5/6 School And FFH –

Proposed Bond Issue Draws Reaction

By Steve Bigham

The issue of whether the town will ask taxpayers to vote on a combined $43 million package for the proposed 5/6 school and the purchase of Fairfield Hills drew comments this week from many town officials and residents.

Both the Legislative Council and the Board of Selectman brought the matter up at their meetings this week, responding to an article and editorial in last week’s Newtown Bee. They were also responding to recent comment from the public, many of whom say they do not like the idea of having to vote on the $43 million expenditure as one question.

The fact of the matter, say council members and the Board of Selectmen, is that neither board made such a recommendation and certainly never took any vote on the issue. But at Wednesday night’s meeting the council did not completely rule out the possibility.

On Monday, the Board of Selectmen made it clear that it had never recommended any type of plan for how the town might present these two large projects to the town.

“We have not as a board ever made a recommendation on how voting should take place when we do go forward with a request for Fairfield Hills,” Mr Rosenthal said. “To my knowledge, we’ve never discussed this at all.”

Fellow selectmen Joe Bojnowski and Bill Brimmer agreed.

Mr Rosenthal disputed last week’s editorial which stated in part: “The plan is remarkable in the degree to which it limits voter participation in deciding key issues associated with the expenditure of $43 million over the next 20 years… We are surprised that in this day and age we still have to remind our leaders that choosing one thing over another is the reason why we vote in the first place. Take that away, and there is no reason whatsoever to go to the polls.”

This week, Mr Rosenthal also submitted a letter to the Letter Hive, calling The Bee’s commentary “inaccurate.”

“Let me state unequivocally that neither I nor the Board of Selectmen have ever proposed a single vote to authorize both the construction of the Grade 5/6 school and the purchase/redevelopment of Fairfield Hills,” he wrote.

The Legislative Council also brought up the Fairfield Hills and 5/6 school issue Wednesday, doing its part to quell the public’s concern. However, while the council made it clear that it had not made a final decision, there was indication that the confusion did not lie solely on the part of the press.

“I think most people want separate votes. Everybody I’ve talked to has said that,” remarked council member Peggy Baiad.

We don’t know that for sure, other members quickly responded.

Council Chairman Pierre Rochman said the council has made no final decision. Vice Chair Melissa Pilchard agreed.

“I think it’s extraordinarily early to urge one thing or another because we haven’t discussed this as a group,” she said. “I think it’s unnecessary hype.”

Mrs Pilchard went on to explain why some council members, particularly the council’s finance committee, believe the two projects should be packaged as one.

“It’s important that the public understand the importance of Fairfield Hills and the 5/6 school. These two projects are very intertwined,” she said. “If we don’t purchase Fairfield Hills, we have no control over it. We will have lost it. We need to let the public know why we have always tied these two projects together.”

The first selectman’s office has reportedly received numerous calls this week from residents who object to the idea of a single vote. They are being told that there is not necessarily going to be a single vote. The two projects could very well be voted on the same night, but separately.

“I have never come on record of proposing or even discussing how we might make a recommendation to the council,” Mr Rosenthal said. “I never said I support a single question.”

And, as the first selectman pointed out last week, Fairfield Hills may not be ready in time to be packaged with the 5/6 school.

This week’s discussions made it clear that town officials still have plenty of tough decisions ahead of them. The town meeting is expected to take place in May or June of this year.