LEVERETT — In the wake of Town Meeting rejecting taking by eminent domain an easement to access conservation land off Shutesbury Road, several residents are calling on the Select Board to put an end to related Land Court litigation.
At Tuesday’s Select Board meeting, the first since Town Meeting was nearly evenly split on the eminent domain article, but well short of the necessary two-thirds majority, two formal presentations were made appealing for a resolution to the legal dispute with David and Norma Evans and their daughter Julie Evans Marlowe.
“It is truly unacceptable the way this family has been treated by this current administration,” said Silas Ball of Chestnut Hill Road.
The family, which is renovating the neighboring home at 101 Shutesbury Road into a multi-generational dwelling, filed a Land Court lawsuit in June 2024 against the town and its Conservation Commission due to concerns about the public using a strip of land to get to the Blueberry Patch, also known as the Gordon S. King Life Estate, a former Christmas tree farm.
Since that time, the family has put up a gate and no trespassing signs that prevent the easiest route for the public to get to the property. But town officials and municipal workers, such as police officers and firefighters who might need to respond to an incident on the conservation land, continue to have access.
Speaking before a Town Hall meeting room filled with residents, Ball said his concern is that continuing the legal fight despite voters rejecting the eminent domain is leading town officials to a so-called “adverse possession” claim to take the property, which he called a “sneaky move” prompted by the Select Board having the ears of a small group of manipulative residents.
Ball said the no-trespassing signs are sensible, observing that when King was alive he and his father, Lynn, understood they needed permission from the Evans to use that access point for cutting and removing cordwood.
For Peter May of Juggler Meadow Road, the town should try to find a nearby strip of land to access the property and give up on the easement, which doesn’t grant the general public the right to enter onto the premises that way.
“The town, or a select group in this town, that they’re listening to and getting a bug in their ear about this,” May said. “I really hope this town gets some sense and stops this nonsense.”
Prior to the presentations, Select Board members said they wouldn’t be responding to comments, with member Jed Proujansky saying that the board is doing what’s right and best for the town.
“We are in litigation and there is very little we can say about that,” Proujansky said.
Board member Tom Hankinson said he would be having a meeting with the Evans family this week in hopes of reaching a resolution.
The town has incurred about $20,000 in legal expenses
Proujansky appealed for the divisiveness on the national level not to enter town. “Let’s not let that take over Leverett,” Proujansky said
Two other residents used public comment to argue against the eminent domain.
Tim Shores of Long Plain Road, a member of the School Committee, said he came to Town Meeting with an open mind, but now it is “irrefutable that a community is trying to take something away from a family.”
Patrick Jernigan of Hemenway Road offered a similar analysis. “You are using your positions of power to take something away from a taxpayer,” Jernigan said.
Other business
In other business, the Select Board received a request from Apple Ahearn of North Leverett Road to adopt a proclamation defending democracy. Ahearn said the proclamation, already approved in Amherst and Shutesbury, is about asking the Trump administration to follow the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
Members also said they will advise departments to build budgets with 2.5% increases for fiscal year 2027, while also presenting what it would take to offer level services.
The board’s vote came after the Finance Committee offered two alternatives, with member Steve Weiss suggesting that departments should present plans for retaining as much as possible, because a 2.5% increase is arbitrary, while member Nancy Grossman, observing that the state’s chapter 70 school aid funding formula is a disaster, said schools would have to bring in a much bigger increase.
“I think if we give more flexible or loose guidelines to come back with the same services, those are going to be increases beyond 2.5%,” Grossman said.