Log In


Reset Password
Archive

Controlling Spending At Fairfield Hills

Print

Tweet

Text Size


Controlling Spending

At Fairfield Hills

To the Editor:

The town charter clearly defines the procedures for approving town expenditures, and it includes the participation of the Board of Finance (BOF), the Legislative Council (LC), and the voters. The BOF plays an important advisory role and should be seen as an independent body that provides voters with confidence that their tax money is being well spent.

The ordinance governing Fairfield Hills (FFH) unwisely and purposely allowed the three members of the Board of Selectmen to bypass this process. They made decisions as to how our bond money was spent and they have bypassed proper procedures to obligate the town to spend additional millions without BOF review and approval of the LC and the voters.

There is a significant flaw in a system that allows the approval of the $21.8 million bond package for FFH redevelopment without a system of checks and balances and oversight of the actual expenditures.

It is unfortunate that the BOF did not have technical “jurisdiction” over how the Board of Selectmen spent the $21.8 million in bond money approved in 2001 for FFH redevelopment. Knowing this, I still would have liked to have seen the BOF question how and why those originally bonded funds and millions of additional funds not approved by the voters were being spent over the course of the project as plans for Fairfield Hills were changed at the urging of the Board of Selectmen. I would have appreciated the BOF perspective on the FFH lease agreements.

I chose a different path. The Legislative Council does not have technical “jurisdiction” over Fairfield Hills either, but I have consistently questioned these projects to provide my constituents with more and better information and to highlight other options for the property. Some may call this a lack of civility; I call it good government.

For two years, I have consistently encouraged the town leaders to perform a financial analysis to estimate the true cost of redeveloping FFH.

I have also consistently encouraged the town leaders to begin a long-term planning process that would include FFH in a strategic integrated long-term plan for Newtown, something called for in IPN’s campaign platform.

Gary Davis, Chris Lyddy, and I were the only members of the current LC who supported the review of the Fairfield Hills Authority ordinance last year. The majority of the LC members decided to prohibit a review of this ordinance. With more members of the IPN elected to the Legislative Council this November, I hope to have more support for a full review of the FHA ordinance.

In addition, I am very pleased that there is a growing support for Gary’s and my request for the BOS to initiate a process to undertake a full review of the FFH Master Plan to (1) determine if the current master plan is still setting the right course for continued development of the FFH campus and (2) assess if changes to the master plan are warranted to address the future needs of the community.

Po Murray

Legislative Council member

District 2

38 Charter Ridge Drive, Sandy Hook                       August 12, 2009

Comments
Comments are open. Be civil.
0 comments

Leave a Reply