Ambrosino in 2025, at a joint Ways & Means hearing in Clinton. (still via malegislature.gov)

The battle over the courthouse in Springfield is as much a battle with the Trial Court’s administration as it is with executive branch agency that manages the Commonwealth’s real estate. Thomas Ambrosino, in his capacity as administrator for the Trial Court, had sworn out a declaration in the case. However, it is unlikely he will continue to have any role. Ambrosino retired last month.

Ambrosino’s retirement was not a surprise. The news had appeared in Boston media as early as late spring. Still, he was a key voice backing the 125 Liberty Street site for the courthouse and its developer Liberty Junction. There is no immediate indication his successor, Michael Coehlo, will feel different. Even if the opponents of the 125 Liberty Street site fail, Coehlo will have an influence over the courthouse.

Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly reported Ambrosino’s retirement on June 23. The justices of the Supreme Judicial Court named Coehlo on Friday.

Before becoming the Trial Court’s top administrator, Ambrosino had been the mayor of Revere and City Manager of Chelsea.

Ambrosino has come up as a key figure in the battle over the site selection of Springfield’s courthouse. He submitted a declaration as part of the motions Division of Capital Asset Management & Maintenance (DCAMM) and Liberty Junction have filed. Specifically, he noted that he was among the trial court affiliates on the selection committee reviewing the proposals.

“From the perspective of the Trial Court, the Liberty Junction proposal was the obvious and only choice,” Ambrosino said. “Of the 10 proposals, the Liberty Junction proposal addressed the Trial Court’s needs with by far the lowest projected impact on the Trial Court’s future operating budgets.”

Of note, Ambrosino also said that the Liberty Junction proposal would save the trial court $300 million.

“This preserves the Trial Court’s ability to fund other important components of the delivery of justice for the people of the Commonwealth,” Ambrosino continued.

Such a deal? (DCAMM)

That statement does not apear to come out of nowhere. At a hearing for the fiscal year 2026 budget in March of 2025, Ludlow Senator Jake Oliveira challenged Ambrosino about whether the trial court was well-served by the leaseback arrangement. The Democrat also question if the courts would need more money to pay the lease.

Ambrosino admitted that in a “perfect world” Massachusetts and its based courts in Springfield would be “better served” with a state-owned facility.

“If we sought to build it with capital money, we would be waiting another decade,” he told Oliveira. “There was not room in the capital plan for that large of an expenditure in any of the next few years.”

Ambrosino also conceded that the legislature would need to appropriate millions more a year to pay for lease.

The opponents of the site on Liberty Street have pointed to emails where Ambrosino says that the decision is DCAMM’s. Similarly, the trail court does not control the Commonwealth’s capital budget. Still, in public Ambrosino had been all in on the leaseback option process and, ultimately, the selection of Liberty Junction.

That has lent support for claims from officials such as Hampden Clerk of Court Laura Gentile that Boston made this decision at the expense of local staff’s opinions.

No doubt that has contributed to Liberty Junction’s efforts of late to drum up local support for their selection. The developers have been on something of a press offensive in recent weeks and have begun to tout benefits to local stakeholders such as unions and local contractors.

They will need the continued backing from the courts’ administration, though. That will ensure that Coehlo remains in the spotlight and have to face any consternation among local court employees.