HARPSWELL

With a judge’s decision expected Wednesday on the Mitchell Field water tower lawsuit, both the Friends of Mitchell Field and the town’s lawyer said they were optimistic.

In July, the friends group sued Harpswell in an effort to prevent the destruction of the disused 1950s water tower that had served Navy operations at its former fuel depot.

The judge’s decision could mark the end of a months-long effort by a small group of Harpswell residents to overturn a March town meeting vote to demolish the tower.

Contending that the initial vote was marred by misinformation and inappropriate actions by the town, the Friends of Mitchell Field organized a petition calling for a revote. When the selectmen rejected that petition, arguing that they needed to uphold decisions made at town meetings, the Friends of Mitchell Field attempted to go around town officials and host their own town meeting. Finally in late July, the group sued the town for blocking their petition.

The judge quickly recommended that the alternate town meeting be canceled and set a hearing date for last week.

The case went to court last week, with a full day of hearings Tuesday and closing arguments Friday afternoon. The process has been expedited because the contractor hired to demolish the water tower is hoping to do the work in September. The judge has said he expects to have a written decision issued no later than Wednesday of this week.

On Friday, Friends of Mitchell Field spokesman Robert McIntyre said he was optimistic that the judge would rule in the group’s favor. Specifically, McIntyre said that one of the biggest revelations of the hearings was that Selectman Rick Daniel had stated that he would take action against the group to prevent them from overturning the vote, supporting one of the group’s core claims that selectmen and town staff had acted inappropriately to stop them from forcing a new vote on the water tower.

Town Attorney Amy Tchao threw cold water on the idea that the judge would find elected officials and town staff were biased in how they handled the issue.

“I feel that the Friends of Mitchell Field’s arguments that board members and town officials were biased, which was a big part of their argument, is not the argument that is going to carry the day,” said Tchao. “Frankly, there is no basis in this record, no basis that came up in the hearing to make that kind of allegation, and it’s a really hurtful allegation, especially when it addresses town staff and the integrity of town staff who are just trying to do their job.”

She was equally dismissive of the Friends of Mitchell Field’s claims that the town violated their First Amendment rights.

“If you really reduce their claims to what they are, I think they’re basically that ‘We were unhappy with the town meeting vote. We felt like the town should have done more to advocate for our proposal,’ and (the selectmen’s) failure to do so — in their minds — was some kind of First Amendment violation,” Tchao said.

Tchao didn’t expect the judge to agree with that.

McIntyre said that he expected the loser of the case to appeal, which would draw out the dispute.

For her part, Tchao said that she had not spoken with the town about appealing if the judge rules against the town. She said she would be disappointed if the Friends of Mitchell Field lost and then appealed. It’s unclear what impact an appeal could have on timeline of September’s expected demolition.

The Times Record Sustaining Sponsor
We believe a community must be informed to thrive. bowdoin.edu