Auditor Proposes Higher Payments for Mount Washington Land
State Auditor Diana DiZoglio seeks a per-acre minimum for state conservation land payments to rural towns such as Mount Washington.
Updated on Nov. 2, 2026 in Regional Economics
Live Poll
Should Massachusetts raise minimum payments to rural towns for state-owned conservation land?
Massachusetts State Auditor Diana DiZoglio proposed a per-acre minimum payment increase for state conservation land in Mount Washington. Mount Washington could receive an additional $500,000 under a $100 per-acre floor proposal.
Why it matters
The current reimbursement formula pays rural towns far less per acre than wealthier eastern Massachusetts communities, and Mount Washington has no property tax revenue from state-owned conservation land. A minimum payment would set a floor that prevents those amounts from falling further.
Mount Washington received $42 per acre in 2024, compared with a statewide median of $127 per acre for eligible state-owned land. The proposal would add roughly $10 million to the state's $63.4 billion budget, but it remains unclear whether lawmakers will adopt it.
The players
Diana DiZoglio
Diana DiZoglio is the Massachusetts State Auditor, a statewide official who oversees state audits and financial reviews.
The details
The payment-in-lieu-of-taxes program compensates communities for tax-exempt state property such as forests, wildlife habitat, and recreation areas. Under the proposed change, payments could not fall below a set amount per acre, with the 2025 report also recommending annual increases tied to rising state land values.
Timeline
2024: Mount Washington received $42 per acre for state land.
2025: A PILOT report was published with recommended formula changes.
November 2, 2026: DiZoglio discussed the proposed changes at Mount Washington Town Hall.
Regional Economics
The proposal would modify Massachusetts' payment-in-lieu-of-taxes program, which reimburses towns for tax-exempt state land under a formula that currently favors wealthier eastern communities. A per-acre floor would change how rural towns are compensated for forests, wildlife habitat, and recreation areas.
Towns with large amounts of state conservation land could see higher annual payments if a per-acre floor is enacted, offsetting the lack of property tax revenue. Residents would see the effect only through local budgets, and only if lawmakers approve the change.
The takeaway
Rural towns hosting state conservation land depend on reimbursement formulas that can shift their budgets substantially. Readers following local tax issues can track how the proposal moves through the legislature.
Further reading
For more on how state spending affects local towns, see Regional Economics.
Source note: This article includes information reported by The Cool Down.
Live Poll
Should Massachusetts raise minimum payments to rural towns for state-owned conservation land?
