A group of neighbors fighting approvals to a tea party business in the Village District of New Ipswich has filed an appeal with the state Supreme Court against decisions of the state Housing Appeals Board for rulings made last month.

The neighbors have filed multiple appeals in the case with the courts and with the state HAB, some of which are still pending, appealing decisions made by the New Ipswich planning and zoning boards approving plans for Silver Scone Teas, an event business run by owner Jane Elwell out of her historic home on River Road. The Planning Board has given approval for Elwell to host tea parties at her home up to four days a month.

The latest appeal filed by the neighbors seeks to overturn decisions reached by the HAB in the case denying motions made by the neighbor group to disqualify members of the HAB from sitting on the case and denying a motion to reconsider a decision not to disqualify those members. The decision relates to a November ruling issued by the HAB, upholding an approval of a variance for Silver Scone to operate in the town’s Village District.

According to Nancy Clark, who is both one of the appellants and the lawyer representing them, the decision both did not cite statute or case law in addressing the alleged legal deficiencies with the approval, and included “statements criticizing the appellants and the appellants’ counsel as the primary reason to uphold the variance.”

The alleged criticism included stating that Clark’s filings indicated a “scattergun” approach, with the neighbors listing “any and all offending features” of Elwell’s business.

Clark filed an appeal of the HAB decision, as well as motions to disqualify HAB members  David Rogers, Stephanie Verdile and Steven Keach for statements in the November decision that Clark alleged showed bias against her and her clients. The HAB upheld its original decision, in an order issued on Feb. 12.

The board denied the motions to disqualify Rogers, Verdile and Keach, in their entirety, indicating that the three board members would continue to preside over the case, including an upcoming motion hearing that was scheduled for later that month.

Two days later, the HAB also denied a motion for reconsideration to disqualify the board members, also filed by Clark,

“It is well settled law in New Hampshrie that when a judge or adjudicator makes a statement demonstrating their bias against a party or that party’s counsel, that the judge or adjudicator must disqualify or recuse themselves from the proceeding,” Clark wrote in her Supreme Court appeal. “In this case, the New Hampshrie Housing Appeals Board, comprised of David Rogers, HAB chair, Stephanie Verdile, HAB member and Steven Keach, HAB temporary member, issued an order on Nov. 25, 2024, overtly criticizing the appellants and the appellants’ counsel, in several instances. These statements were false.”

Clark said the comments were “reckless,” “served no adjudicatory purpose” and “were intended to belittle and intimidate.”

Ashley Saari can be reached at 603-924-7172, Ext. 244, or asaari@ledgertranscript.com. She’s on X @AshleySaariMLT.