ROCKPORT — The Monday morning spent in Knox County Courtroom No. 1 with Justice Bruce Mallonee was of patient legal discourse, as attorneys for three different parties involved in the Rockport Village hotel dispute each presented arguments to him as to why their interests should prevail.  

In the end, and just before handing out paper copies of a particular law case he wanted the lawyers to study, Justice Mallonee thanked them all for their efficiency and the quality of work contained in the written material and oral presentations made before before him.

Each attorney represented clients that included plaintiffs Friends of Rockport, Clare Tully, Mark Schwarzmann and John Priestley, and defendants the Town of Rockport and 20 Central Street LLC, 

20 Central Street LLC is the entity that is currently constructing the new hotel in Rockport Village. The owners are Stuart and Marianne Smith, and their son, Tyler Smith, all of whom were in the courtroom, with their attorneys.

Rockport’s planner Orion Thomas was in the courtroom, along with the town’s attorney, Daniel Murphy. No plaintiffs were present, other than their counsel, whose lead is Kristin Collins.

In mid-July and after the Rockport Zoning Board of Appeals concluded its own hearings on appeals of the municipal permitting process, and finding in favor of the town and 20 Central Street LLC,  Justice Mallonee issued his order. He said he would take up the constitutional question concerning two land use ordinance amendments approved in August 2020 by town voters, and whether they should have been considered by the town when processing a building permit for a new hotel in Rockport Village.

Those two amendments had been placed on the municipal warrant via citizen petitions.

Part of the ZBA appeal (read the complete appeal here) asserted that the wrong ordinance governing building permit applications for Village hotels was applied. The appellants said that the 2020 ordinance amendment, which was approved at Town Meeting in August 2020, should have been used. That amendment, approved by voters, limits the number of guest room in the Village to 20.

Justice Mallonee had set Sept. 7 as the deadline for all lawyers’ briefs to be filed.

One attorney, speaking in the courthouse hallway following the two-hour plus Oct. 4 hearing, described Justice Mallonee as “extremely conscientious,” and said the proceeding was akin to thoughtful deliberations before Maine’s highest court — the Supreme Judicial Court.

Mallonee distributed homework to all the parties, asking the attorneys to read a piece of case history and then respond to him with their thoughts.

That 1988 case, Larrivee versus Timmons, was decided by the Maine Supreme Court, whose justices wrote in their decision: “This case raises the question, novel to us, whether the steps for obtaining multiple land use approvals from different administrative agencies operating under different ordinances or statutes are all part of a single "proceeding" for purposes of the *745 grandfathering provision of 1 M.R.S.A. § 302 (1979).”

The case had rested on a dispute involved a mobile home park in Windham, and like the Rockport hotel case, involved the timing of amended ordinances approved by voters.

While Justice Mallonee’s opinion is not anticipated before the end of October, the plaintiffs are hoping he will issue an admonishment to the Rockport Planning Board for its review of the building and parking plans. They also hope the decision will include a requirement that the number of rooms be decreased from 26 to 20, and that certain architectural features will be modified to accommodate concerns of neighbors about the view shed.

Meanwhile, contractors continue to build the hotel, and Tyler Smith said he understands that it is not without risk. But, they are aiming to close up the structure before winter arrives and attention will turn to the interior of the hotel.

Reach Editorial Director Lynda Clancy at lyndaclancy@penbaypilot.com; 207-706-6657