After an executive session Monday, high school committee chair Robert Lionette said the committee directed its attorney to reach out to the Oak Bluffs planning board to resolve the ongoing lawsuit.
The Martha’s Vineyard Regional High School Committee will seek to resolve its legal dispute with the Oak Bluffs planning board, committee chair Robert Lionette announced Monday evening.
The school has been attempting to overhaul its athletic fields and track for years and sued the planning board in 2022 after the board denied the school’s plans for a new artificial turf field. On Monday, the school committee met in an executive session to discuss the ongoing lawsuit.
“The committee has resolved and directed our attorney to engage in discussions with Oak Bluffs … for the purposes of resolving the pending appeal,” Mr. Lionette said after the committee’s 90-minute closed-door session with lawyer Brian Winner.
The high school committee will also strive to meet at least once before Aquinnah holds its annual town meeting on May 9, Mr. Lionette said, holding out the potential that a resolution may be reached before town voters decide whether or not to fund the school’s budget for the coming fiscal year.
The budget has become a flashpoint for some towns, with Chilmark and West Tisbury both voting down their portions of the high school budget in protest of continued legal spending on the artificial turf lawsuit.
Under the regional agreement for operating the high school, at least four towns must agree on the budget for it to pass. If three towns vote against the budget, the school committee would have to come up with a new one.
While Edgartown, Oak Bluffs and Tisbury have passed it, Tisbury voters added a non-binding request to stop funding the legal fight with Oak Bluffs.
More than 100 people attended Monday's hybrid school committee meeting.
More than 100 people attended Monday's hybrid school committee meeting.
If Aquinnah votes with the other up-Island towns, school officials say they will be unable to extend contracts on June 1 to teachers and other employees — not only at the high school, but with the Island’s shared services programs for students with special needs.
“What we would have to do is not send contracts out … to any folks that support kids with high needs,” superintendent Richie Smith said Monday.
Monday’s hybrid committee meeting drew about 10 members of the public to the high school library and over 100 people online.
Attending remotely, Mr. Winner updated the progress of the school’s request to the state land court for a judgment before the Oak Bluffs appeal goes to a full trial.
Both sides in the case completed their required briefings in mid-March and are waiting for the court’s decision on the school’s motion, Mr. Winner said.
A favorable ruling in the overall case for the high school would end the current legal conflict, but it won’t ward off a rematch if Oak Bluffs appeals, he cautioned committee members.
“We’re at the trial court level, and at the trial court level all decisions are appealable,” Mr. Winner said.
Some attendees spoke out against the legal challenge and spending at Monday’s meeting.
West Tisbury resident Doug Ruskin, a former member of the town’s finance committee, expressed concern that the school’s legal budget for the Oak Bluffs appeal continues without a cap, despite the negative town meeting votes.
“Does the committee have a response for the three towns’ position about unfettered spending on this lawsuit?” Mr. Ruskin asked, drawing a brief “No” from Mr. Lionette and a sharp response from committee member Mike Watts.
“Uncapped is different than unfettered,” Mr. Watts said. “Please, we’re not idiots, right? Uncapped means it’s not capped. Unfettered means you can go and do whatever the hell you want. This committee has no intention of doing that.”
The Oak Bluffs planning board denied the field project in 2022, citing concerns about per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly known as PFAS, from the turf negatively affecting the area’s water quality.
The school argued that provisions in state law exempt the district from certain zoning regulations, and has claimed that the school didn’t even need a special permit from the board.
Other speakers Monday raised environmental concerns as they opposed continued litigation.
“The aquifer is located right under your field here [and] there’s nothing more important than our drinking water,” said Oak Bluffs resident Richard Toole.
“I applaud our Oak Bluffs planning board for sticking their necks out. They had the nerve to do the right thing,” Mr. Toole said. “I’m paying legal fees on both sides of this issue and it’s just ridiculous … You are damaging your chances of getting the high school [building] project approved if you continue your silly little litigation.”
Including schematic design work and a project manager, the school has spent about $520,000 on the controversial athletic field overhaul, school officials said.
The turf field is one element of the plan along with renovated grass fields, lighting, a press box and other improvements.
Comments
This is a complete joke!
Tom OBThis is a complete joke! Please move on and stop wasting taxpayers money please. Who is responsible for all this?
For those that have been so
Islander61 OBFor those that have been so concerned about money resulting from the appeal, I hope you’re happy that $500k has just been thrown down the drain and likely thousands of dollars more will now be needed to redesign the field. It just goes to show that Mr. Lionette really doesn’t care about spending your money. He and his Field Fund supporters don’t care that we now will have to pay more to design the fields, so their defunding the budget was never about the money, because it would have been cheaper to see the appeal through than have to redesign the field. This was his way to “get his way” and kill the project. Forget that no science indicated the field would jeopardize the aquifer, ignore the facts presented in all the testimony, more money wasted on the testing that we taxpayers paid for, ignore that the student-athletes, coaches, and youth sports programs all supported the project. Then, when the grass fails after the overuse, more money to replace that, more nitrogen into the ponds, more water used to try to keep the grass that’s going to fail. This was never about the money. Fool me once…..shame on you….fool me twice, shame on me. You’ve been fooled once…..
I agree entirely.
Mr. B ChilmarkI agree entirely.
Another way to look at it is
Rational Person Oak BluffsAnother way to look at it is that we just wasted a half million dollars debating a plastic field that is not needed.
Except for these facts, as
Islander61 OBExcept for these facts, as testified in open meeting at the MVC, the experts who testified said it was needed due to the schools needs. The people who actually use the field want the field. It is only those who don't use it who are saying it isn't needed. Likely, like yourself. If it is not needed why do now, Mashpee High School, Falmouth High School, Sandwich High School, Barnstable High School, Dennis Yarmouth High School, Monomoy High School, Nauset High School, and Mass. Maritime all have at least one, if not two, turf fields. Heck, even Nantucket has a turf field. Those are just on the Cape and in the school's league. Look off Cape, Carver, both Plymouth schools, Taunton, Cohasset, the list goes on. If turf wasn't needed why would schools feel the need to put them in, because they are needed.
Wise words, Richard Toole!
David Wilson Oak BluffsWise words, Richard Toole!
Richard Toole, a very long
Ken Rusczyk Oak BluffsRichard Toole, a very long time member of the MVC, is spot on! The field is over our priceless aquifer, and once we ruin that, it's Game Over. And ALL of our million dollar homes are worthless.
It’s so easy to claim a
James EdgartownIt’s so easy to claim a doomsday scenario isn’t it. You just shout it loud and long enough and it just has to be true!! Let’s ignore the scientific data that suggest synthetic fields are more environmentally friendly and that this project has an over designed water filtration system in the event that data is wrong. Let’s keep grass fields with low watering and no fertilizers!! Makes sense. Now scream more!!! Plastic is bad!!! Bad plastic!!
Chair Robert Lionette
Vicki Divoll ChilmarkChair Robert Lionette delivered a carefully worded statement that likely took up most or all of the 90-minute closed door session to agree upon.
“The committee has resolved and directed our attorney to engage in discussions with Oak Bluffs … for the purposes of resolving the pending appeal,” Mr. Lionette said.
Translation: "We have not ended taxpayer spending on the lawsuit, we have authorized more spending on the lawsuit." Taxpayers in three towns have demanded that the spending stop now. Please do not incur more legal fees, tell him to stop working!! Withdraw your lawsuit against the town of Oak Bluffs today.
It’s actually called an
Islander OBIt’s actually called an appeal. I would assume someone with your vast knowledge and experience would understand the most basic of legal rights. Perhaps appeals are only for upisland folks?
The Chilmark finance
Rebecca ChilmarkThe Chilmark finance committee told the voters it would be "fiscally irresponsible" to approve the uncapped budget. It's not only about the fields.
No other action by the high
Islander OBNo other action by the high school’s attorneys has ever been capped before. Let’s not fool anyone, it’s always been about the fields. Those that oppose the plans at MVRHS will stop at nothing end this fight. Claiming fiscal responsibility when a Chilmark pays a pennies on the dollar for the school’s budget is laughable. Just say it, it’s about the fields. Lol.
Now that we know this is a
Tina Bean VINEYARD HAVENNow that we know this is a tactic which can be employed aka defunding the MVRHS, and appears to be an acceptable practice by many, I will patiently wait to see when it is used again. Perhaps defunding another school budget, perhaps a town budget, perhaps..... let your imagination run away with you as mine has. There are so many others ways to make demands, without hurting kids. I believe this is a new low for our island and sadly this tactic will be remembered and will be used again. I for one look forward to a peaceful resolution.
Tina Bean is right --
Peter Palches Oak BluffsTina Bean is right -- defunding an entire budget is a poor way for citizens to have an impact on school policies and decisions.
Since this high school serves all the children of all the people on the Island, a better way would be to have the MVRHS committee members run for their seats in Island-wide elections. One positive outcome of the turf brouhaha is the spotlight shown on the confusing path to MVRHS board membership. You run for one elementary board, and then you may or may not find yourself on the MVRHS board. No one on the MVRHS board is directly accountable to the Island-wide public at large.
Maybe having fewer members, say five, would be enough.
Add new comment