Page 343 - BOXFORD

This action involves a complaint which was filed in March of 2008 pursuant to G.L. c.40A, §17,
appealing the Zoning Board of Appeals' February 21, 2008 Remand Decision, which upheld the
decision of the Building Inspector that the Ingaldsby Farm Stand, located at 14 Washington
Street, is in compliance with the Town's Zoning Bylaw and the agricultural use exemption under
G.L. c.40A, §3. A trial was scheduled to commence on January 31, 2011, but on the morning of
the trial, the Town's co-defendants, the landowners and operators of lngaldsby Farm Stand,
informed Town Counsel that they would not proceed with the trial and would concede that they
did not have records to demonstrate compliance with G.L. c.40A, §3. The Court entered an order
finding that the Town's co-defendants had conceded the issue and that they would have to
demonstrate to the Town that they complied with G.L. c.40A, §3 either in the past year or the
upcoming year prior to operating pursuant to the Town's Farm Stand Zoning Bylaw. The plaintiff
then filed a Complaint for civil contempt against the Farm Defendants and the Building
Inspector, alleging that the Farm Defendants had not produced sufficient documentation of their
compliance with G.L. c.40A §3 and that the Building Inspector had failed to enforce the law
against them. Trial was held in July, 2012. The Court issued an opinion in favor of all the
defendants on March 12, 2013, finding that the Farm Defendants had submitted sufficient
documentation in light of the wording of the Court's previous order and that the Building
Inspector had responded appropriately to the documentation provided. An appeal was filed and
the Appeals Court affirmed the Superior Court dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint for
contempt. The Appeals Court concluded that the action had been frivolous and directed the
Town to submit a motion to recover attorney’s fees incurred in defending the appeal as well as
twice its costs, i.e., for printing the appellate brief. The Appeals Court denied the plaintiff’s
request for reconsideration, and the Supreme Judicial Court denied further appellate review.

Varsity Wireless, LLC v. Town of Boxford

Varsity Wireless is challenging a denial of a variance and special permit to construct a monopine
telecommunications facility at 12 Mortimer Road, under the Federal Telecommunications Act.
The Town is represented by special counsel in this matter.

Respectfully Submitted,

Paula Lia Fitzsimmons, Chair

Board Members
Paula Lia Fitzsimmons, Chair
Barbara Jessel, Vice Chair
David Peterson, Clerk

342