Land Use

Resident Files Motion to Dismiss Burrillville’s Countersuit in Artificial Turf Case

Share

PROVIDENCE — Attorneys for a local conservationist suing the town of Burrillville over a planned artificial turf field filed a motion in court last week to dismiss the town’s counterclaim against her.

Roberta Lacey’s lawyers said in court documents that the town’s counterclaim should be dismissed because it falls under Rhode Island’s Anti-SLAPP statute — a state law that is meant to protect against retaliatory lawsuits.

“In light of the potential retaliatory nature of the Defendants’ motion and its chilling effect on Plaintiff’s right to petition for redress, Plaintiff requests that the Court evaluate the motion under the Anti-SLAPP framework,” Lacey’s counsel stated in a document filed Jan. 6.

The filing also asked the court to deny Burrillville’s request to add the Burrillville Land Trust (a private, nonprofit group) to the counterclaim, stating, “Plaintiff contends that the Defendants’ motion to join a third-party defendant is in fact a retaliatory tactic aimed at punishing Plaintiff for engaging in protected activity.”

The town filed its counterclaim against Lacey in November, writing in its own complaint that Lacey based her suit on “speculative and unsubstantiated fears,” and interfered with the town’s contract to complete the turf field at Burrillville High School, which has cost the municipality money.

Town officials and their lawyers have argued that the level of PFAS found in the artificial turf and the amount that leeches off the fake grass is small and will not lead to negative health impacts.

In court documents, the town had also alleged that the land trust was financially supporting and facilitating Lacey’s case, and thus contributed to the “tortious interference with a contractual relationship” of which accused Lacey.

The legal battle between Burrillville and Lacey began in the fall, after Lacey filed a suit against the town claiming that the artificial turf field would contaminate drinking water with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known as forever chemicals or PFAS, and that the town had not properly sought zoning and planning approval for the field.

PFAS are a group of chemicals found in everything from waterproof fabric to firefighting foam and artificial turf, and some PFAS have been linked to serious health issues including decreased fertility and development delays in children.

Lacey’s complaint, filed in Providence Superior Court, led to a temporary restraining order in October, halting the field’s construction in Burrillville. Hours of dense and tense testimony followed at the end of the last year without a ruling on the field or the town’s counterclaim.

The judge overseeing the case asked both parties to file post-trial memos by the start of the year, but a future hearing on the case has not yet been scheduled.

Categories

Join the Discussion

View Comments

Recent Comments

  1. I don’t understand why the Town just doesn’t look for a safer alternative rather than use tax payer money to fight. Obviously, protecting the environment and health of the Town residents should be their priority.

  2. We are talking about our children’s health and the safety of our well water. Why do you have to name call and turn it into something it isn’t. All I care about is the future of our children. And what the cost will be to the Town when it needs to be removed later down the road for any reason like age or new laws that will banned it completely

  3. Ok so artificial turf vs grass that needs maintenance and fertilizer . Artificial turf is used all over for years. Liberals wasting money again crying against progress

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Your support keeps our reporters on the environmental beat.

Reader support is at the core of our nonprofit news model. Together, we can keep the environment in the headlines.

cookie