Master Plan Review Committee Receives Charge

By Kendra Bobowick

Assembled for the first time on June 7, the recently selected Fairfield Hills Master Plan Review Committee members listened to selectmen’s expectations, warnings, and advice.

The Master Plan of 2005 calls for a five-year review, as do town officials who have expressed a need to evaluate current plans and progress for the former state hospital campus reuse.

“This is important work to our town,” First Selectman Pat Llodra told the new committee members. Review committee members are Michael T. Floros (D), Paul Lundquist (D), Robert Mauer (R), Michael R. Mossbarger (R), Ben Roberts (D), Nancy G. Roznicki (D), Gary Steele (U), Alan B. Shepherd (R), and Deborra J. Zukowski (U).

 “You’re aware that Fairfield Hills has been contentious, controversial, and caused disruption from time to time in the community,” Mrs Llodra said. Political and financial points of argument have created a rift through the community in past years, while elements such as future planning and economic development have also prompted discord among campaign opponents.

In 2001, during a town meeting vote, residents supported bonding roughly $21 million for the purchase and redevelopment of the more than 180 acres of land and buildings.

Looking from one member to the other as she spoke, Ms Llodra said, “Our goal, I believe, is to move forward to a place of consensus on the role of Fairfield Hills in the context of our community, maybe tease out the notion that Fairfield Hills is not part of our geography.” She noted the campus’s “valuable role” in town and warned, “To get from where we are to there may be a challenge.

“It is very, very important to solicit input from the public; really solicit these voices,” stressed the first selectman. People should be able to “weigh in,” she said, adding, “You’ll have the opportunity as a group to learn about their views and educate them about what you know.”

Dropping a thick and voluminous 2005 Master Plan before each person, Mrs Llodra explained that she had condensed the pages into four concepts. She named the commitment to open space, commitment to the development of a new municipal building — the group currently meets beneath the roof of a former state hospital building that had been refitted to accommodate the Board of Education and town municipal offices — and naming a third commitment she favored, economic development. “This could trigger a great deal of discussion,” she warned.

Mrs Llodra then introduced educational uses as the fourth concept. A future need may arise requiring land for educational purposes, she explained. “That’s a piece you can look at.”

“What’s not in the plan? All the other things that were not articulated in 2005, what are new thoughts?” she challenged. “Nothing is fixed. We encourage you to look at new ways to use the 185 acres to benefit the community, that should be the overarching goal, to benefit the community in the long run.”

Selectman William Furrier echoed Ms Llodra, saying, “I’m confident that this group is the right group. I am confident about a successful outcome.”

Growing more serious, he said, “I don’t want to put ideas in your head, but what is missing for me is an explanation of real costs and benefits. I encourage you to explore and understand those. The costs of plans and the benefits are important.

“Look at the way approvals [for plans] are obtained,” Furrier continued. Concerned with the essential chain of command for approving a course of action for the campus, he said, “The Board of Selectmen has too much power at Fairfield Hills, but others feel it provides expediency.”

Stepping in, Mrs Llodra said, “I want to make my biases known.” Stating that the campus is a “great gift,” she said, “I think the work we do will not [only] benefit me and you, but future generations — it’s often not for immediate benefits. Our goal as well is long term.

“I appreciate what [Mr Furrier] has said about costs, but don’t prejudge,” she added. “You have to trust that lots of people will weigh in on your recommendations.”

Mr Furrier said again, “Moving forward, what is the cost? What are the benefits?”

Selectman Will Rodgers added his points.

“First, respect the process as you go about your work.” Raising politics, he said, “It’s bemusing to me that in the last election the top candidates were vying for a commitment to the Master Plan review.” The review is required by the plan itself, he explained.

“To date, Fairfield Hills has been the most public process in Newtown,” Mr Rodgers said, but then added a warning: “Unfortunately, there is a perception problem.” Among the public, he said, is the argument that “there wasn’t participation.”

He refuted a handful of points before stating, “Bear in mind the difference between planning and execution of that plan. Don’t try to do too much.”

Mrs Llodra said, “Don’t be stuck in the past. Some discussions in the community have been continuous. Don’t be held prisoner — we can’t undo the past or be held by the past. It’s important to learn from it, but you’re not compelled to repeat or explain it.”

Mr Rodgers instructed, “No one is placing boundaries on what you explore, but tie it back to this master plan. You’re a review committee, and subsequent entities will act on your recommendations.”

Acknowledging the hefty task before them, Mrs Llodra asked that they appoint leadership, and reach for a December deadline.

Ensuing discussion raised several points. Mr Rodgers responded to one conversation saying, “You’ve been chosen to do more than reflect public voices. Use your judgment.”

“We trust we have the right group,” Mrs Llodra said. “We respect your commitment. Call on us as you need to.”