Groton Conservation Advocates say they'll accept different land for swap
Groton — Members of a Groton conservation group said Tuesday they would accept another property as protected open space in exchange for the town building a middle school on the Merritt property.
Groton wants to build on the Merritt property adjacent to Robert E. Fitch High School, and already has paid to design the school there. But the land is deed-restricted for passive recreation or open space, so the town must obtain approval of a Superior Court judge to build on the property.
As of Tuesday, no such request had been filed with the court.
Eugenia Villagra, a steering committee member of Groton Conservation Advocates, said Tuesday that group would encourage placing land restrictions on a portion of land known as the King property, on which Catherine Kolnaski Magnet School is located, in exchange for the town building on the Merritt property. The King property is roughly 120 acres, with about 40 acres used by the school.
Groton planned to offer a 20-acre property called Boulder Heights, off the end of Colver Avenue, as an alternative open space so it could use the Merritt property. But conservation activists opposed the swap, saying Boulder Heights doesn’t have the same value.
If Groton attempts to seek court approval for the Boulder Heights swap over the objections of environmental advocates, it could face a legal fight. Groton Conservation Advocates have not threatened legal action over the Boulder Heights swap but others could object, they said.
Additionally, the town has $100 million in state funding at stake. Voters approved spending $184 million on a plan to build or renovate three schools, including the middle school, and the state committed to reimburse $100 million to the town for the school construction.
Town Councilors met in executive session Tuesday evening with town attorneys and Superintendent Michael Graner to discuss strategy regarding the project and possible legal action.
The town has spoken to the attorney general’s office, but a spokeswoman on Friday said the office has not decided what position, if any, it would take.
"Attorneys for the town are aware that a court order is necessary to permit construction of a school on property that is restricted for passive recreation and conservation purposes,” spokeswoman Jaclyn Severance said. “Such an order is necessary whenever one seeks to use property in a manner inconsistent with a conservation or other charitable use restriction.”
“The Attorney General is tasked with protecting the public’s interest in charitable use restrictions, which are permanent and strict unless and until a court determines that honoring the restriction has become unfeasible,” she said. “Only a court can make such a determination, and it will be incumbent upon the town to explain to the court why it should make that conclusion in this matter.”
Other state departments also are aware that Groton needs court approval to use the land for a school. If the town wanted to change the location of the middle school because it couldn’t use the Merritt property, the state could consider an alternative and the “reasonableness” of the town’s request, said Konstantinos Diamantis, director of the Office of School Construction Grants and Review in the State Department of Administrative Services.
“If something goes wrong with the project, and they don’t have property and there was any expenditure in dollars, yes, the town would in fact, be liable to return the funds to the state of Connecticut,” he said.
The project approval requires Groton to begin construction two years from the date of grant commitment, he said.
Comment threads are monitored for 48 hours after publication and then closed.
