Date: Fri 09-Aug-1996

By KAAREN VALENTA

Published: Aug 11, 1999 12:00 am

Publication: Bee

Author: KAAREN

Quick Words:

National-Register-Historic

Full Text:

Plan To List Local Properties On National Register To Be Aired Aug.28

B Y K AAREN V ALENTA

The Connecticut Historical Commission will hold a public meeting in Newtown on

August 28 on proposals to add the Hattertown Historic District and the Newtown

Borough Historic District to the National Register of Historic Places.

The state commission sent a letter to First Selectman Bob Cascella last week

notifying him that the two historic areas will be considered by the State

Historic Preservation Board for nomination to the National Register at the

board's meeting in Hartford on October 3. Before the board meets, an

information meeting will be held in Newtown to answer questions which local

residents may have about the National Register designation.

The meeting will be at 7 pm in the Newtown Meeting House on Main Street on

Wednesday, August 28.

Last year the Borough Board of Burgesses sent a letter to John Shannahan,

executive director of the Connecticut Historical Commission, asking that the

then-proposed historic district in the borough be placed on the National

Borough Warden Joan Crick and Burgess James Gaston sent the letter to Mr

Shannahan to start the process to have buildings along Main Street and partway

up some adjacent streets placed on the national registry. Mr Shannahan already

had told former state representative Mae Schmidle that the commission would

provide the staff and funding for the project.

The borough area which will be included are those properties listed in the

1995 proposed historic district, not just those in the smaller district which

was formed earlier this year.

The state commission also decided to include the Hattertown Historic District

in its efforts. The Hattertown district includes homes in the vicinity of Aunt

Park Lane, Castle Meadow Roads, Hattertown Road and Hi Barlow Road.

The cost of placing both areas on the National Register will be paid by the

state.

Listing in the National Register enables property owners to apply for federal

grants for historic preservation when funds are available, although presently

funding is not available. Federal investment tax credits are available for

rehabilitating historic commercial, industrial and rental residential

buildings.

In Connecticut, a listing on the National Register entitles property owners to

purchase historical markers from the State Historical Commission. It also

provides a legal recourse to stop the "unreasonable destruction" of historic

structures and landmarks when demolition is planned.

But beyond that, the National Registry has little control over what individual

property owners do to their properties. It can't prevent the commercialization

of a property or alterations to buildings, according to Paul Leother, the

historical commission's architectural historian and National Register

specialist.

"Owners of private properties nominated to the National Register have an

opportunity to concur or object to the listing," said Mr Shannahan, who is

also the state's historic preservation officer.

If, after the meeting is held in Newtown, property owners object to a National

they are a sole or partial owner of the private project and that they object

to the listing. The notarized letter must be submitted to John W. Shannahan,

State Historic Preservation Officer, 59 South Prospect Street, Hartford, CT

06106 by the day of the October 3 board meeting.

Fire Reports | April 28-May 4, 2026

Just Over The Border: Southeast Kitchen And Bath’s New Showroom

Police Reports | April 27-May 3, 2026

Silent Auction To Coincide With Garden Club Standard Flower Show

BOE CFF Discusses Itemized Estimates, Summer CIP Projects

Well that is some spin. The Democrats have a super majority on the LC and passed the Education Budget without serious consideration of if the voters could afford the multi million dollar increase. "Was the request justified?" rather than "is this needed?" and "can the voters shoulder yet another large increase?" The voters rightly sent it back. Then for some reason all the discussion around reductions to the increase seemed to be coming from the classroom, rather than administration and overhead costs. Is this a coercive tactic to manipulate parents into supporting the budget like tacit threat of cutting freshman sports was two years ago? Who believes the Democrats did not caucus privately before the meeting and came in with a number already worked out? This is the Dems budget, they own it.

Education Cuts: Who Voted For What

I think it is important that we do not villainize every black box seen around a home, business, farm, or municipal property. A black exterior station does not always mean rat poison is being used. These stations can hold a number of different products, including monitoring blocks, snap traps, non-toxic bait, anti-tick bait stations, organic salt- or cornmeal-based control products, and newer fertility-control approaches intended to reduce rodent populations without traditional poisons. The better conversation, in my opinion, is not simply “black boxes are bad,” but rather: what is inside them, who is maintaining them, and whether the rodent issue is being managed responsibly. Exclusion, sanitation, trapping, habitat reduction, and careful monitoring should all be part of a responsible IPM strategy. To be fair, on my own property I do use rodenticides, including Bromethalin and Bromadiolone, in secured bait stations. But that is a choice I make for my property, based on my circumstances and the risk I am trying to manage. I also believe property owners should understand the tradeoffs and be encouraged to use the least harmful effective method whenever possible. I support protecting Newtown’s wildlife. I also support giving residents accurate information and not assuming that every black box represents reckless or unsafe pest control. The goal should be responsible rodent management, not fear of the box itself.

Discusses Policy Against Rodenticides

Debora, thank you! I accidentally doubled the project prices by adding the bond to the appropriation. Thank you so much for catching that and pointing it out. With the corrected numbers, the voters approved a combined $1.32 million for a salt shed ($600k) and library pavement ($720k), while rejecting the $1.12 million replacement turf. Regarding the 80s, I truly respect the hurdle of 14% mortgage rates. My point is simply that the math has shifted: in 1980, while the rates were higher, the price of a home relative to earnings was significantly lower. We are facing a different, but equally crushing, financial wall. Ultimately, it is disheartening that voters who recognized safe sidewalks and parking lots as essential, dismissed a playing field in the exact same condition. The turf has passed its life cycle and is just as much of a liability as the library’s pavement, the only difference is that this safety concern affects thousands of children who, coincidentally, cannot vote. These are apples-to-apples needs. I was hopeful our community would agree that all Newtown residents deserve safe conditions, regardless of which facility they utilize. Again, I would be remiss not to mention that when 82% of residents don’t show up, we have to deal with the interests of those who did. Hopefully, the next referendum will have a bigger turnout.

The ‘Me’ Generation

Thanks for the reply. I meant the numbers you presented in your letter. I found one place where other numbers were listed: https://www.newtownbee.com/04232026/get-out-and-vote-on-the-2026-27-proposed-municipal-and-school-budgets/?q=\\\%22advisory%20questions\\\%22. In that article, the numbers were cited as: Treadwell field: $1,125,000 Library: $720,000 Salt Storage: $600,000 As one who started out in the early 80's when inflation was double digits, my 1985 mortgage rate was 14%, and child care costs were comparable (in present value), I shared your grief but never considered the voters ironic or shameful. PS. I agree college tuition is ridiculous. Thankfully, universities are offering (or considering) waiving all or most tuition for middle class families (upwards of $200,000 incomes). Hopefully, they'll also reconsider their need for those funds in the first place.

Sure! Child care costs: https://www.ffyf.org/2022/10/13/data-child-care-prices-continue-to-rise-ahead-of-midterm-elections-outpacing-inflation/ (also from 2021-2025 we had 2 children in a local daycare in Newtown and it cost us $3200 a month, so that's a number I am very familiar with) Home price / median price vs income source: https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/home-price-income-ratios Tuition increase vs inflation: https://feed.georgetown.edu/access-affordability/noting-a-decline-in-middle-class-students-colleges-provide-more-aid/ Hope this helps :)

<< May 2026 >>
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
26	27	28	29	30	1	2
3	4	5	6	7	8	9
10	11	12	13	14	15	16
17	18	19	20	21	22	23
24	25	26	27	28	29	30
31	1	2	3	4	5	6

Log In

Date: Fri 09-Aug-1996

Leave a Reply Cancel reply