ROCKPORT — The man who sought to represent all 154 Long Beach leaseholders in a class-action lawsuit against the town may continue his own push against the leases and changes carried out by Rockport officials.

But a Lawrence Superior Court judge has ruled that Stephen Sheehan — and any other Long Beach tenants who wish to challenge their leases — will have to do so individually, not as a recognized “class.”

Judge Paul Wilson has denied Sheehan’s bid to give his lawsuit class-action status, finding he had not shown there are sufficient questions of law or facts “common to the class” that would be represented — namely all of the tenants. In the same five-page ruling, issued Aug. 16 and received by the town Monday, Wilson found that Sheehan had not shown he could adequately represent all of the tenants in arguing their lease concerns.

“Whether inclusion of the disputed lease provisions caused actual, serious interference with a particular lessee’s use and enjoyment requires a highly individualized analysis,” the judge’s ruling states. “… I find that there are not sufficient common questions of law or fact that predominate over those affecting individual members. I find quite the opposite.”

Going on

Sheehan said Wednesday that the judge’s stand against allowing a class-action approach will not stifle his challenge.

“My name on the lawsuit represents the feelings and position of the strong majority of Long Beach tenants,” he said. “We are peaceful, law-abiding families who care deeply about the future of Rockport … We will continue to approach this as we have — democratically and unified.”

He said he’s not sure whether the judge’s ruling will spur other tenants to file individual legal actions against the town.

“We haven’t talked about any of that,” he said. “But I can say the vast majority of us are in agreement.”

Town response

One issue at the core of Sheehan’s lawsuit is the town’s position allowing public access to the beach across the properties. The town owns the vast majority of Long Beach — though a strip in the southwest corner of it sits in and is owned by the city of Gloucester — while the tenants lease the land and own the houses they or prior tenants have built there.

The dispute between the town and the tenants — joined through the private Long Beach Association — boiled over when the town issued and residents signed new leases in January 2014.

Story continues below video

Among other provisions, the new leases gave tenants the right to sublet the properties, which they were not able to do before. But the leases — similar, 10-year agreements issued to all of the tenants — called for annual rent increases of about $1,400 annually for front-row cottages, or by some $14,000 by the end of the term. The lease amounts are slightly lower for the second and third rows off the water.

Sheehan and other residents sought to renegotiate their leases over the rent hikes and provisions, such as the clash over public access, but the town has held its ground.

Selectmen Chairman Paul Murphy said Wednesday he and other town officials welcome the judge’s ruling.

“I certainly was very pleased to learn that the judge, in his wisdom, did not believe this fell under (terms of) a class-action lawsuit,” said Murphy, now in his third term. “I think we’ve worked very diligently over the last six years to work with Long Beach and the Long Beach Association, and we want to continue to maintain a good relationship and make sure that things move forward.

“The town obviously has a vested interest in Long Beach and in the town — and we want to be good stewards for both,” Murphy said.

A disputed point

While recognizing and accepting the judge’s finding, Sheehan said Wednesday he disputes one aspect of the decision. In his ruling, Wilson noted the plaintiff — Sheehan — has twice rejected the town’s offer of a potential settlement.

“This alone is not cause for concern, as the town’s offers failed to adequately address the numerous problems the plaintiff has, and others in the proposed case may have, with the lease,” the judge’s statement reads. “However, in his responses to the town, the plaintiff has alluded that an acceptable settlement offer would include the town’s agreement to purchase, for a substantial sum, the home the plaintiff owns that sits on the land he leases from the town.”

“That is totally erroneous; it never happened,” Sheehan said. “It’s very disappointing to see that in there because never once did I offer to sell my property to the town — nor did the town or the town’s attorney ever bring this up.”

Sheehan said his next step will be to meet with other Long Beach residents and decide how to proceed.

“Either way, we will decide democratically,” he said. “It may be my name on the lawsuit, but I’m relying, as I have all along, on the input from my neighbors. It is not just my one voice.”

Staff writer Ray Lamont