Voters Reject Fairfield Hills Master Plan

By Jan Howard

The master plan for development of the 189-acre Fairfield Hills campus was defeated by 154 votes, 1,238 to 1,084, in the advisory referendum on August 9.

Voter turnout was low. Only 2,323 voters turned out for the referendum, including 25 grand list voters and 2,169 registered voters or about 15 percent of a total of 14,706 registered voters.

 First Selectman Herb Rosenthal and other town officials and members of the public waited quietly as moderator David Brown called off the numbers for each voting machine. The results of the first machine were indicative of the next four. Only the final machine had Yes votes outnumbering the No votes.

The ballot question asked voters to approve a master plan for the property that would address uses of the campus for immediate needs of the community as well as future opportunities.

“I was disappointed in the outcome,” Mr Rosenthal said Wednesday morning. He said he was most disappointed for the Fairfield Hills Master Plan Committee that had worked so hard on it.

“I don’t take it personally,” he said. “It was a plan I thought was good.”

Mr Rosenthal said he was more disappointed that so few people voted. “Eighty-five percent didn’t vote,” he said, noting, however, there were more absentee ballots than for the annual budget vote.

He said it was difficult to assess why people did not vote. “Everyone had equal opportunity,” he said. “Those that did need to be listened to. Clearly, changes have to be made.

“I hoped that we would have a significant majority voting in favor of the plan,” he said. “Now we need to take some time to figure out why the people voted Yes, No, or not at all.”

A Yes vote would have sent the master plan on to the Planning & Zoning Commission. The question before town officials now is what to do next.

Mr Rosenthal said town officials would try to determine what people didn’t like and what they liked about the plan. “We’ll sit back and assess what happened. We don’t want to rush into anything until we have something people feel comfortable with,” he said.

“We didn’t rush into the first plan. We’ll let the dust settle first. We don’t want to rush into changes.”

He said he hopes to hear from the public as to their concerns about the master plan. He expects the master plan issue would be added to the Board of Selectmen’s agenda for discussion at its meeting Monday, August 18.

Possible reasons for the master plan’s failure may include questions about the eventual cost of development of the property and the impact on taxes, cost of a renovated or new town hall, concern over commercial development of the property and the Fairfield Hills Authority that would manage it, development of playing fields on the site, open space concerns, or any number of other issues that have been raised in the two years since the town voted to purchase the property.

Mr Rosenthal said that even though no additional money was to be appropriated as a result of the referendum vote, concern about taxes might have been among reasons for the defeat of the plan. One-third of the cost of the $21.85 million approved two years ago for the purchase of the Fairfield Hills campus, including improvements to ball fields at the high school and renovations to Edmond Town Hall, was included in this year’s budget; the remaining two-thirds would be in future years’ budgets.

 He said a master plan of the Fairfield Hills property was required before any redevelopment could take place at the site. “We never would have had such an elaborate plan if zoning didn’t require it.”

Mr Rosenthal said there could be any number of reasons for those who voted No, noting he had heard some concerns about too much economic development of the site and too much money for a proposed town hall.

“Misinformation that was out there didn’t help,” he said. “We tried to clarify the town hall issue.”

In response to concerns about the town hall issue, prior to the vote the Board of Selectmen approved a resolution that called for a thorough review of comparative costs of renovation and new construction of town office space.

There had been considerable debate on the master plan issue prior to the referendum, with Mr Rosenthal’s opponent in the November election, Republican Bill Sheluck, urging voters to reject the plan. To that end, the GOP challenger sent out 300 postcards just prior to the vote.

“I don’t know how many people he impacted,” Mr Rosenthal said.

Mr Rosenthal said $8 million was the projected cost of a new or renovated town hall, not $10 million as alleged by Mr Sheluck. The first selectman also took issue with Mr Sheluck’s statement that “a No vote will prevent our taxes from skyrocketing in order to finance a plan that is nothing more than a ‘wish list’ of possible uses.”

“He always supported budgets in the last two or three years,” Mr Rosenthal said of his political opponent.”

Members of the grass roots group friends of Fairfield Hills also passed out flyers urging the public to reject the plan.

Mr Sheluck said Wednesday the vote on the master plan “sent a clear message that there were concerns about the impact of the master plan on taxes.

“Our elected officials have to listen to that vote,” he said.

“I think the town should concentrate on negotiations with the state, making sure the town is protected on environmental and water issues, and go on from there,” Mr Sheluck said. “I feel we should take one step at a time.

“We don’t know what we have until we own the property,” he said. “Until that is resolved we won’t know the conditions under which we will own the property.”

Mr Sheluck believes nothing should be done further at this time. “The process should come to a halt. We should take a break until we take title to the property,” he said.

Economic conditions are not right, Mr Sheluck said, pointing to continuing budget issues, town and school issues, and an open space initiative. “These are costly measures so we should allocate our dollars prudently.”

Mr Sheluck said the master plan needs a focus. “We should start with what is the primary interest and what do we want to accomplish there. We need to send a clear message.”

He said the master plan is “so widespread. The proponents of the plan call it flexibility. I call it a lack of focus.”

Mr Sheluck said the lack of a clear message has confused and polarized people. “The only thing definite in the plan was the town hall and fields.”

In June 2001, citizens of Newtown voted overwhelmingly in favor of spending $21.85 million to purchase the Fairfield Hills campus, provide space for municipal offices, build athletic fields, and demolish or renovate certain buildings at the site, in addition to renovations, improvements, and code compliance updates to Edmond Town Hall and reconstruction of playing fields at Newtown High School.

The Legislative Council, Board of Selectmen, and the Fairfield Hills Master Plan Ad Hoc Committee unanimously approved the master plan.