• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • My Account
  • Subscribe
  • Log In
Itemlive

Itemlive

North Shore news powered by The Daily Item

  • News
  • Sports
  • Opinion
  • Lifestyle
  • Police/Fire
  • Government
  • Obituaries
  • Archives
  • E-Edition
  • Help
This article was published 5 year(s) and 3 month(s) ago

Letter to the Editor: Revisiting the Kasabuski vote

the-editors

July 28, 2020 by the-editors

I was surprised to read the opinion piece in the Daily Item, July 26 (“Saugus dodges thin ice”). It totally mischaracterizes what occurred with the Saugus Board of Selectmen’s vote to terminate the Kasabuski lease. 

It wasn’t, as your piece would lead the reader to conclude, a prudent fiscal move conceived by the town. It was simply a ministerial act by the board to acquiesce to the state’s mandate to take back the rink so it (state Department of Conservation and Recreation and state Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance) could undertake a complete renovation of the aging facility — one of the first of the “covered” rinks built by the state in the early 1960s and run by the then Metropolitan District Commission. 

Further, the estimate of $3 million plus for improvements is greatly exaggerated by town officials and would not have been a town expense had the operators (my clients) continued to run the rink. 

They were fully committed to undertake the improvements called for in the lease had the state not asked that the rink be returned to it. Admittedly, the listed improvements were behind  the schedule set forth in the lease document, but that was caused by the almost five-year litigation that the town undertook to cancel the lease. 

The trial judge put a hiatus on the timetable while the litigation was ongoing, reasoning that the operators needn’t fund the required improvements if the town was going to be successful in taking it back. It wasn’t, and that delay while the case was alive led to the altered timeline for upgrades. 

I am disappointed that what should have been a simple vote by the board to finalize an amicable agreement between all the parties to cede control of the rink to the state turned into an opportunity for the board to raise old grievances which the trial judge and the Appeals Court long ago ruled to be unconvincing and unfounded. 

The real story should have been that the state wanted to take back the rink and that the plan is for a major renovation/reconstruction that will benefit skating programs throughout the North Shore area. 

Neil Rossman

Swampscott

 

 

  • the-editors
    the-editors

    View all posts

Related posts:

No related posts.

Primary Sidebar

Advertisement

Sponsored Content

Safe, Supervised, and Grounded in Care: How Lumin Health Delivers Ketamine Therapy Responsibly

Revenge Saving: Taking Back Control of Your Finances – with a Little Help from Beverly Credit Union

Energy-Efficient Home Upgrades: What Actually Makes a Difference

Advertisement

Upcoming Events

20% OFF BLACK FRIDAY & SMALL BUSINESS SATURDAY

November 28, 2025
The Loft At Stetson

2025 Lydia Pinkham Open Studios – Saturday, November 22

November 22, 2025
271 Western Ave Ste 316, Lynn, MA, United States, Massachusetts 01904

2025 Lydia Pinkham Open Studios – Sunday, November 23

November 23, 2025
271 Western Ave Ste 316, Lynn, MA, United States, Massachusetts 01904

38 SPECIAL

December 13, 2025
Lynn Auditorium

Footer

About Us

  • About Us
  • Editorial Practices
  • Advertising and Sponsored Content

Reader Services

  • Subscribe
  • Manage Your Subscription
  • Activate Subscriber Account
  • Submit an Obituary
  • Submit a Classified Ad
  • Daily Item Photo Store
  • Submit A Tip
  • Contact
  • Terms and Conditions

Essex Media Group Publications

  • La Voz
  • Lynnfield Weekly News
  • Marblehead Weekly News
  • Peabody Weekly News
  • 01907 The Magazine
  • 01940 The Magazine
  • 01945 The Magazine
  • North Shore Golf Magazine

© 2025 Essex Media Group