Judges on the state’s Supreme Judicial Court poked holes in the arguments of both sides of the White Stadium case in a hearing Wednesday.
The Franklin Park stadium is currently undergoing renovations to serve as a home for Boston Legacy FC as well as being a hub for Boston Public Schools athletics starting next year.
The project is forecast to cost $325 million, with taxpayers responsible for $135 million of that price tag, a large jump from an initial projection of $50 million.
Opponents of the plan — including the Emerald Necklace Conservancy — have raised numerous concerns, arguing that this amounts to privatization of the stadium.
How the SJC rules on the case will have a big impact on the future of the stadium. But it was unclear from oral arguments on Wednesday which way the justices are leaning.
Justices poked and prodded at each side’s arguments, while both attorneys spoke well past the usual 15-minute allotment as they responded to additional questions.
In their arguments, plaintiffs have sought to show that Wu’s plan would go well beyond the original intention of the stadium as being mostly for public school use.
Alan Lipkind of the Boston law firm McCarter & English, representing the plaintiffs, argued that the stadium will be essentially different, even if the capacity is the same. He emphasized that it will have retail and restaurant aspects to it, not to mention facilities for the team.
“There’s a difference between those two stadiums,” he said.
Sammy Nabulsi, who spoke on behalf of the City and BPS, contended that at its heart, White Stadium will continue to be the home of BPS athletics.
“Yes, there will be a new use at the White Stadium parcel, but it’s not effecting a change in use to Franklin Park,” he said.
That idea was challenged by Chief Justice Kimberly S. Budd, however.
“You’re trying to say this is going to be the same and everyone knows it’s not going to be the same,” Budd said. “Do you admit that it’s not going to be the same? You’re going to have bigger crowds, it’s a completely different thing ... can you at least admit that we’re talking about something different now?”
Justices were particularly interested in aspects like how the project would impact roads around White Stadium and the intricacies of past statutes dealing with the White Stadium parcel.
Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell’s office has sided with the city in the case, arguing that only the AG’s office, and private parties in limited circumstances, can challenge how a public charitable trust like the George Robert White Fund Trust is administered. That rule protects charities from unwarranted litigation.
The SJC hearing comes a year after a Suffolk County Superior Court judge ruled against plaintiffs, who claim in a lawsuit that the stadium development had not gone under the proper review through Article 97, a part of the state constitution dealing with environmental protections and open space. Judge Matthew Nestor ruled in that case that the parcel the stadium is on isn’t protected by Article 97.
That followed a lower-court judge’s denial of a request for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order against the development in 2024.
