Town counsel outlines status of public-records lawsuit, estimates legal costs near $10,000

Town counsel Adam Costa told the Townsend Select Board on July 1 that litigation arising from a public-records request remains active in Middlesex Superior Court and that the town’s legal team has asked the court to dismiss parts of the case.

Costa, of the law firm identified on the record, said the suit began on April 29 when the chair of the board of health filed a complaint seeking revolving-fund budgets. The chair later signed a stipulation of dismissal after counsel provided the town’s financial ledgers, but the town clerk, who moved to intervene, filed an amended complaint and has continued to pursue the case in court.

“I prepared a motion to dismiss for a number of reasons,” Costa said, explaining two central arguments: that municipal officials generally lack authority to sue in their official capacities without select-board authorization, and that revolving funds do not have separate budgets—the public-records request therefore sought documents that do not exist as described. Costa said the town had produced financial ledgers for the town’s 15 revolving funds to address the records request.

Costa told the board the filings have generated a large package of motions and oppositions and that the presiding judge has the papers before them but had not ruled as of the meeting. He described the procedural posture as typical for such matters and said the court could take time to act.

On costs, Costa estimated that as of mid‑June the town had incurred roughly $6,000–$7,000 in attorney fees connected with the matter, with an additional $2,000–$3,000 spent in the subsequent weeks, putting the total approach near $10,000 so far. He added that about two‑thirds of the time he and his firm have devoted to Townsend matters in recent months has been consumed by this litigation.

Costa also addressed whether the town was paying to represent the intervening plaintiff. He said the town is not representing the town clerk; the clerk is pro se. The town does, however, pay for counsel to defend the town’s interests, which has required substantial attorney time.

Board members asked for clarification about cost and operational impacts. Costa said he had handled most of the work himself because of familiarity with the matter and the individuals involved. He recommended that board members limit direct calls to town counsel on unrelated matters while litigation expenditures remain a budget concern.

The select board did not take further formal action on the litigation during the open session; some strategy had been discussed in executive session earlier in the meeting. Costa said filings are public and encouraged interested residents to consult the Superior Court docket for the case records.

Next steps: the judge will consider the pending motions and oppositions; the board and counsel will revisit any follow-up in executive session as appropriate.