Copper Mill Lawsuit

[Zev Pogrebin]

Hello all,

This is in response to Rachel's response to "FYI — Litigation filed involving Copper Mill", which was sent to the Announcements Google Group. As I am unable to send messages in that group and I believe this is the proper forum, I will respond here.

This is not to discuss the lawsuit (I'm anxious to look into the claims more), but to clarify a few matters which I believe are not accurate.

This new lawsuit further evidence that Copper Mill is NOT a valid developer.  Given Andrew Flynn's demonstrable history of lies and shady business dealings, the DSNC Community Benefits Committee should NOT engage with him or Copper Mill.

I'm not sure what this means, because Copper Mill is a developer. People may not like them and may want them to stop being involved in Davis Square, but they are a "valid developer," with a proposed project in Davis Square. As such, we should engage with them. Additionally, I don't think that there is sufficient proof to claim a "demonstrable history of lies and shady business dealings." The lawsuit at hand is an allegation which has not been adjudicated yet, and the case of The Bon does not seem like an example of "shady business dealings." Below, I will discuss why I think Rachel's example of Copper Mill lying is inaccurate.

And to call out just one of many bold-faced lies that  Andrew has told to the DSNC membership: when Frank asked Andrew directly at the community meeting whether he'd consider withdrawing the 40B to give the city time to complete the Davis Square Neighborhood Plan, Andrew responded that he'd never been asked to consider such a decision - a boldfaced lie to our entire community because in fact DSNC VP Chris Beland had already discussed with Andrew, face-to-face, a letter from DSNC making the exact same request.

In my opinion, this is not true. The letter from the DSNC board stated "At our monthly membership meeting on January 26, 2026, the Davis Square Neighborhood Council (DSNC) voted to request the withdrawal of this application until the City of Somerville has completed the Davis Square Neighborhood Plan (DSNP). We urge the city to make the same request of Copper Mill." This is in accordance with the motion taken at DSNC's meeting on January 26, 2026 where it was moved to "request that the city ask the developer to withdraw their submission for 6 months". This motion was then amended to include a request to "ask to have the city ask [Copper Mill] to wait until they finish their neighborhood plan." To be clear, neither the motion nor the letter asked to return the project to a city process, nor participate in community engagement, merely to pause the 40B process to wait for the city to complete the DSNP.

In the meeting, Frank stated "Would you be willing in the spirit of good faith to back that, what you're saying here, the flexibility that you're willing to show by taking the state out of it and withdrawing the 40B and coming back to the community and engaging with us?" Andrew responded: "It's a [sic] interesting question. I do not want to commit to something here tonight, it is something that I need to think more about. Because I don't want to give a misleading answer we'll go and reflect on that further. But, that is the first time that this question has been put to us." Frank then responded "Actually, the Davis Square Neighborhood Council voted to ask you that same question," to which the assembled crowd began loudly calling Andrew a liar. The exchange takes place at around 1h59m in the video recording. 

The Davis Square Neighborhood Council did not vote to ask that same question; to 'take the state out of it', or 'come back to the community,' nor did it communicate any of that with Copper Mill. The request that was made by Frank was different than what had been previously told to Copper Mill. It is entirely reasonable that Andrew was not aware of that request. There may be other lies that Copper Mill has told, but this was probably not a lie.

This may seem pedantic, but I think that there is a lot of misinformation floating around regarding Copper Mill that is in need of correction. Whether or not Copper Mill told a bold-faced lie in front of hundreds of people is highly material to how and whether DSNC engages with Copper Mill. I think it's important to clarify these errors whenever possible, as they will have material impacts on the decisions of the Council.

Best,

Zev

[rachelro...@gmail.com]

Hi,

Posting my original message to the correct list serve, to provide context for Zeb's response.  I sent it earlier today as a reply to Elaine's email, which I now realize was using the announcements list, rather than the discussion one.

Thanks for sharing this important update, Elaine.  

This new lawsuit further evidence that Copper Mill is NOT a valid developer.  Given Andrew Flynn's demonstrable history of lies and shady business dealings, the DSNC Community Benefits Committee should NOT engage with him or Copper Mill.

For the TLDR crowd, here are two quotes from the beginning of the article summing up the lawsuit:

• "A Massachusetts developer with ambitious multifamily plans around Greater Boston is facing allegations that it stiffed the former owners of a Cape Cod boutique hotel, then sold the property to avoid repaying millions owed under the deal."
• "The former owners of the Queen Anne Inn in Chatham sued Boston-based Copper Mill and its principal, Andrew Flynn, in Suffolk Superior Court last week, alleging the developer defaulted on payments tied to its $10 million acquisition of the property before transferring the hotel and its sale proceeds beyond the reach of creditors."

While these are still allegations, they are particularly concerning in the context of Andrew Flynn's other development failures and his demonstrable lies relating to the proposed Elm Street development.   For those not aware, Scape (Andrew Flynn's previous development company) has filed for bankruptcy on its 451-unit Fenway apartment building and that building (one of the few Andrew can say he has brought to completion) has turned out to be a financial disaster.  We can't let the same thing happen to our beloved Davis Square.  And to call out just one of many bold-faced lies that  Andrew has told to the DSNC membership: when Frank asked Andrew directly at the community meeting whether he'd consider withdrawing the 40B to give the city time to complete the Davis Square Neighborhood Plan, Andrew responded that he'd never been asked to consider such a decision - a boldfaced lie to our entire community because in fact DSNC VP Chris Beland had already discussed with Andrew, face-to-face, a letter from DSNC making the exact same request.

It's time to move on from this proposal overall.  It will never happen and it's a divisive distraction that's preventing us from working together on projects that have (or could have) broad support and community benefits.

Best,

Rachel

[Penelope Doherty]

Zev, thank you for this thoughtful parsing. I was thinking along the same lines but wasn't sure how to approach. You did it beautifully and I agree it is indeed incumbent upon all of us to be both accurate and civil in our undertakings.

Looking forward to continued conversation.

Penelope

---

From: dsnc-di...@googlegroups.com <dsnc-di...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Zev Pogrebin <zpogre...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2026 1:02 PM
To: DSNC Discussion <dsnc-di...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [DSNC-Discussions] Copper Mill Lawsuit

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DSNC Discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dsnc-discussi...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dsnc-discussion/5aeef1bf-f4e1-49aa-9db2-7640d12180cfn%40googlegroups.com.