Grounds for Appeal:

STATEMENT TO THE PRESS FROM ATTY. PECCI

The recent Board of Health vote on Casella’s application to establish the Southbridge Landfill as a regional MSW facility should not be construed as final and binding. There are a number of circumstances that cast grave doubt upon the validity of the BOH proceeding.

According to the Southbridge Charter, the BOH is comprised of three members. A vote of the Council is not sufficient to change the Town Charter, nor does a town manager have the power to reorganize the Board of Health. Atty. Colognesi, the chairman of the charter commission, confirmed the limitations of the Town Manager’s authority in his email to me, attached hereto. 

Until such time as the Charter is properly amended, there are only three legal members of the Board of Health: O’Leary, Zaido, and Barnardone in order of their appointment.  Tremblay and Cook, the most recent appointees are invalid members.  Only one of the three legal members of the Board voted to grant Casella’s proposal; the other two found that granting the proposal would pose a danger.

In addition, we will be filing an Appeal before Superior Court to overturn the vote to grant the Request, based in part on the fact that the Board has only three legal members, but also on the failure of the Board in following the Code of Massachusetts regulations.

The CMR calls for all parties to have an opportunity to present their case to the Board of Health.  Nevertheless, the closing arguments and proposed findings were never presented to the Board by their Attorney, Michael Scott.  When one of the Board members obtained the documents on his own initiative and presented copies to the Board, the Chair and Attorney Scott refused to allow them time to review them before calling for a vote.  Moreover, they refused to  allow the Board to discuss the Site Suitability Criteria on which the law requires their decision to be based. This is all a matter of record.

In addition, Atty. Scott wrote findings on behalf of the Board that the Board did not have an opportunity to read.  Again, this is a matter of record. There are numerous other illegalities to justify this decision to be overturned on Appeal.

In summary, this matter is by no means decided, so it would be reckless indeed for the Acting Town Manager to spend money that the Town may not be entitled to spend.