Council Considers Keeping

Queen St Properties After All

By Steve Bigham

The phones in the first selectman’s office have been ringing off the hooks the past month with people interested in purchasing the town-owned homes on Queen Street. They have been told that the four homes are not yet for sale. And, following this week’s Legislative Council meeting, it now looks like they may never be sold.

Council member Donald Studley, an accountant, suggested Wednesday that the town demolish the houses and keep the land for town use either as open space or for future municipal space needs. He presented figures that indicated that selling the homes to families with school-age children would be costlier over time than simply tearing the houses down. Under one Studley scenario, which made several assumptions, selling the homes would end up costing the town about $4 million over the next 25 years. Mr Studley figured in the cost to educate children over several years compared to the relatively small return in taxes. These are not $750,000 homes, council member John Kortze said.

Demolishing the buildings would save the town $809,000 over time, Mr Studley said.

Several other members of the council agreed with Mr Studley, who 14 months ago questioned the town’s interest in purchasing the homes and property from the state. The town eventually purchased the sale items for $1.2 million.

Council member Doug Brennan questioned Mr Studley’s figures, saying he may have left some key “assumptions” out. For one, he said, the figures do not include all tax revenue the town stands to receive from these homes. He also guessed that the town would sell the homes for a higher price than Mr Studley had figured in.

First Selectman Herb Rosenthal agreed, adding that Newtown residents were told at a town meeting last year that the town’s intention was to eventually sell the homes with deed restrictions.

“I do think people voted for purchasing the Queen Street [houses] with the thought in mind that the town would sell the houses,” he said. “Of course, the Legislative Council may think differently.”

Council member Melissa Pilchard said the land was not purchased with demolition in mind, although some Queen Street residents were hoping that would happen in favor of open space.

Mr Kortze favored demolition, saying the move puts all the costs right up front, rather than having to float a bond for several years.

Will Rodgers supported the demolition of the houses to make room for the town’s future needs. Ruby Johnson agreed with Mr Studley’s position, but not for financial reasons. “It’s more about making the area more user-friendly,” she said.

The Queen Street issue is expected to be discussed further in the coming weeks; however, Council Chairman Pierre Rochman said, “it is not a given” that the town will sell the houses.

“This is an opportunity to pick up some open space,” he said.

Upon the request of Mr Brennan, Mr Studley agreed to revise the figures, but they are not expected to change many opinions.

“The disagreement may not be in a few numbers here and there, but a difference in philosophy,” Mr Rochman said.

At Wednesday’s meeting, resident Richard Sturdevant, who agreed that all houses should be torn down, also questioned the Board of Selectmen’s recommendation to sell a sixth house “as is” to Habitat for Humanity for $20,000. He considered it an unfair distribution of tax dollars to the one family that will benefit.

“It is certainly a noble gesture, but it is not good as a matter of public policy. Only one family will benefit,” he said.

A sixth house, judged to be in extremely poor condition, is already slated for demolition.

The town purchased each home at a cost that ranged from $76,500 to $140,000.

The homes were once a part of the Fairfield Hills campus and were inhabited by staff members.