Court ruling sparks debate over planning board's future actions

In a recent government meeting, officials discussed a significant ruling from a land court judge favoring plaintiff Garvey Hammond, LLC, regarding a special permit for a self-storage facility. The judge has remanded the case back to the planning board, instructing them to conduct a legally noticed public proceeding to consider the permit, which includes 21 previously approved conditions.

The board is now faced with a critical decision on whether to appeal the judge's ruling. Legal counsel has advised that the chances of a successful appeal are less than 50%, with estimates suggesting a mere 25% likelihood of winning. Furthermore, if the appeal is pursued and lost, the plaintiffs could seek to recover attorney's fees, potentially costing the town upwards of $50,000.

Complicating matters, the current makeup of the planning board includes two members who have not previously engaged with the case, raising questions about their ability to participate in the decision-making process. The board is seeking clarification on how to proceed, particularly regarding the imposition of additional conditions on the permit, as the judge's order allows for reasonable conditions but does not specify how new members can contribute without prior knowledge of the evidence presented.

The deadline for making a decision on the appeal is April 8, and with the town attorney currently out of the country, the board is under pressure to act swiftly. Members expressed concerns about the implications of adding new conditions that the plaintiff may contest, potentially leading to further legal disputes.

As discussions continue, the board must weigh the financial implications of an appeal against the necessity of adhering to the judge's order and ensuring a fair process for all parties involved. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for future planning board decisions and the handling of special permits in the community.