NORTHAMPTON — Mayor David J. Narkewicz tried late last year to reach a formal agreement with Forbes Library trustees over financing and library ownership. But those efforts stalled and resulted in the legal action taken by Forbes in probate court Friday, newly released correspondence between library trustees and the city shows.
The documents released by the mayor’s office include a Nov. 11, 2015, email from Narkewicz to Forbes Library trustee Russell Carrier informing him that the city was providing the library with $13,250 in trust money earlier than usual to help stabilize its finances.
In the email, the mayor also stated that he was asking City Solicitor Alan Seewald to provide an opinion regarding ownership of the library, as he wanted clarity on “long-standing issues” the mayor had been discussing with trustees concerning maintenance and utilities, among other budgetary matters.
“As soon as that opinion has been completed, I would like to set up another meeting with you (to) discuss it and work toward some kind of formalized agreement between the city and board of trustees,” Narkewicz wrote.
Carrier replied in an email eight minutes later, “This is a great start!!!! Looking forward to our next meeting.”
Nearly three months later, on Jan. 28, 2016, the mayor sent a copy of an opinion from Seewald to Carrier, requesting a meeting to discuss next steps on “resolving ongoing maintenance and budgetary issues.”
In his opinion, Seewald wrote that “Judge Forbes made clear his intent that the Library, once constructed, be a municipal institution,” and as for management and control of the library, “the Library functions as a department of the City.”
Seewald further wrote that “as elected public officials that expend public funds for a public purpose, the Trustees are a public body and the employees of the Library are public employees.”
He was scheduled to meet with trustees April 28, but trustees in February canceled the meeting with Seewald indefinitely, according to correspondence between the library and mayor’s office.
On Friday, the library’s trustees filed a complaint against the city in Hampshire Probate and Family Court claiming the mayor views the trustees as a governmental body and library as a city department.
The trustees disagree — and say the will of the late Charles Edward Forbes puts the library under their control.
“In the interest of putting this matter to rest, the Trustees seek relief from the Court in the form of a declaration as to the rights and obligations of the parties, including specifically the status of the Trustees,” the complaint states.
Narkewicz issued a statement Monday saying he is “disheartened” that the library’s trustees would file a lawsuit against the city and noted he has been a strong supporter of the library as mayor, a city councilor, resident and patron.
“My proposed (fiscal year 2017) city budget would appropriate over $1.2 million in tax dollars to Forbes Library, which would represent a 3.2 percent increase from the current year and over 95 percent of its operating budget,” Narkewicz wrote. “My administration has also provided hundreds of thousands of dollars for capital improvements to the library.”
Forbes Library employees are also on the city’s health insurance and retirement system plans.
Narkewicz noted that since becoming mayor he has been engaged in a dialogue with trustees about how to properly fund and maintain what he described as a “beloved institution.”
“I felt that we were having productive conversations,” the mayor wrote in a statement emailed to the Gazette. “Unfortunately, the Trustees have unilaterally terminated those discussions and chosen to litigate instead.”
The mayor further stated that he has “no interest in usurping the authority of the trustees in the day-to-day operations of the library” and that one of the long-standing challenges that predates his administration is “how an institution initiated by a 19th century will and now funded almost entirely by city taxpayers interfaces with the requirements of 21st century open government.”
The mayor wrote that he is committed to continue discussions with the library “despite the unnecessary and potentially costly actions taken by the Trustees.”
Eric Lucentini, a Northampton lawyer representing the trustees, told the Gazette last week when the lawsuit was filed that Forbes trustees believe the library exists as a matter of trust law under the will of Forbes, who was a Northampton lawyer and state Supreme Judicial Court judge.
Elaine M. Reall, one of seven library trustees and a lawyer at the same firm as Lucentini, said the board had voted not to talk to the media about the complaint filed Friday.
After trustees canceled Seewald’s meeting with them, the city and library continued exchanging correspondence. In a March 23 letter, the trustees wrote to Narkewicz that Seewald cited “no legal or statutory support for his conclusions” and that they were seeking independent legal advice on the matters.
“Throughout his opinion Attorney Seewald erroneously describes the Library as an arm of City government rather than recognizing its status as an independent institution established under a valid will and trust by Judge Forbes,” the trustees wrote.
Trustees also wrote that they were taking the matter to Probate Court for a ruling on the role the city plays, if any, in the governance of the library.
The following month, on April 20, Seewald sent a blitz of letters to the offices of the secretary of state, attorney general, and inspector general, seeking opinions on whether Forbes Library is subject to the state’s open meeting, public records, and procurement laws, according to correspondence reviewed by the Gazette.
A supervisor of public records, Alan N. Cote, earlier ruled in February 2008 that Forbes Library and its trustees are private entities not subject to the public records law.
In a May 11 letter to Shawn A. Williams, the current public records chief, and copied to the state inspector general and attorney general’s offices, Lucentini urged the state agencies to decline to render opinions to Seewald.
“The City Solicitor’s letters merely evince a multi-pronged effort by the current mayoral administration to improperly interfere with the Trustees’ exercise of their duties and powers under the will,” Lucentini wrote. “This atter can be put to rest only by means of a binding judicial interpretation of the applicable provisions of the Forbes will.”
Dan Crowley can be reached at dcrowley@gazettenet.com.