Protesting Corporate Park Plan –

Johnson Resigns From Fairfield Hills Advisory Panel

By Steve Bigham

A disenchanted Ruby Johnson resigned from the Fairfield Hills advisory committee this week, saying she could not associate her name with a group that was about to make a recommendation she did not agree with.

That recommendation involves the creation of a corporate park using the five largest buildings in the center of the 185-acre campus, and then knocking down four or five smaller structures to make way for 1,500 parking spaces. Woodbury and Newtown halls, the two showpiece buildings on the campus, would also have commercial uses, depending on the needs of the tenants.

It is a plan that the longtime Newtown resident can not agree to, and she hopes Newtown residents argue against it at next Thursday night’s public hearing (see related story).  Mrs Johnson says she will be there to provide a dissenting point of view.

“I can not let my name be used for that. I can’t go back on what I believe. I’ve never said we should have a corporate park,” Mrs Johnson explained. “They want a consensus, and I can’t in all conscience consent to that. In short, the advisory committee is saying that an income-producing Fairfield Hills is more important than land for municipal needs. The town is at a cross roads and is about to make a bad decision.”

Ironically, it was Mrs Johnson who fought so hard to convince the town to consider purchasing Fairfield Hills. Now, with a plan in place to buy the massive campus, Mrs Johnson is shaking her head in opposition.

“They’re going to buy it for all the wrong reasons,” she said. “Their vision of Fairfield Hills as a corporate park is incompatible with the vision I have advocated for over a year.”

That vision keeps a number of the buildings and all of the open space for municipal needs, while also recognizing the need for a limited presence of income producing uses as a way to help the tax base. She believes the town should address the need for expanded town offices, fire and police, recreational facilities, senior services, youth services, library services, and a school site before considering revenue.

And there are others on the committee who appear to share similar visions, although Mrs Johnson fears they have remained on the board in the hopes they might “get tossed a bone.”

“Over the weekend, someone said to me, ‘you can’t beat city hall.’ Maybe he was right,” Mrs Johnson said, referring to the role town officials such as First Selectman Herb Rosenthal have played in steering the committee’s direction.

The local activist vowed to continue her effort to be persuasive that the best interest of the town is to designate major portions of Fairfield hills for the town’s needs.

Advisory Committee Chairman Michael Floros expressed his disappointment in Mrs Johnson’s resignation, saying he did not think her view was that much different from that of the rest of the committee. He said having a municipal-based Fairfield Hills is great until it starts to drive up taxes. People’s opinions change once their taxes start going up.

Furthermore, he said, the advisory committee’s recommendation is not set in stone. Its job is to simply present a good case for purchase. Under the vision to be presented next week, a town-owned Fairfield Hills would address most of the town’s needs, provide cash flow, and would not include any kind of housing.

Mr Rosenthal said Mrs Johnson deserves a lot of credit for focusing the debate and for bringing people out to take an interest in the Fairfield Hills issue. He was disappointed to see her step down, especially since, in his opinion, their viewpoints about the use of the 185-acre are not that far apart, although Mr Rosenthal does favor a larger commercial presence there.

“It’s not viable as a totally municipally-led piece of property because it is too huge. The cost to maintain it is too high,” he said.

As for the role of the advisory committee, Mr Rosenthal said its purpose is to simply get some idea of what the property could be used for. He believes the committee – minus Mrs Johnson – is now on the same page. Of course, compromise plays a large part in the solution, meaning that not everyone is going to get everything on his or her wish list.

Recent news that town officials plan to present the purchase of Fairfield Hills and the proposed 5/6 school to the voters in one bonding package has angered some, including Mrs Johnson. She, like others, says the two projects should be put up for two separate votes.

“It’s not fair to the people. The school people are being manipulated,” she said. “They have a genuine concern about the need for a 5/6 school.”

But Mr Rosenthal believes the town runs the risk of becoming divided if each project is voted upon separately.

“This is one town, not a bunch of special interest groups,” he said. “Let’s not divide ourselves. It would be a disastrous approach to take things individually. It’s bad for people to be worried that they won’t get their project approved if someone else’s gets approved.”