Challenge to use of Mattos Field heads to Appeals Court Tuesday
Jun. 13—Even with construction of the city's new consolidated elementary school well underway, a group of residents is continuing a legal challenge to the project.
They'll be in the state Appeals Court on Tuesday to argue that the city of Gloucester broke the law when it approved the plan to use Mattos Field, a small park and ballfield, as the site for the consolidated school.
The appeal comes after a Newburyport Superior Court judge last summer granted the city's motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the project's opponents in late 2020.
Lawyers for the group "Save Mattos Field" contend that Judge Thomas Drechsler erred when he concluded that the city had fulfilled its obligations under state law and the state constitution.
But lawyers for the city say that officials went above and beyond what they believe was necessary — including special legislation to authorize taking the park for a new use even when, the lawyers contend, the measure wasn't required, "in an abundance of caution."
The measure, and a subsequent amended piece of legislation, calls for the city to replace the open space of Mattos Field by converting the current site of the East Gloucester elementary school to open space as soon as the building is no longer needed as a school, and by upgrading two other Gloucester softball fields.
At the same time, officials in Gloucester say they do not believe that the 1972 amendment to the state constitution, Article 97, applies to the project because the land was never intended to be permanent conservation space.
The neighbors and other opponents counter that the city is trying to "have it both ways." They say that the site next to Veterans Memorial School, named for a Gloucester man killed in World War I, has always been open space, even after part of the park was taken previously, in 1954, to put up the school.
They go further, arguing that the fact the city had previously spent $280,000 in Community Preservation Act funds over a five-year period on Mattos Field creates a "public trust and dedication" that bars the field from being used for any other purpose.
The city's lawyers say that's not accurate, and that the restriction the opponents cite applies only to land acquired with CPA funds, not to improvements. They also note that the CPA fund issue was not raised until after the Superior Court hearing.
The opponents also say that the city failed to follow environmental notice requirements until after their lawsuit was filed, which, they contend, jeopardizes state reimbursement for the $20 million project because it was not done within 10 days of seeking aid from the Massachusetts School Building Authority.
But the city's attorneys say they were in contact with the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs and the state has issued a certificate saying the plan does not require an environmental impact report.
A three-judge panel of the Appeals Court will hear arguments at 9:30 a.m. in the John Adams Courthouse in downtown Boston.
It typically takes three to four months for the court to issue a decision.
