A divided Martha’s Vineyard Regional School committee voted Monday to dedicate additional money to the district’s lawsuit against the Oak Bluffs planning board over the town board’s denial of an artificial turf playing field at the school.
A divided Martha’s Vineyard Regional School committee voted Monday to dedicate additional funding to the district’s lawsuit against the Oak Bluffs planning board over the town board’s denial of an artificial turf playing field at the school.
The school committee voted 5-4 at Monday’s meeting to allocate the funds necessary to complete the lawsuit after the school spent the initial $30,000 in legal fees it had set aside for the case.
The committee decided to not set an upper limit on the legal costs.
“To put a number on this [legal budget] detrimentally impacts our chances of success in the undertaking, which a majority of this committee voted to support,” committee member Kimberly Kirk said as she moved the question.
“I would not like to put a number on it. I want to proceed so that we can finalize … the appeal that we started,” Ms. Kirk continued.
Her motion passed with the support of Michael Watts, Kris O’Brien, Louis Paciello and Kathryn Shertzer. It was opposed by Skipper Manter, Roxanne Ackerman, Robert Lionette and Jen Cutrer.
The Oak Bluffs planning board denied the school's plans for a turf field in May 2022, citing concerns over the effects of PFAS chemicals (per and polyfluoroalkyl substances) in the town water resource protection area.
In an attempt to forge ahead with a new turf field, the school district sued the Oak Bluffs planning board in June, saying that certain provisions of state law exempt school land used for “educational purposes” from some local zoning restrictions.
When the school committee hired Newburyport law firm Mead, Talerman & Costa to sue Oak Bluffs last June, the $30,000 budget was based on the attorneys’ estimate of the time needed for the case.
But district finance director Mark Friedman told the committee Monday that the firm has an additional five hours of work — a total cost of $4,356 — to finish the current phase of the case, in which the high school has requested a summary judgment against the planning board’s decision.
A judge in the state’s land court is expected to set a hearing date for both sides to make their cases later this year.
“We don’t know what will happen at that point,” Mr. Friedman said.
Arguing against Ms. Kirk’s motion Monday, Mr. Manter and Mr. Lionette both expressed ire at the rising legal bills, saying the attorneys should have asked the committee’s permission before submitting invoices that surpass the $30,000 cap.
“I just don’t think it’s appropriate. I think it’s wrong,” Mr. Lionette said.
But Mr. Watts noted that the original $30,000 was based on an estimate and that the school committee has not made a practice of imposing limits on legal fees.
“I don’t know why we’re doing it now,” he said.
Mr. Friedman assured committee members that the additional bills would come nowhere near exhausting the high school’s legal budget line, which stands at $46,000 for the fiscal year ending June 30 with only $20,000 spent.
Comments
It baffles me that the Town
Islander61 OBIt baffles me that the Town of Oak Bluffs hasn't set any limits with their planning board, they can do that. The Chair wants a trial which will drive up legal bills on both sides. He must believe he can't win a summary judgement because the judge will follow the law, the last thing the planning board chair wants. He wants to change the law because he doesn't like it, did you read the town's argument? It is my wish that the select board of OB gets control over their planning board chair and stop his funding. With all the information now available regarding the levels of PFAS in the current soils at both the OB and High School, it is clear that the turf field will do no more harm than what is currently present and will likely lower the risk of PFAS contamination compared to the soils there now, and way less than any one septic system over the aquifer. Why can't the planning board chair see this? Because he is against a turf field, period, it was never about PFAS, PFAS was his only avenue to try to stop the project, a project he voted for when the vote was in front of his planning board the first time. Stop this nonsense and let the turf field be built. It has been proven time and time again that grass fields in New England can not hold up under the demands a high school puts on their fields. No level of maintenance can overcome that, professional football teams can't do it, why do you think we can. BTW organic doesn't mean PFAS free, just look at the OB school where the PFAS levels are higher after using organic fertilizer. I don't think that is a coincidence. The kids need and want the turf fields, after all, they are the ones using it and the science has proven that it is safe, not only the aquifer, but for the kids. Come on, end this and just build it already. There is no way everyone on the island will be happy but at least our kids will be when they have a quality field they can be proud of and one that will keep them safe.
This is a stunning turn of
Vicki Divoll ChilmarkThis is a stunning turn of events! Whatever you think about the turf/grass controversy, no one on this island, I believe, (except five members of the school committee) wants the MVRHS to have a blank check to spend unlimited money on the lawsuit between the school and the town of Oak Bluffs! Yes, a BLANK CHECK!!
And yet that is PRECISELY what happened last night at the MVRHS school committee meeting! The guard rails are off!! The legal bills for the lawsuit had previously been capped at $30,000. That has already been spent and there is nearly another $30,000 left in the 2023 legal budget line, approved last year by the towns. But as of last night's vote the high school can, and will, spend it ALL on the OB lawsuit.
But much worse, they are no longer limited by the finite amount in the legal budget line! Too constraining to them! Without any notification to the towns, nor any further vote at the school committee, they can spend into INFINITY on this lawsuit -- a lawsuit that they are about to lose on summary judgment and head into the never-never land of forever appeals. They will just run the legal budget line into the red and then square it up at the end of the year with money from other parts of the budget.
And much, much worse, if they run out of excess cash in the budget, they can then turn to the "contingency fund" to pay the bills. That fund has been used in the past essentially as a slush fund for this artificial turf project by the school committee, despite promises to the towns that it would only be used for unforeseen emergencies, like a "burst boiler!"
There are thus NO limits, NO constraints and NO transparency on further spending on this artificial turf project legal controversy. It will just happen in the dark of night.
All because five members of the school committee cannot take NO for an answer from the town of Oak Bluffs, the town that is the home of our high school.
Our towns have already spent well over $600,000 for a field that (1) many (perhaps most) people do not want, (2) the OB Planning board has ruled could contaminate our water, and (3) probably will never happen as we approach spending $200-300 million on the new high school. When is enough, enough?
This is neither a valiant
Amy Upton West TisburyThis is neither a valiant cause to get behind nor a good use of taxpayer money. Anyone who still thinks plastic turf is a reasonable option has been living in an information desert or refuses to accept reality. In either case, do we still want them occupying positions on Committees where important conversations need to be had? Lets plant some grass and move on.
Amy, please explain how
James EdgartownAmy, please explain how “Anyone who still thinks plastic turf is a reasonable option has been living in an information desert or refuses to accept reality” Does this apply to the administrations of most of the top Universities in New England? Should you claim that our flagship University of Massachusetts leadership “refuses to accept reality” last I counted they had at least 3 or 4 synthetic fields. How about Amherst College? Atleast 2 synthetic fields. Lastly can you please tell me how you are going to explain to the young women playing field hockey that they may not have any home games in the future as teams are already refusing to play our HS because the sport has transitioned to synthetic. And what about the potential for unified field sports and special Olympics??
This is such an incredible
Angry Parent WTThis is such an incredible waste of money! You are suing to put in a filed that will be no doubt illegal within a few yrs. Maybe you should think about all the time and money that has been wasted on this project, you has the opportunity to put in grass fields years ago with the help of a huge grant, but you refused.
Maybe you should use this money to support the teachers at MVRHS who are fed up and leaving because their salaries do not allow them to continue living on this Island!
The High School offers 17
OB Taxpayer Oak BluffsThe High School offers 17 sports teams that do not need these playing fields. No athlete will miss out if we eliminate a few sports. No, mom and dad, your kid's probably not going to get a full athletic scholarship or an invitation to join the U.S. Olympic Team if we spend millions on these fields. However they may get an academic scholarship if we spend the money on better teachers and academic programs. Even if they don't get an academic scholarship wouldn't an improved education suit them better in life than knowing how to punt a football?
If you think the only
Islander61 OBIf you think the only education a student can get is in a classroom, maybe you need to spend some time with a person who, without sports, would have had no reason to go to school, I bet you’d feel differently. Kids often need a place to go after school to avoid going home. I was one of those kids and BTW, there are dozens of professions in sports that don’t involve being a professional athlete or getting an athletic scholarship. Your comment shows how much you don’t know about this subject or athletics.
Obviously you didn't
Rational Person Oak BluffsObviously you didn't understand my comment. Sports are certainly important and without these incredibly expensive fields - both grass or turf- there is still ample opportunity for our kids to participate. Even better than traditional sports wouldn't it be great for kids to participate in math teams, debate teams, chess teams, stem teams etc. Ramming into other kids in football, lacrosse or soccer really doesn't help improve the intellect of our kids which should be our priority. Don't you think?
What an unbelievable waste of
Carol formerly ChilmarkWhat an unbelievable waste of taxpayer money. They asked for artificial turf; request was denied; MOVE ON.
The MVC approved the project,
James EdgartownThe MVC approved the project, the OB planning Board voted against the special permit 2-2. The “request” was hardly “denied”. The School is protected by the Dover amendment and does not have to follow the towns Zoning. As for a waste of taxpayer money I happen to agree. The chairman of the Planning Board and his illegal reasoning for denying the permit has cost us all. Especially OB residence as they are in this for both ends.
Vicki and Amy are right on.
Tom Engley West TisburyVicki and Amy are right on. Pull out of this foolish errand.
This 5-4 vote was decided by
Peter Palches Oak BluffsThis 5-4 vote was decided by board members who never campaigned directly to be on the MVRHS Board. In the case of Oak Bluffs, for instance, Kathryn Shertzer and Kris O'Brien cast two of the five majority votes. I don't know how Rizwan Malik, the third member of the Oak Bluffs local committee, would have voted if he were on the MVRHS board. He might have voted with the majority also. But if he hadn't, the vote would have been 5-4 the other way.
This was a high interest decision. But in an important sense the general public was frozen out of it. How many people even know that in Tisbury, Oak Bluffs and Edgartown, when voters take part in a school committee election locally, they are also voting that the winner has a chance to be on the high school committee -- but also, even if he or she wins, has a chance not to be. (The three members of the local board somehow select which two will also serve on the MVRHS board.)
In the 42 years I've been watching school elections here on the Island, very infrequently is a local school board race contested -- and so school issues, local or regional, do not come up in that context. Moreover, I do not recall ever seeing in a news article any mention of how the three members of local down-Island boards choose their two MVRHS reps.
So here we have a case where the two Oak Bluffs MVRHS board members, having been chosen by local voters for another position (the board of their local school) then vote together as MVRHS board members, to sue the planning board of their own town. I am not making any of this up.
OK. What's the big deal? This is a matter of a few thousand dollars on a single line item, and we are assured that there's already enough set aside.
Yes. But these same processes, as we move ahead towards a new high school, will be the ones used in spending over a hundred million for capitol costs alone. The annual MVRHS budgets which now are near $25,000,000, come in on top of the capitol costs. Throw in the costs of K-8 and you are talking real money.
How can we expect that education, the most important thing we do, will be well served by such a confusing and unrepresentative process?
Excellent comment Peter,
Island taxpayer ChilmarkExcellent comment Peter, thank you! Your information on the lack of voter approval of several of the down island school committee members is startling!! Yes, these 5 school committee members have exercised enormous power over all spending for this artificial turf field. In 2019 the MVRHS came to the towns to get the initial $350,000 to design this field (and field house, 1000 seat stadium, etc.) Only the select boards in Chilmark (rejected at town meeting) and West Tisbury (approved at town meeting with conditions that were ignored) saw fit to bring it to the voters -- the other four let it be approved by default. Now over $600,000 has been spent with NO vote in the towns. Island voters have been SHUT OUT of these decisions! With this recent decision, now even the rest of the school committee has been shut out!
So … a majority vote that you
Val M MVSo … a majority vote that you don’t like isn’t valid? What country do you live in?
Perhaps the reps that voted to support the turf lawsuit have constituents that want turf? That may be hard for you to believe or understand because it’s not what you want but not everyone thinks the same way. The turf proponents don’t seem to begrudge anyone the use of grass fields why can’t the grass supporters have tolerance for athletes and proponents that would be better served with turf?
Add new comment