The verdict states that the trust does not have an enforceable contract with the city to build on those 15 parcels of city land. According to the memorandum of the case, the trust had originally been designated as developers of the property in 1999, but that contract was for one year. After that term expired, the city did not reappoint the trust as developer. In court, the trust stated that its agreement with the city was still binding but the court agreed with the city that because it had not re-appointed the trust, it no longer had rights to develop the parcels.

Lawyers for the trust reportedly insist that it was denied the right to develop those parcels because of its involvement in the linkage payment scandal and the mayor's desire to disassociate himself from the trust. The trust was established to collect linkage funds, which are payments that developers are required to give to the city to benefit the community to compensate for the disruption caused by their development. The trust signed a linkage deal over three years ago to get payments from firms developing the waterfront in its area. City officials at the time wanted to get South Boston's support for the proposed convention center that would be built in that district.

Housing officials from other neighborhoods sued in Federal court, especially since it was believed that South Boston officials were not going to support equal opportunity housing for outsiders or minorities. The mayor settled the case and nullified the agreement. The city has since promise to distribute the funds more evenly. Reportedly, the trust could have gotten as much as $65 million from the deal. The trust has since sued, claiming that the city had no right to nullify a binding contract.

In his ruling, the judge took notice of the political nature of this case by stating that "this Court has made its decision on facts not in any way in dispute. The facts sought by the trust's Rule 56(f) filing relate to political issues between the Mayor and the former President of the City Council, which, even if true, would have no effect on the legal issues upon which this decision is based."

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Once you are an ALM Digital Member, you’ll receive:

  • Breaking commercial real estate news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
  • Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
  • Critical coverage of the property casualty insurance and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, PropertyCasualty360 and ThinkAdvisor
NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.