Petitioners Demand Separation From Community Center—

Seniors: We Want Our Own Facility

By Kendra Bobowick

Rustling pages of a petition signed by more than 200 seniors adds to the rumbling that launched a landslide of political action recently.

The petition asserts: “The undersigned support a standalone Senior Center, and do not support the Newtown Senior Center being part of a Community Center facility at Fairfield Hills.”

The message, which has come through definitively this month after more than a year, changes the course of one capital project in particular — a multipurpose community center promoted by the Parks and Recreation Department.

In early January, Parks and Recreation Commission Chairman Ed Marks’ uncertainty about seniors’ involvement was clear. He had said, “At some point, someone is going to tell us to include seniors or move on [with community center plans] without them.”

As selectmen reviewed Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) requests recently, which included several phases of work for a community center in coming years, they chose to advance the center’s funding.

Seniors snapped to attention.

“It was clear to [seniors] they weren’t on the same page,” Legislative Councilman and former Commission on Aging member John Aurelia said.

By mid-January Mr Aurelia told the council about a petition signed by seniors who want their own, standalone senior center. The council promptly put a stop to plans for funding the recreation/community center. “A few new senior center members got the blood flowing, they’re no longer passive,” he said.

“The issue was they wanted to be heard,” he later explained.

Mr Aurelia’s statements to the council caused officials to reconsider. Chairman William Rodgers told selectmen to remove recreation center funds from the town’s Capital Improvement Plan only days after selectmen had opted to fund it. He had asked for all parties to meet to find a definitive idea about the future building’s occupants. Funds that would have come through for a design phase for a combined use building, and possibly demolition funds to raze Litchfield House where the center was slated to sit, have been pulled completely from the recreation department’s five-year capital improvement plans. These plans included future amounts of $3.1 million for final construction phases.

As recently as last week First Selectman Joseph Borst vowed to find out what seniors wanted, which led to a tense meeting this Monday. Armed with architectural drawings of what a combined facility would look like and a caveat that “we’re not going to talk about a separate building,” as he had said in previous interviews, Mr Borst attended this week’s Commission on Aging meeting.

The situation soured.

Robert Sharpe, who is among those who started the seniors’ petition, attempted to hand copies of the document to the first selectman. Mr Borst refused to take the paperwork.

“I gave it to him, and he said he didn’t want it,” Mr Sharpe reported. Thinking about his next move, Mr Sharpe said, “We’ll keep plugging along. The petition speaks for itself,” he said.

Mr Borst refused the signatures, however. “I didn’t want the petition. I wanted a hard copy of what [seniors] wanted for space [in a multi-purpose] building.” Economically he does not believe a separate senior center is possible, and wants the seniors and Parks and Rec to “get this resolved,” he said. “We’re back at square one.”

He predicts only problems unless the seniors and recreation department combine. “If it winds up they insist on a separate building it will be a real economic problem,” Mr Borst said.

 

Why The Eleventh Hour?

“It hasn’t come to a head until now,” Mr Sharpe said. Mr Aurelia believes the decisions from the selectmen’s CIP meetings “hit the paper,” and seniors realized recreation center plans, with them possibly included, were moving quickly. “They wanted to be alone, not told what to do,” he said. Was anyone listening to them?

“They felt they’re old enough and experienced enough to make up their own minds,” Mr Aurelia said. Further describing seniors’ feelings, he said, “We’re your mothers, your fathers, and you’re going to tell us what to do?”

Similarly, Mr Sharpe explained, “When you feel pushed into a corner you fight back,” he said. “We needed to speak up and say we need a building of our own.”

Simple communication may have been part of the problem, Mr Aurelia agreed. “There was a failing all around, miscommunication all around,” he said. The situation starts in early 2007. Then First Selectman Herb Rosenthal had noted that both the seniors and recreation department sought new facilities and asked that the two groups consider a combined recreation/community center. As the recreation officials worked with an assumption that seniors would be part of the project, seniors teetered and never committed to the project.

Mr Aurelia had attended Parks and Recreation Commission meetings, and said he conveyed information to the Commission on Aging. He feels that someone, possibly then-first selectman Rosenthal needed to speak with seniors directly. “I don’t think the people who had the plan explained it to the seniors.”

Despite frustrations at Monday’s meeting, Mr Sharpe looked ahead. “I hope that talks with the first selectman go better,” he said. His next move is “try to settle this,” he said.

Where The Community/Rec Center Stands

In the short term, the seniors’ more than 200 signatures has helped delay the course of a community/recreation center at Fairfield Hills.

The petition and recent statements to the Legislative Council have defined seniors’ position. Mr Marks understands, “They’re not ready to move on.” He was also at Monday’s commission meeting. He suspects the reluctance goes deeper than simply disliking the preliminary plans Mr Borst carried with him Monday, showing some overlapping, shared spaces.

“I think there are some longstanding resentments,” he said. Concerned about a lack of trust in how the town handles senior center issues, he said, “It’s manifesting itself in the shared facility.”

His commission needs to regroup, he said. Viewing the recreation department as partners with the seniors and Commission on Aging since Mr Rosenthal had asked them to think about sharing space, Mr Marks said, “We were really partners and if they and the town don’t want us together, then we’ll go along alone.” Weighing the central location in town on the Fairfield Hills campus, close proximity to a future pool, and soon-to-be-built indoor sports complex, Mr Marks said, “I think it would be a missed opportunity.”

Without a consensus, however, the recreation department will “move on,” he said. “Next year we’ll ask for funds to move forward and I hope to garner some funds for design.”

Last week, recreation director Barbara Kasbarian again stated the benefits of a new facility. “We would have a teen center in our building and would be next to a gym, that’s one things all kids want — to be active.” The teen center is currently located on Church Hill Road across from St Rose of Lima church, and lacks gym space, for one. The proposed recreation center would be adjacent to the Newtown Youth Academy, which broke ground January 26. The academy will offer indoor gym and court space, a track, and more.

Currently recreation programming relies entirely on school space. “Everyone is vying for space. There is definitely a need for us to have our own building.” Eventually a pool would be added to the facility, she said. “It’ll be a total package,” she said.