NORTHAMPTON — When the city filed a counterclaim in probate court against Forbes Library this month, it cited a 33-year-old court ruling to bolster its case that library trustees are subject to the state’s open government laws.
In a June 9, 1983 decision in Hampshire Probate and Family Court, Judge Sean M. Dunphy wrote that “The duties of the Trustees of Forbes Library have become primarily those of public officials rather than those of Trustees of donated public charitable trusts.”
Dunphy was a former Northampton mayor and his ruling came after trustees sought to change certain conditions in the will of Charles E. Forbes, which established the library in 1881. Forbes was a Northampton lawyer and state Supreme Court judge.
At the time, trustees sought to expand their numbers from three to five, eliminate a restriction on who could serve as a library employee or trustee, and sought more flexibility with its investment options, among other issues.
Dunphy’s use of the term “public officials” came after he noted that public funds raised by taxation constitute a majority of the library’s budget — and that library employees are paid with municipal funds.
“If the question is ‘Are they public or private trustees?’ He’s saying they’re public,” Northampton Mayor David J. Narkewicz said when asked his perspective on Dunphy’s ruling, which he Tweeted June 9. “I believe that was the purpose of (City Solicitor) Alan (Seewald) citing that case.”
Narkewicz said Dunphy’s reference to trustees duties being comparable to those of public officials speaks to one of the key areas of dispute between the city and Forbes Library in probate court today: whether trustees are subject to the state’s Open Meeting, Public Records, Conflict of Interest, Procurement, Prevailing Wage and Construction Bid laws.
“At least for the open government piece, that’s sort of at the heart of what we’re trying to determine,” he said.
In the view of Forbes Library trustees, who are elected by the public, the 1983 decision does not fit neatly into the city’s interpretation.
“The context of the decision was totally different,” said Eric J. Lucentini, a Northampton attorney who is representing Forbes Library trustees in the current court case. “The court very clearly did not say the trustees are public officials.”
Lucentini said the 1983 case involved trustees seeking changes to the provisions of Forbes’ will and that the court was “hedging” when it raised the issue of trustees being public officials.
“The court was saying essentially we’re dealing with a constitutional matter at this point,” Lucentini said. “That opens an inquiry, it’s the beginning of a discussion.”
Asked for his take on Dunphy’s mention of trustees carrying out the work of public officials, Russell W. Carrier, then and still trustees president, said trustees were focused on the main issues raised in their legal filing at the time and that their status as public officials was not one of them.
“I don’t think we really thought too much about it,” Carrier said. “I don’t think it made any impression, more one way than another.”
Carrier said unlike most other elected officials in the city, Forbes Library trustees receive no city benefits. He added that there are other institutions besides those in local government that use elections to choose their leaders.
Forbes Library has until early July to respond to the city’s June 9 counterclaim in probate court.
The legal dispute began May 20 when the library’s trustees filed a complaint against the city in probate court claiming the mayor views the trustees as a governmental body and library as a city department.
The city has expressed concerns about the appropriation process for Forbes Library and how it handles repairs and maintenance. The city stated in its June 9 court filing that while trustees are “nominally the trustees of a charitable corporation, they are “governmental” for the purposes of open government laws … ”
The trustees disagree — and say the Forbes will puts the library under their control and seek to maintain the status quo.
“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,” their May 20 complaint states.
Staff Writer Dan Crowley can be reached at dcrowley@gazettenet.com.