Not So Fast On Fairfield Hills

To the Editor:

Earlier this month, the Fairfield Hills Advisory Committee (FHAC) met to begin its newest phase of planning the development of the Fairfield Hills campus.

I believe that Fairfield Hills represents a wonderful opportunity for Newtown; however, the general public has not been invited to participate, critical information is being withheld, and Newtown’s taxpayers are in for a surprise.

To date, last month’s two-night planning session was the only opportunity for the general public to participate in the Fairfield Hills planning process. Unfortunately, other than articles in The Bee, the town made no effort to inform the public. Isn’t our town concerned that only one percent of Newtown’s 8,000 households attended the planning session? Wasn’t the town vote last year contingent on the first selectman’s commitment to include the town in the planning process? Would that vote now be considered null and void?

At the FHAC meeting, it was suggested that there were no infrastructure problems with the Fairfield Hills campus. Why then, at the “public” planning session, did consultants hired by the town tell me otherwise? Aren’t most of these considered to be infrastructure?

*The sewer and storm drains are not operating properly.

*Newtown has chosen to negotiate new rights to the neighboring wells that supply water to the campus, in lieu of the state’s remaining low-cost lease to the wells.

*Costly improvements will be needed to Interchange 11 off I-84 and Queen Street where it intersects with Wasserman Way. The study, paid for by Newtown, found that significant changes would be needed regardless of which Fairfield Hills plan is selected.

*There are concerns about the water main system, which is “porous” in some areas and in need of repair.

*The town’s estimates to remove asbestos and lead from seven buildings as published on its Fairfield Hills website are wrong (I did my own research showing the town’s estimates are off by at least $1.5 million). Did anybody wonder why Brookfield and the state are going to spend $3.4 million for the remediation of four schools?

*Pesticides and other toxic chemicals may have left the soil contaminated. The cost to address this could be significant. Is this why the state insists that Newtown assume all environmental liability?

 By my conservative estimates, Fairfield Hills will cost Newtown between $42 and $54 million to buy, study, demolish, clean up, renovate, build, and market and $2.6 million per year to support. Considering the lack of interest by commercial developers and Danbury’s recent announcement of its own 400-acre mixed-use development plan, I estimate only $1 million in annual revenue from commercial real estate and property taxes. Using the midrange of $48 million, interest and principal will cost the town $82 million over 30 years, for a total cost of $5 million each year, without considering inflation. If each $1.8 million represents a “mill,” will we see taxes increase by three mills just to pay for Fairfield Hills?

I encourage our leadership to remember the commitment it made last year to the public, and trust that the Concerned Citizens of Newtown will not sit by and allow a project of this magnitude to go unchecked or unchallenged.

Kevin Fitzgerald

24 Old Farm Hill Road, Newtown           July 17, 2002