The Merritt property, purchased with public funds, is dedicated to open space, conservation and recreational purposes. Though aware of that dedication, the town manager and school superintendent promoted the property as site of school construction while ignoring their statutory obligations and its use restrictions. The attorney general opined the local dedication of that property is binding and that its use for school construction requires court approval, “Attorney general: Groton needs court permission to build school on Merritt property,” (March 6). Groton government is solely responsible for the current mess surrounding the Merritt Property as construction site for the proposed middle school. The next reasonable step is for the court to review the case and render an independent judgment.

Meanwhile, the King poperty is an alternative site available for consideration. Identified as essential to the long-range school development program, the town spent millions of extra dollars to prepare that property as building site for the Kolnaski School and as a rst step in developing a campus setting. Siting the middle school on the property offers school officials the added opportunity to further their expressed interest in creating inter-school synergy. Other viable options exist.

Richard A. Voyer

Mystic