Newtown Neighbors & Newcomers is planning a casual get-together this weekend to acknowledge the end of summer and celebrate the return of autumn and a new school year.
Danbury Animal Welfare Society is proud to announce the return of its Putt Fore Paws charity golf tournament, to be held on Monday, October 24, at Redding Country Club.
EverWonder Children’s Museum has been busy planning its annual fundraiser.
The returning event this year will be held on Saturday, October 22, at Marygold’s on Main, 19 Main Street.
This year’s theme,...
Seasonal treats are planned this month for the big screen in the theater of Edmond Town Hall. Readers should note there is a slight change of plans for tonight's special screening of a spine-chilling classic.
The next meeting of the Genealogy Club of Newtown will be conducted via Zoom, with a guest speaker who has been in love with genealogy since she was in elementary school.
On Saturday, October 22, Newtown Congregational Church will again host its popular Mississippi BBQ & Shrimp Boil to benefit Back Bay Mission in Biloxi, Miss.
The Flagpole Photographers Camera Club invites readers to their October events, which open next week with a program night led by club member Erik Landegren.
While some states have done away with Columbus Day, or changed the observation to honor Indigenous Peoples Day, the State of Connecticut continues to follow the lead of the federal government this year observing October 10 as a national holiday.
To be clear, there are different types of open space designations in the State of CT. The "Open Space or Recreation" designation simply means that the open space is open to the public for passive recreational activities (e.g., Hiking, Fishing, Horseback Riding, etc.), as opposed to the types of open space that are closed to the public. I'm confident that our terrific Conservation Commission will fulfill their responsibilities associates with Open Space land, as outlined by the town Charter, including the recommendation of specific rules on what's allowed and what's not for the Board of Selectmen to approve.
Also, make no mistake, the final language of the law is completely aligned with the resolution passed by a vote of 2-1 at the 10/7/24 BOS meeting. That resolution reads "....the Board of Selectmen will request that state legislators designate 6 Commerce Road as Town Open Space and request the economic development restriction be removed from the 6 Commerce Rd. deed....."
Interestingly, on November 1st, the First Selectman wrote a letter to Mitch Bolinsky and Tony Hwang saying "....Following a resolution adopted by the Board of Selectmen on October 7th, and subsequently endorsed by the Legislative Countil on October 23rd, we seek to enact legislation that would remove the economic development stipulation from the deed of 6 Commerce Drive."
Not only did he change the name from 6 Commerce Road to 6 Commerce Drive, but he also changed the request to suit his desire for the property instead of what was voted on, by omitting the part about designating it as open space! Thankfully, he attached the 10/7/24 BOS meeting minutes to his letter, where our state reps were able to reference the actual accurate resolution language, which again, matches the final language of Special Act 25-15.
The only clarification needed, is why the First Selectman changed the wording of his Nov. 1st letter, from what the BOS approved on October 7th.
I am feeling like Mr. Ackert's quest/request for greater transparency of our town's governance is disingenuous. First off, I cannot imagine how a "town-wide policy to provide greater transparency" could possibly be worded, and I think that Mr. Capeci was just being polite in agreeing that we should have one. Secondly, Mr. Ackert is accusatory, as if he believes something nefarious is behind the lack of transparency, where it exists, while I do not believe this at all. Third: The time, effort, and upkeep to have absolutely every town meeting interactively live, recorded, and fully documented, would obviously NOT save the town money, and I doubt that other towns of our type "implemented these policies long ago." And lastly, after having witnessed the town meeting behaviors of the anti-development faction, I am certain that we should not facilitate their ability to sit at home and harangue the poor people who work so hard IN PERSON, to make our town a better place.
The language “any purpose other than open space or recreation, the parcel shall revert to the state of Connecticut” is a bit concerning and warrants clarification. Would the existing infrastructure be violative of this language?
It’s disappointing to see Newtown move forward with the so-called “Save-As-You-Throw” program—let’s be honest, it’s really Pay-As-You-Throw. Most families will end up paying more just to throw out their trash, despite the high taxes we already pay.
While the swap shop and free bulky waste disposal are nice ideas, they don’t offset the added cost and inconvenience of having to buy special blue bags—up to $4.40 each. It’s especially frustrating to see threats of $500 fines and policeenforcement tied to something that used to be a basic service.
This isn’t about sustainability—it’s about shifting more costs onto residents. I hope the town will reconsider and find a more reasonable and affordable approach. I have already heard discussions about purchasing backyard incinerators as a work around. What's next, is the town going to discontinue curb side recycling?
