Eric Taussig: Moultonborough selectboard vote to raze Taylor House was underhanded

If you are a Moultonborough voter, you should be concerned about your selectboard’s actions regarding the Taylor property both before and after the 2021 Town Meeting. Residents should know what prompted the selectboard’s preordained post-Town Meeting vote on July 1, to raze the landmark Taylor House, in derogation of approved Article 16 requiring a site study of the Taylor property.

Last Thursday’s board vote, conducted with no proper notice and no public hearing, was unlawful and showed total disregard for the community’s interests in the property. Even more troubling was the selectboard’s concerted effort prior to Town Meeting to silence critics and keep voters from knowing any details about their “deal” to sell the property to Huggins Hospital.

At the July 1, selectboard meeting, I publicly disclosed that I had filed a right to know request request for communications between the selectboard and Huggins Hospital, as I was interested in the proposed transaction to sell the Taylor property. I asked why the letter of intent and purchase and sale agreements were prepared by the Town (seller), rather than by Huggins (buyer), a reversal of normal protocol. My question received no rational answer.

The RTK documents revealed that on April 2, Town Administrator Charles Smith emailed Town Counsel, with the selectboard’s list of seven conditions:

“Our board of selectmen would like to move forward with a finalized agreement to present at Town Meeting. Huggins Hospital requested that we write up a letter of intent for their counsels’ review. The board did not object to this . . . ”

The emails demonstrate that the selectboard, in pursuing any “deal,” was prepared to allow Huggins to bypass the Town’s planning and zoning requirements. On April 22, Huggins asked the Town to:

“Provide language that there is not an indication of any current or proposed town zoning, planning, Village Center Overlay or historical district concerns that would inhibit an appropriately code, design and site development compliant building plan for an 8,500-10,000-square-foot building from being built” – and this language was added verbatim to the draft LOI by Chair Kevin Quinlan on April 29.

The selectboard first publicly discussed and approved the LOI on May 6, and signed the P&S with the same terms on May 10. Starting on May 12, Moultonborough citizens reacted to the proposed “deal” with letters to The Laconia Daily Sun and Meredith News, and both papers reported on the potential sale on May 13. However, the Huggins board would not meet until late that day to approve the LOI and P&S.

Early on May 13, Quinlan contacted Huggins to provide a ‘heads up’ about the media:

“The LDS called me for comment and I asked them twice to hold any comments and letters to the editor until after today but they refused.”

Huggins responded:

“Unfortunately, it has become very public, very fast. It is likely that the Huggins board of trustees are or will be very aware of the, quite honestly, negative press . . . we fear that this latest barrage of email will likely challenge the decision making.”

At 9 a.m. on May 14, Smith alerted the selectboard and Town Counsel that “Our chairman was notified that HH has withdrawn their interest in the Taylor Property,” resulting in the "update" announcement recommending that Article 15 (to authorize the Taylor property sale) be tabled at Town Meeting, which appeared at 2 p.m. on the town’s website with the community message from Huggins.

Huggins Hospital President and Chief Executive Officer Jeremy Roberge wrote to Quinlan at 1 p.m. to clarify their action (excerpt):

“The timing of Town Meeting and short period of time to review the letter of intent has resulted in our leadership team and board of trustees deciding that we need more time to review and evaluate needs and options before moving forward. While there are obvious benefits to Huggins and the town with us owning and expanding our services on the Taylor property, there also appears to be issues and misunderstandings regarding the property.”

Communications continued after the Town Meeting. Quinlan informed Huggins on May 17, apparently referring to Article 16:

“They did approve spending $75,000 to determine what site conditions exist and it is in the board's hands to spend it . . . We could do test borings. Perk tests, etc. If there are specific site concerns that might make sense for us to look at in general I would welcome any suggestions.”

This offer was made despite the fact that Article 16 requires the selectboard to take specific actions with regard to the Taylor House and property that they will now apparently disregard.

Roberge replied:

“I would like us to continue our discussions and as you noted I feel the priority is for the town to figure out what needs to be done with the house. Based on the reactions in the papers, along with emails that I received directly, such as the one from the executive director of the New Hampshire Preservation Alliance, there seems to be strong feelings around protecting the house. I really don’t want Huggins in the middle of that again and I would prefer for the town to reach agreement on what needs to be done with the house before we could consider that property.”

The selectboard agenda for July 1, listed “Taylor House” under new business. Most would presume this related to fulfillment of the obligations of Article 16 as approved at Town Meeting, but in a contemptible surprise, it was instead a pre-orchestrated vote to demolish the Taylor House.

The selectboard’s underhanded vote to raze the historic Taylor House was clearly intended to remove any obstacle from the “deal” the board is chasing to sell the property. Unfortunately, the selectboard has violated the voters’ instructions and the public trust with their vote, as the community has neither been consulted nor agreed to this irreversible action.

•••

Eric Taussig is an attorney in Moultonborough.