To the Editor:

I recently learned that the Newtown Parks and Recreation Department charges nonresidents $150 a year to use the town's parks. Residents do not pay the fee.

Why shouldn't nonresidents help pay the costs that residents pay the bulk of with their property taxes? It seems only fair.

The first selectman surely thinks that making nonresidents pay their way lightens the tax burden on residents and tamps down upward pressure on the mill rate. She must also think that not charging residents to use the parks is fair because they already pay most of the costs through their property taxes. Clearly the first selectman is protecting the financial interest of town residents.

But we have another interest - one the first selectman may not have considered - that has to do with the reason many of us go to the parks in the first place.

In Connecticut, parks are considered public forums held in the public trust for everyone's benefit, residents and nonresidents alike, where everyone is free to engage in his first amendment rights to speak freely and to associate with others. Consequently, a town may not discriminate between residents and nonresidents in a way that limits access to its parks.

It seems to follow that a town may then charge a nonresident only the actual cost of using the parks, so as not to restrict that person's access. By charging a nonresident more than its actual cost, the town is discouraging a nonresident from using the parks. Is $150 Newtown's actual cost? Does the town even know?

What if a nonresident does not have enough money or is not willing to pay more than the town's actual cost? Is she then not able to speak and associate with others in the public forum? Is she in effect barred from exercising her constitutionally protected rights? If nonresidents were charged a fee commensurate with the actual cost of their use of the parks - certainly less than $150 - it seems to me, the town would recoup that cost and the rights of nonresidents would not be violated. But we shouldn't help fund the town budget by charging nonresidents a disproportionate share of the costs to exercise their constitutional rights in the parks.

And if this means residents may have to pay a few more dollars in property taxes, so be it. I, for one, would be happy to pay my share so nonresidents would not have to pay more than theirs.

Glen Swanson

9 Maplewood Trail, Sandy Hook                                                                     July 25, 2016