After years-long battle, Ossipee Main Street building demolished

OSSIPEE — The former Ossipee Main Street Program building was demolished last Thursday, after a 19-month-long legal saga.

Whether it's the end of the saga remains to be seen. One champion of the building says she will continue to fight the town over the demolition. 

An excavator was on site Thursday, moving rubble into dumpsters. Clearing the building makes room for a parking lot for the nearby park and a rail trail that's being planned.

Ossipee selectmen had said the building at 15 Moultonville Road, which served as headquarters for the now defunct Ossipee Main Street Program, was in poor shape and had mold issues.

"I think having additional parking in general for recreation purposes and for the downtown, it's going to be a huge thing," said Town Administrator Matt Sawyer.

"As we talked about over the last year or two, we plan to make a through way behind the gazebo, so it'd be parking and then a one way exit to go out towards the other parking lot that's on Dore Street."

The removal of the building would allow for larger farmers markets and  concerts in the park, he said, adding it would also create parking for a rail trail that's being developed in the area. 

On Nov. 10, Probate Judge Leslie Leonard granted the town's request that a deed restriction be removed in order to allow demolition of the building. The judge's order came about six months after the town requested it.

The state of New Hampshire, the other party in the probate case, agreed the deed restriction could be removed. 

But not everyone thinks the District Court case is closed.

Resident Kassandra Johnson believes the town made a mistake. Specifically, she said the town failed to wait until the time frame for reconsideration or appeal to the New Hampshire Supreme Court had passed.

The notice of Leonard's decision by Clerk of Court Elaine Lowe, dated Nov. 13, says, "Any motion for reconsideration must be filed with this court within 10 days of the date of this notice. Any appeals to the Supreme Court must be filed within 30 days of the date of this notice."

Sawyer dismissed this concern, saying, "Nothing on the 'Assented-To Order of Final Judgement' says you must wait for the appeals period to proceed and our Attorney said to go forward with the demo, as this is a "Final Judgement."

Leonard's order comes after the town had an unrelated but long legal battle with Lynn Clarke, former president of the Main Street Program, who took the selectmen to Carroll County Superior. She claimed the selectmen's decision violated the New Hampshire Right to Know Law. 

In April of 2024, Clarke took the selectmen to court over evicting the group and voting to tear down the building, claiming it was a right-to know-law violation. 

Judge Mark Attorri dismissed Clarke's case in April, but Clarke continued to try to file motions to keep it going.  

"Over the next five months (since the April dismissal) Ms. Clarke filed no less than 11 different pro se motions to reopen, reconsider or otherwise revisit the merits of the case; all of those motions were denied by the court," said Attorri in an Oct. 1 order.

"Now, following the most recent denial, Ms. Clarke has filed still five more motions seeking essentially the same relief.

"Enough is enough. The court has done its best to understand and fairly address the substance of Ms. Clarke's complaints in its rulings, but it will not allow the resources of the judicial branch to be further and unreasonably burdened by this avalanche of repetitious filings. All pending motions are denied."

Attorri continued, "the Electronic Filing Center is ordered not to accept any further motions or submissions by Lynn M. Clarke in this matter. Case close."

Sawyer commented: "Superior Court says it all: 'enough is enough' in the Judge’s own words regarding the extreme amount of frivolous motions Ms. Clarke has filed attempted to relitigate the same case."

In a statement Friday, Clarke said: "I did see that the building was demolished. I am not going to speculate or inflame the situation publicly — I will simply say that demolition occurred while multiple court cases and an active Supreme Court appeal were still pending.

"I have already filed the appropriate notices with the courts regarding spoliation and material changes affecting the appeal. From this point forward, I will let the courts address the implications of demolition during pending litigation."