty by reminding them it needs paving…Boom. That’s when you learn the road is unaccepted, and, unbeknownst to you, you’re the proud owner of XYZ Way — at least to the centerline. 

The good news: your property taxes won’t automatically go up. 

The bad news: major maintenance of the road may be on your dime. 

Now that you’re hyperventilating and counting down the hours until City Hall opens, let’s start with the basics — some key definitions: 

Paper Street 

A “paper street” is a roadway shown on a recorded or approved plan that was never actually built — or was never finished or formally accepted by the city. In other words, it exists on paper, not on the ground. Think of it as a ghost street. In Massachusetts, paper streets are common in older subdivisions where plans were recorded but roads were never built or accepted. Under MGL Ch. 41 §81L and related case law, simply being shown on a plan does not make it a public way

Private Way

Then: Many private ways began generations ago as paths over family land to reach a house set back from the main road. They didn’t connect two public streets, served only a few properties, and stayed private because there was no reason to make them public. 

Now: Private ways also show up in modern developments. Sometimes entire subdivisions are designed with privately maintained roads — no city plowing, no municipal trash pickup, and road upkeep funded by the development residents (often through a homeowners’ association). 

Unaccepted Way 

Exactly as it is apply named, it’s a street or way that, for one reason or another, was not designated as a private way and was never formally accepted by the City. The reasons vary case by case, but common ones include: a developer went defunct before the project was completed or accepted; the road was not built to City specifications; there are title or easement defects; or other unresolved conditions. To make things trickier, some streets are only partially accepted — one segment is public, while another remains unaccepted. 

Accepted Street 

Take a breath — this is where heads start to pop. 

An accepted street is a public way… but not every public way is an accepted street. 

Okay, let’s get this out of the way: an accepted street is always a public way.A street becomes “accepted” when it meets the City’s standards and the City Council votes to accept it. Once accepted, the city holds title to the property, recorded in the registry of deeds. 

There are three ways a road becomes a public way, in Massachusetts: 

1. Statutory acceptance — the formal layout and vote (the “accepted street” route). 

2. Prescription — the general public has used it openly, notoriously, adversely, and continuously for 20+ years (yes, “notorious” is the actual legal word). 

3. Pre-1846 common-law dedication — long-ago owner dedication plus public acceptance. 

   
   

Bottom line: every accepted street is public. Some public ways got that status without a council vote (paths 2 or 3), so they’re public — but, and this is key, they are not “accepted.” The big misconception? That “public way” = the City must maintain it forever. Nope. Being public by use or ancient dedication doesn’t magically hand the DPW a plow-and-pave obligation. Maintenance follows who’s legally obliged to repair—and if it isn’t the City, then one snowplow pass or a past patch job doesn’t lock them into perpetuity. M.G.L. c. 82, §§ 21–24 and Hay v. Commonwealth, 253 Mass. 537, 540 (1916).

Ok, let's get back to the mic drop moment when a City worker just told you they won’t fix your street — even though it swallowed three VW Beetles, a Fiat, and (allegedly) three dogs last week. If you don’t want to play road-frogger anymore, you and your neighbors may have to pay for it, because it’s your road. 

“WHAT DO I PAY TAXES FOR?!”

Hard truth: this isn’t about your tax bill — just like people without kids still help fund schools. It’s about how your road was designated when it was born. As frustrating as it is, it is what it is. 

If you squeak loud and long enough, the Council might take up your cause — especially in an election year. That’s what happened with one resident. Taking advantage of his right to speak at public participation, he became a familiar face, consistently advocating to have his road paved and questioning the accuracy of the City-maintained street-acceptance list which is arguably less than perfect.

Voilà — the task force was born. 

Classic politics: appease a constituent by sending their gripe to “committee.” 

Fast-forward three years: there’s now a resolution before the Council for the City to pave five unaccepted streets using whatever funds the Mayor has at his disposal. The resident persistence paid off: his unaccepted road made the cut. 

Okay, let’s deconstruct this. 

What’s wrong with this resolution? 

1. Public money on private property — hard stop. You can’t spend public funds to pave unaccepted/private ways except through very narrow legal channels — translation: this basically means PATCHING POTHOLES, folks. Even the CAFO spelled it out to the Council in the last meeting. You can see that here:https://methuentv.cablecast.tv/internetchannel/show/7622?site=2

2. Nelson Ave reads as a private way.A good part of the street is owned by one or two abutters, and it wasn’t built to be accepted. The deed language ties access to an easement over Nelson Avenue — the city does not own it in any way shape or form:

3. Conflict of interest — participation barred.The persistent resident is an abutting owner and a member of the Unaccepted Streets Task Force, is a municipal employee for ethics purposes. He cannot participate in any matter where he has a financial interest — like selecting or even talking about his own street for paving. At minimum, a written disclosure is required; in practice, he should recuse. Having the City pave his road saves him real money; taking part in the discussion or selection is not lawful. 

4. Paid, not volunteer. Salt in the taxpayer wound: They are not just a task-force member — they are a paid consultant. According to City records online, from Dec. 2024 to Feb. 2025 they collected $12,675 in “consulting” fees — paid by you, the taxpayers. So they might get their street paved, and they are getting paid while the decision is teed up. 

   
   

Moving the Goalposts 

Watch the October Task Force meeting (linked above): the persistent resident flat-out says the road-acceptance rules won’t work for their street because three of nine abutters won’t sign on. One even likes the road in disrepair to slow traffic; the other two barely use the street to access their homes, so they don’t want to pay to upgrade it and have it accepted. 

Later on the Council agenda, an ordinance to change the acceptance rules. If the first resolution to pave the five streets falls through — Plan B. The proposal drops the City’s abutter buy-in from 75% (to fund bringing the road up to standard) down to 51%. Convenient when you know at least three neighbors won’t agree. 

Now, instead of needing 7 out of 9 signatures — which they know they can’t get — they only need 5. 

If you live on one of the City's 200 unaccepted streets in town, we'd be concerned - that’s not consensus: that’s engineering the outcome. 

The onus for acceptance should be on the abutters, not the City. And to the councilor who claimed “we’ve let these poor people down”: no. If a street’s residents want acceptance, they petition the City — the City shouldn't strong-arm for them. Stop burning taxpayer money and staff time on something City Hall has should have no business spearheading — and stop shoving the bill into residents’ pocketbooks who never asked for it. 

We’ll leave you with food for thought: why the hard push to accept these roads right now? 

All we know is the five streets the committee picked are all in either the East or West district. The committee includes three councilors; two from the East and one from the West. Two of them are realtors, and one is a developer/contractor. Do with that what you will. I’

Watch for part two of the series – You want to petition the City for street acceptance, now what?