Waltham Mayor Lays Out Case For Stigmatine, Accuses Councillors Of Thwarting Progress

WALTHAM, MA — There are City Councilors who are in the Stigmatine Father's corner and they're going behind the mayor sabotaging the possibility of any deal to build a high school on the property, Mayor Jeannett McCarthy said in a letter signed and dated Sept. 20 and tweeted out to the city today.

"Councillors have every right to vote anyway he/she wishes, however as long as Councillors continue to deal directly with private parties, including Stigmatine priests, Stigmatine followers, individual real estate people and the Stigmatine attorney compromising the city's bargaining position, there is no hope for an agreement because the Stigmatine attorney knows that these counselors are in his corner. The Stigmatine attorney indicated to the city attorney we have friends on the city council and this will never happen," wrote the mayor.

(For more information on this and other neighborhood stories, subscribe to Waltham Patch to receive daily newsletters and breaking news alerts.)

The city recently reopened discussion to consider the Stigmatine property after the city council voted against the possibility of using the land owned by the Stigmatine Fathers to build a new high school in the city to address the growing population of students. This comes after back and forth over whether the city should look at taking the site by eminent domain or explore using the Fernald site to build.

McCarthy applied requested an additional $7.4 million to purchase the land on Lexington Street, and explained why in the three page letter, citing five main reasons, including that it was an effort to keep development there at bay. She also addresses the alleged $100 million associated with the Fernald site and an override and how the Stigmatine property came to be the most viable spot for a high school.

"Not for sale? Really?" she wrote. "At least back to July 14th 2015, the Stigmatine fathers, Inc, had site development plans from a private developer: 'Scheme A' for 327 units and 'scheme b' for 447 units," she said.

But she said the Stigmatine fathers never told the city of any plans to develop their property. On Jan. 4, 2016 after hearing from consultants that the land was being sold, the mayor said she went up to the Stigmatine office herself with a letter expressing interest in the land.

"I was advised by the person sitting at the desk that 30 acres was currently in the process of being permitted, but she would make sure the provincial the president of Stigmatine fathers Inc /Springfield Priest would get my letter," she wrote of the land that some 96 single family homes could be built there. And the zoning is set for that, she said.

Acquisition of Stigmatine land has been in the city's open space plan since 1994, according to the mayor and she's wanted to use the land for a school first, and if not for school, for open space.

What city councilors think

Bill Fowler who is a city councilor up for reelection this year for Ward 2 said he was one of three who voted with the mayor to take the land by eminent domain back when it first came before the council.

It was the Stigmatine lawyers who reached out to individual councilors. "They continually showed up at our houses with packets and I asked them to give it to the clerk and distribute. I have voted for every single time with the mayor. I agree with every thing she said," he added.

Councilors who have opposed taking of the land from the beginning have also said if the Stigmatines are open to buying it, they'd support the plan, he said.

"Well, if we haven't upped the anti to them of what we're willing to pay them. How can she negotiate a potential sale? I don't know if it's possible at this time. But if she has $7.4 million more in her hand, it helps," he said.

He questions why the Stigmatines would call a developer to assess land if they didn't need to sell. "My own belief was they needed money then they needed money now. Shouldn't we have the mayor in the best position to negotiate with them?," he said adding that out of the three locations to place a high school he still believes the Stigmatine spot is the best place for both long term and short range needs of the high school.

"People say if we take this property we'll end up in court for years... That's just simply not the reality if you talk to a land court attorney," he said. Once the deal is done the land would become the city's to build on. The only thing the Stigmatines could do is sue for more money, he said.

"It's very frustrating because this should have been a much smoother thing. Unfortunately it wasn't. ... If not the Stigmatines where? If you say at the current site aren't we going to be looking for property three years from now? All we're doing is kicking the can down the road for someone else to have to deal with," he said.

But he acknowledges he's in the minority on that point when it comes to the city council's view.

'We denied it'

"I'm at a loss for words," said City Council President Diane LeBlanc. "We have a form of government. There's a process. The council has decided the eminent domain issue. We denied it."

She said she understands that the mayor asked for $25 million to enhance her power to negotiation, but she said the Stigmatines were clear that they did not want to negotiate when they sent a letter saying as much.

"You can only negotiate if you have a willing entity. I understand the mayor wants people to understand her position, but it's been decided," she said.

As for the matter of the $100 million in reference to an environmental clean up at Fernald, LeBlanc said that was taken out of context. "I'm only one councilor but I believe what ever the environmental impact is there it's our responsibility to clean it up. We won't know what that looks like until the environmental study of the entire property can be done," she said. Whatever a full fledged environmental analysis comes up with - be it $100 million or $1 million - she said the city should foot the bill.

"We don't know what we're dealing with right now. We're operating without real information in fear of environmental issues and the bottom line is we own this property and we have a responsibility to clean it up," she said.

She said that the mayor brought up the possibility of a tax override in her letter is misleading. "You don't ever hit the taxpayer with that kind of a bill, those types of expenses are handled by long term bonds," she said.

And as for accusations of sabotage?

"She's made some accusations that councilors interfered with negotiations. I never dealt with negotiators. I never met that attorney or Father White 'til they showed up in council when we were taking the vote," she said. She acknowledged meeting with the father and talking with him because he lives and works in the city, though.

"I never ever provided him with any information that was not a matter of public record. I mean seriously, the man lived in Waltham. He worked in Waltham. Is he not entitled to information that's a matter of public record, especially when you're talking about taking away his ministry and his home?"