Fourth planning board member asked to recuse from hotel review

WINDHAM―The recusal of three town planning board members from the ongoing review of a proposed luxury hotel at the Windham Mountain Club (WMC) has now prompted demands for a fourth withdrawal.

If that occurs, it will leave only two members to determine the fate of the project, possibly bringing an already controversial approval process to a screeching halt and putting the town in uncharted legal waters.

A public hearing was held October 1 on an amendment to site plan and preliminary plat approvals that were made in April of 2025, as part of a long term WMC development Master Plan.

That master plan included 60-plus townhouses on land historically used for visitor parking as the ski slope shifted toward greater privatization.

The amended proposal eliminates eight of those residences and lots, replacing them with an upscale, 26-room hotel and an associated four-bedroom detached unit/cottage for commercial use.

A group of local hoteliers have raised multiple concerns about the proposal since it became widely known this past spring and in recent weeks have doubled down on their misgivings.

Planners have been conducting a required environmental impact study, determining on September 3 there will be no adverse effects―thereby paving the way for the next phase of moving the project forward.

But local hoteliers are resisting that ruling, believing the new hotel would negatively impact “community character,” a phrase used in a separate agreement signed between the town and WMC.

The side agreement was drafted in response to similar concerns raised by local business owners over restrictions on public access to the ski slope originally proposed in the master plan.

Fast forwarding to the present and the October 1 public hearing was preceded by a request from at least two hoteliers to “pause” the planning board review, very likely stalling the hotel that WMC has already announced would be opening in 2028.

In a letter to the planning board read during the hearing, Albergo Allegria Hotel owner Marianna Radelich Leman raised several objections to the proposed amendment, including concerns over what she described as “a significant amount of recusal” among board members.

Two planners have stepped away from the talks and any votes due to minor work situations at WMC, while the third recused planner is a WMC member and all want to avoid any perception of a conflict of interest.

Planners have given no indication there will be a pause, keeping the public hearing open for written comment which has come quickly from John Flannigan, the proprietor of Wylder Windham resort.

Flannigan has emerged as a vigorous fighter of the new hotel plan, focusing on the overall planning board process.

“Who decides who recuses themself and who does not? The town board and the town supervisor appoint the planning members,” Flannigan asked in an October 2 email to the planning board.

“Given these circumstances, I am formally requesting that the town board and appropriate municipal counsel review and provide a written determination concerning whether a legally sufficient quorum of the planning board was present for [the October 1] hearing,” Flannigan stated.

Three members were active, including Planning Board Chairwoman Lisa Jaeger, representing a legal quorum able to conduct the meeting and vote on matters before the board.

“Specifically, the concern raised is that Ms. Jaeger serves as chairperson of the planning board while also serving as chairperson of the Chamber of Commerce, with [WMC president] Kristen Leach serving as her [Chamber of Commerce board of directors] partner,” Flannigan wrote.

And further, “Kristen Leach is the applicant for Windham Mountain Club,” Flannigan noted, adding that the three planners, “recused themselves based upon identified conflicts, yet their relationships to the [WMC] pale in comparison to Ms. Jaeger's and the Mountain.”

The ski center has long been, and continues to be, a steady contributor to support various community events and entities, including the annual Autumn Affair, organized and run by the Chamber of Commerce.

Jaeger serves in a volunteer capacity with the chamber even as Flannigan asks planners, “whether Ms. Jaeger should participate in further proceedings concerning this application, and… whether [the October 1] public hearing and any actions taken during it were legally valid and should remain part of the ongoing review process,” due to Jaeger’s participation.”

Flannigan has also raised questions about comments made by two of the three non-recused members, saying publicly, prior to making a formal environmental impact decision, they did not see any roadblocks.

“The important point is that a planning board member’s prior commitment can become legally significant when it demonstrates that the member is no longer approaching the application with an open mind,” Flannigan wrote.

Flannigan, in an October 5 email to the town’s special counsel assisting the planning board, filed a Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) request to the town for voluminous records related to the overall review process and dating back to January of 2024.

The next planning board meeting is slated for October 15 where members could be responding to questions and comments from the October 1 hearing.