Don’t Delay The Vote

On The 5/6 School

To the Editor:

I emphatically urge the Legislative Council not to delay the vote on the 5/6 school until the town is ready to vote for Fairfield Hills. The increased costs associated with such a move, both financially and in the overcrowding of the existing schools, make no sense.

By the time this letter is printed, parts of the Legislative Council will have met to discuss and perhaps decide on how voters will be able to make their voices heard on the 5/6 school and Fairfield Hills. On Thursday, April 12, there will be (was) a meeting of the Fairfield Hills Subcommittee and the Finance Subcommittee. Part of the agenda is reported to be the discussion of the possible postponement of the vote on the 5/6 school until such time that both the 5/6 school and Fairfield Hills could be voted on at the same time. The Board of Education has been working toward putting the 5/6 school project to a vote on/or about June 20. At this time, negotiations with the state on the price and conditions of sale for Fairfield Hills have yet to be concluded. Neither have the responses to the selectman’s RFP been returned. The date explored at the Legislative Council meeting on 4/4 was September. But there is no guarantee that the town will be ready for a vote even then.

I was very disturbed by the tone of the Legislative Council on 4/4. The discussion of the timing of the vote was adversarial. Will Rogers stated that he expected, in return for his support of the 5/6 school, the school supporters’ endorsement of Fairfield Hills. My impression is that the council is fearful that after spending the money for the school, the town won’t support the additional money needed to purchase Fairfield Hills.

The town already owns the property for the 5/6 school. The Board of Education has a very specific plan and the costs associated with that plan – costs, by the way, that have been inflated in part due to the delays in starting the plans and the construction due to the Legislative Council’s original request that the Board of Education delay until Fairfield Hills’ fate could be decided. The taxpayers can intelligently vote on this issue, up or down, on its own merits now.

Fairfield Hills is still very much an unknown. Its purchase is tied to the town’s very important need for space for municipal buildings, recreation and open space. Since the council and the Board of Selectmen seem to be unanimous in their support of Fairfield Hills, I would expect there is a great deal of truth that the purchase is the right thing to do for Newtown. However, in order to decide that, we the taxpayers need some leadership from the Board of Selectmen and from the Legislative Council. We need to see a plan, a detailed plan that includes the costs of owning, cleaning up, and rehabbing the property and marketing the parts of the property that the town would like to see developed. We also need to know what the alternative would be for the town’s urgent needs if we do not purchase Fairfield Hills in order to know if the costs associated with purchasing Fairfield Hills make economic sense. Laying out the pros and the cons of the purchase in an organized fashion for the public would result in an intelligent decision on the part of the voters.

Delaying the 5/6 vote in order to link it with Fairfield Hills will make many voters feel that Fairfield Hills is being forced down their throats. It is not a leadership move. It is a move motivated by fear.

I am perfectly willing to support the needs of our town and do not see the issues regarding the schools’ needs in conflict with the town’s needs. We need to fund both. And I believe the people of Newtown will do just that if given an intelligent choice. Delaying the vote for the 5/6 school in order to package it with Fairfield Hills does a disservice to the children and the taxpayers of Newtown. The need for the school is now and should not be delayed.

Deborah Hoffmann

4 Antler Pine Road, Sandy Hook                 April 10, 2001