Lawyer Declares CVSD Board Vote Not Legal
June 30 executive session and vote on turf field agreement violated Vermont open meeting law, says group seeking new meeting and new vote.
By Geoffrey Gevalt
The Record staff reporter
A Bristol lawyer representing 10 Hinesburg residents and Responsible Growth Hinesburg wrote to the CVSD board Friday that its votes at its meeting on June 30, 2026, to go into an executive session and then, in open session, to enter into a Gift Agreement for a turf field at CVU, were illegal.
The board’s June 30 “meeting clearly violated Vermont’s Open Meeting Law in several important and highly prejudicial respects,” James A. Dumont wrote in his July 31, 2026, letter. (Full letter attached at bottom of story.)
A key factual point in his argument is that the district had, on Aug. 13, 2025, entered into a previously undisclosed “non-binding term sheet” with a private “association” led by Eli Lesser-Goldsmith, owner of a local health food store and lead spokesman and organizer for the privately financed project.
The existence of that 2025 term sheet was revealed in the Gift Agreement that was signed in July 2026 and released to the public. Since the term sheet was not discussed in the board’s public meeting of Aug. 12, 2025, and no vote was taken, “clearly the board met and decided [at some point] to execute the term sheet outside of an open meeting and without any notice to the public.”
He added that the 2025 term sheet formed the basis of the Gift Agreement signed in July 2026 and for that reason the board did not have legal grounding to go into executive session on June 30, 2026, to discuss details of the Gift Agreement. While executive sessions are allowed to discuss contracts where public discussion would put the district at a disadvantage, Dumont noted there was no disadvantage to the agreement being discussed in public since Lesser-Goldsmith knew all its details and the district’s position.
He also disputed whether the agreement was a contract, particularly since it was made with an “association,” not a legal entity. Friends of CVU, a 501(c)3 nonprofit, is the fiscal agent for the unincorporated group Community Field Project.
The subsequent June 30, 2026, 8-3 vote (board chair Meghan Metzler abstained) to enter into the Gift Agreement “was a travesty,” Dumont said, because, in essence, the board had made its determinations in closed session on “modifications of” the 2025 term sheet and offer without disclosing details of the offer to the public.
Dumont also noted weaknesses in the Gift Agreement, particularly in regard to indemnification.
The Aug. 12, 2025, Meeting
As the video above shows, the school board’s meeting began with CVSD Supt. Adam Bunting bringing the board up to date about a proposal for an artificial field at CVU.
He said the district had reopened discussions about a turf field in 2023 when the district re-formed a Turf Field Committee to look at reviving a plan for a bond vote or private financing of a turf field. Two bond issues for a turf field were defeated by district voters in 2013 and 2015. Bunting said that after the renewed discussions, the idea “was put on hold” given the economic climate and financial unknowns.
But in the fall of 2024, Lesser-Goldsmith approached the district with an offer of a privately financed turf field as well as stands, lighting, access, parking and a concession stand. Bunting said that the district and officials from CVU had “a series of meetings throughout last year (2024/25) that basically culminated in an initial term sheet. It’s a kind of precursor to signing anything; just outlining responsibilities for the turf group, some of the mechanics for how we might move forward.”
Bunting then turned the meeting over to Lesser-Goldsmith, who was present on Zoom.
To read all of The Record’s coverage of the turf field project, click here.
He said he “was invited to come by Megan (Metzler, board chair).” He explained he was “a person that wants to make Vermont and this community better. I’m always trying to help wherever I can.
“I don’t know how I became so passionate about it … but it just became evident that this project was really needed.”
In late fall, he said, he assembled a group, worked with various officials in the school and district, enlisted a landscape architect, worked with the “district’s civil engineer,” and got “Field Turf [manufacturer] involved. I feel the team is excellent.”
After a short discussion, a board member asked him, “How can we help?”
The biggest “barriers,” he said, are raising the money needed, and the permitting process.
“We’re going to need everyone in the community to participate,” said Lesser-Goldsmith, but he told the board to hold off until he was ready to “launch.” “I think when the time comes, we’re gonna need … everyone in the community to participate from you know, just getting the word out, giving of dollars, talking to … community members with the means to really help, [who have] the horsepower behind this project to get it fundraised to where we need it to be.”
Metzler followed up by thanking Lesser-Goldsmith and saying that “Eli has come to me, and I know that he is working with counsel. We’re making sure that we’re doing everything that we need to do from a board perspective and making sure that there’s an agreement between the two so that everything is all set, but at this point there is no need for board action.”
The next day, Aug. 13, 2025, the district entered into a “term sheet” with Lesser-Goldsmith and his group, according to a section of the Gift Agreement signed last month. The Record has requested a copy of that term sheet.
District officials could not be reached for comment. This story will be updated when and if the district issues a response to Dumont’s letter.
