BRUNSWICK, Maine — A conflict between residents and Brunswick officials over public access to coastal property is likely going to court.
Two weeks after the town council rejected a petition signed by 1,164 Brunswick residents hoping to create a park on waterfront property, a recently formed nonprofit group filed suit against the town, arguing councilors relied on incorrect legal opinions when they rejected the petition and chose not to schedule a public hearing and referendum vote.
The suit, filed in Portland Superior Court by Brunswick Citizens for Collaborative Government and Brunswick residents Robert Baskett and Soxna Dice, alleges that Brunswick town attorney Stephen Langsdorf incorrectly interpreted the town’s charter and that councilors violated the charter by choosing not to schedule a public hearing and referendum after receiving the signatures supporting a proposed ordinance to create a public park at 946 Mere Point Road.
“The majority of the town council blatantly ignored the voices of nearly 1,200 Brunswick residents,” Brunswick resident Mark Latti said in a statement this week. “Coastal access is disappearing across Maine, and instead of giving Brunswick citizens a voice, the Brunswick town council is preparing to practically throw away 4 acres of town-owned oceanfront property on Mere Point.
“The council wrongly rejected the signatures. It’s hard to believe we have to file suit in order to make the town abide by its own statutes and implement the Brunswick Charter’s citizen initiative laws,” Latti said.
But Langsdorf said Thursday that he informed the petitioners when they took out papers that because the council passed an “order” to sell the land, such a petition would not bind the council to revisit their decision to sell the property.
“This is basically an attempt to go through the back door … four months later,” Langsdorf said.
After the town acquired the 4-acre waterfront lot at 946 Mere Point Road for nonpayment of property taxes, three town committees and some town staff recommended turning the property into a public park with water access, according to documents filed in court.
Nevertheless, after outcry by “residential neighbors” of the property, in September 2016, the council voted 5-4 to sell the property, which would likely generate $10,000 annually in property taxes, officials said.
The petition effort begun on Nov. 1 garnered 1,164 signatures, which were submitted on Jan. 27.
On Feb. 6, the council voted 7-2 to reject the petition calling for a referendum on reversing the council’s September decision, and declined to schedule a public hearing, basing their decision on Langsdorf’s opinion, which was supported by an attorney from the Maine Municipal Association.
But Cape Elizabeth attorney David Lourie, who represents the plaintiffs in the suit and who previously represented the city of Portland, said Wednesday, “They don’t have the right to not call a public hearing.”
Lourie said previous rulings in Maine have found that municipalities that refused to issue petition forms violated the First Amendment, although he said he’s not familiar with any cases in which a council rejected a petition after the signatures were collected.
“The town’s in a hurry to deed us out of the case, but the fact is that they were wrong,” he said. “I think the council figured this whole thing would go through and nobody would challenge them in court,” Lourie said. “They’re wrong. The citizens of Brunswick are not going to stand by and see their right to petition destroyed.”
“When they asked for the papers for the petition, they didn’t have a right, outright, to do it, but we thought at the time that to tell them no, right off, you can’t even do anything before some time had passed, that that might not be fair,” Town Council Vice Chairwoman Kathy Wilson said Wednesday. “So they knew that the petition was not legal and it didn’t legally hold any water, so to speak.”
Wilson said the council determined that the town already owns “more waterfront land than it can maintain,” including on Bunganuc Road and Wharton’s Point, and that the Mere Point Road property “is probably one of the least suitable sites I’ve ever seen” for a public park.
Wilson said the petitioners represent a small, vocal minority in the town.
“They can sue all they want. What I’ve heard is that rarely will any type of judge [rule in their favor]. They make a lot of noise, but they have no idea the number of people I’ve talked to who say, ‘Please don’t let this happen.’ It’s not that we’re not responding to the majority of the people, it’s just that these people are the loudest. The other people don’t come out and rant and rave.”
Langsdorf said Thursday that nothing prevents the town from moving ahead with selling the property at this point, and said the council did vote to list it with a Realtor.
But Lourie has filed a motion at the Registry of Deeds to note on the title that a suit is pending on the property — a motion Langsdorf said is improper.
“Everyone should know that this many citizens wanted it to be protected as a park and if someone wants to buy it on those terms, knowing that a lawsuit is pending, so be it,” Lourie said.