Michael Friedland of the Lumbery — a small business located in the Cape Elizabeth town center on Route 77 that sells locally sourced wood, garden beds, and tools — has asked the Town Council to provide reimbursement for legal fees and other expenses incurred during his protracted legal battle with the Town.
In November of 2023, the Cape Elizabeth Town Council voted unanimously to dismiss without prejudice the lawsuit filed against Friedland and the Lumbery in October of 2022 for allegedly failing to comply with the town’s zoning and sign ordinances.
[RELATED: Case Dismissed — Cape Town Council Finally Drops Unpopular Lawsuit Against Beloved Small Business]
Friedland has now asked the Town to reimburse him a total of $11,000 for expenses he incurred during this time — $9,500 for legal fees and an additional $1,500 for “the time [he] dedicated to rectifying this matter.”
With a 4-3 vote on Monday, the Town Council has tabled consideration of this request until June 10, 2024, at which point they will look into using “unexpended funds from this year’s budget” for Friedland’s reimbursement.
In 2022, the Town of Cape Elizabeth accused Friedland and The Lumbery of “encroaching well beyond their approved site plan by storing several pallets of firewood, picnic tables, stacks of lumber, and other items in the front of [the business].”
Although the approved site plan for Lumbery allows for “minimal outside storage of materials in areas defined in the site plan,” the Town argued that Friedland’s displays do not fall under these criteria.
Cape Elizabeth also accused Friedland of “placing a sign in the front of [Lumbery] without submitting the information necessary for a complete sign permit application.”
Once word of this began to spread throughout the town, roughly 1,200 residents — representing more than 10 percent of the town’s population — came forward and signed a petition supporting The Lumbery and asking the Town Council to drop the lawsuit.
Last summer, twenty residents offered public comment in support of The Lumbery, requesting time and time again for the Council to drop the lawsuit.
Following this public outcry, the Council voted to direct the town attorney to pursue a court-approved settlement with Lumbery, but Friedland and other concerned residents wanted to see the lawsuit dropped outright, which it finally was in November of 2023.
Friedland is now seeking reimbursement for the legal fees he incurred throughout this protracted process, as well as for the time he spent “rectifying this matter.”
“I am writing to formally request reimbursement for the legal fees incurred during a recent lawsuit, which, upon thorough investigation, was found not to stem from issues of safety or appearance as initially presumed,” Friedland wrote to the Town Council in an email on February 17. “Instead, the core of the matter was a systemic inadequacy that necessitated urgent updating — a responsibility that should ideally be shared collectively.”
“The financial, emotional, and time-consuming toll this process has exacted on me is substantial,” Friedland said.
“It underscores a scenario where I, as an individual, was disproportionately burdened with rectifying a situation that falls within the broader purview of our community’s shared infrastructure and governance,” wrote Friedland in his email. “It is my firm belief that the principle of fairness and community responsibility dictates that I should not have to shoulder this burden alone, especially when the actions required for correction were beyond my personal obligation and should have been addressed at a systemic level without necessitating my oversized involvement.”
Councilor Tim Thomson — citing Friedland’s email — then asked that the Council add this to the agenda for their next meeting.
“I would like to address this issue and put some finality into it,” Councilor Thomson wrote. “The ordinance and processes have been taken care of and this needs to have a button put on it.”
Click Here to Read the Full Email Chain
When the Council discussed this issue at their meeting on March 11, 2024, there was extensive discussion among the Councilors regarding the precedent that it would set for the Town if they granted Friedland’s request.
Councilors also talked at length about a meeting that took place last September, during which potential resolutions to the lawsuit were discussed. Some suggested that given the conversations that took place that night, it would be reasonable for Friedland to expect the Council to at least discuss the possibility of reimbursing him for the legal fees he incurred.
Others on the Council pushed back against attempts to cite the proceedings of that meeting, arguing that they were only “throwing ideas out there” at the time and “trying to figure out a solution,” not proposing a course of action.
Although one member of the public who offered comment Monday night suggested that the Town should have decided whether or not it would be providing Friedland any compensation during the settlement process, Town Manager Matthew Sturgis clarified that a traditional settlement process had not taken place in this case.
After some further conversation among the Councilors, Thompson offered a motion to table discussion of a potential reimbursement until their June 10 meeting, explaining that he had no intention of making this a new budget item, but rather that the funds for a potential reimbursement could possibly be sourced from an existing unused surplus.
Thompson also suggested that tabling the reimbursement for the time being would give the Councilors an opportunity to gather the details necessary to make an informed decision on this issue.
The motion passed with a vote of 4 to 3, wherein Councilors Penelope Jordan, Caitlin Jordan Harriman, and Jeremy Gabrielson voted in opposition.
As a result of this, it is now expected that the Cape Elizabeth Town Council will again revisit the possibility of reimbursing Friedland for the expenses associated with their lawsuit against him when they meet on June 10, 2024.
And how much in taxpayer funds and Council time did the town spend in bringing and defending their short – sighted case ..and
That in addition to the probable paying of Mr Friedland’s $11,000 recompense.
If there was any real justice he would get at least three times that amount. You can’t put a real price on YEARS of being persecuted by city hall.