UPDATE: Marlborough mayor vetoes proposed fire station land purchase order

1360

UPDATE: Marlborough mayor vetoes proposed fire station land purchase order
Mayor Arthur Vigeant spoke during a groundbreaking ceremony for renovations to the Marlborough Public Library last year. (Photo/Laura Hayes)

UPDATE: This article has been updated with comments from City Council President Michael Ossing and Mayor Arthur Vigeant.

MARLBOROUGH – Marlborough Mayor Arthur Vigeant has vetoed an order from the City Council pertaining to the purchase of 100 Locke Drive and the construction of a new fire station there.

The vetoed order authorized Marlborough to buy the property and appropriated more than $5 million for that purchase, contingent on the transfer of more than $1.4 million to a stabilization account for construction costs.

The City Council voted 9-2 earlier this month to add an amendment regarding that $1.4 million transfer out of concern that Vigeant would otherwise not transfer the money, which the council had previously ordered him to do.

In a recent letter to the City Council, though, Vigeant wrote that City Solicitor Jason Grossfield had informed him of “ambiguities” in the actions of the council.

“I have been clear on the need to move forward without any additional constraints,” Vigeant wrote. “Even if I were to support the council’s decision, I could not move forward based on the concerns voiced by our city solicitor.”

‘I feel the initial order that was sent should be sufficient’

Vigeant wrote that he sent a proposed amended transfer to clarify funding sources in December after an initial order was sent to the council in September seeking authorization for the fire station purchase.

However, Vigeant wrote that the order did not appear as he sent it when it came back to him from the City Council, referring to the result as “confusing.”

“I feel the initial order that was sent should be sufficient,” Vigeant wrote. 

He said “the actions of the City Council” would determine whether he will resubmit the original order. 

Vigeant’s letter is included in the City Council’s agenda packet for its meeting on April 25.

Veto comes amid ongoing fire station debate

All this comes as councilors have already butted heads with Vigeant in recent weeks over questions of how to fund the land purchase for and construction of a fire station in Marlborough’s West Side area. 

Vigeant walked out of a City Council meeting on March 28 following one of these disagreements. 

He was not present at a meeting on April 11 where funding was discussed again, and where the council approved its now vetoed order.

This ongoing argument has largely focused on Vigeant’s decision to not transfer that $1.4 million sum to a stabilization account.

Vigeant has disagreed with the City Council over this, saying in a March 28 meeting that he prefers to “skip a step,” transferring funds directly to an account to purchase the property instead of first sending it to another stabilization account.

“I still have not heard the answer why you will not transfer monies that this council worked hard in a special permit to do,” City Council President Michael Ossing said to Vigeant in that same meeting, referencing a special permit agreement in 2019 that collected funds as a mitigation payment.

“The problem is, you’re standing on some principles and neither you nor Councilor [Kathleen] Robey are understanding the transfer process,” Vigeant responded. “It’s as simple as that.”

City Council president discusses next steps 

Contacted by the Community Advocate on Friday, Ossing said that he had “no idea,” what the ambiguities in the City Council’s order that Vigeant referenced could be.

Ossing said that the City Council’s order was clear in approving the purchase of 100 Locke Drive and the transfer of $5 million, contingent on Vigeant also sending a transfer of $1.4 million for the West Side Fire Station’s construction.

“The whole thing from the Mayor has lacked any specificity, from when we brought him before the Council to tell us why he wouldn’t transfer it,” Ossing said. “He didn’t tell us anything, and this letter doesn’t tell us anything.”

Ossing added that the Council cannot take action on the mayor’s veto at its April 25 meeting, as the veto has to lay on the table.

Ossing said that he wants the City Council to ask Grossfield to clarify what the ambiguities are, though, adding that he wants Grossfield to provide a suggested wording for the council’s order. 

The council could then take action at its next meeting on May 9, Ossing said, saying that the council can override the  mayor’s veto.

“If eight councilors support overriding the veto, then it passes and the mayor has to send down that transfer in order to go forward with the fire station,” Ossing said.

Ossing said he is not concerned about the fire station project potentially stalling, adding that there are enough votes in the City Council in support of the fire station to ensure the project moves forward.

The Community Advocate reached out to Vigeant and Grossfield for comment for this article. Grossfield was not available as of publication.

Vigeant responded on Friday afternoon with a statement regarding his veto.

“Anyone watching the meeting would have to agree that many councilors were confused on what they were voting on,” he said. “In addition, they over-reached their authority by splitting up the original order that was sent down.”

“As the City Solicitor stated, two orders indicating two transfers that could be construed as $5 [million] or $10 [million],” he continued. “Keeping in mind, although the Council may think their intent was clear, many years from now it would not be discernible.”

RELATED CONTENT

Marlborough City Council approves fire station purchase as disagreement with mayor continues

Marlborough Mayor, City Council members clash over fire station funding question

No posts to display