Mia Bomback reports:
No decision was made last night on an elementary school.
Or a garden.
But the Long Lots School Building Committee inched closer to a final plan, at their meeting in Town Hall.
Members discussed 6 proposals for renovating or reconstructing the 70-year elementary school. They also discussed a timeline for presenting those plans to the Planning & Zoning Commission, and Board of Finance.
The various proposals faced criticism from Westport residents, who are particularly concerned about the impact on the adjacent Westport Community Gardens and Long Lots Preserve. No votes were taken on the half-dozen plans — or their effect on the gardens and preserve — pending cost estimates from Newfield Construction.
Long Lots Elementary School. The Westport Community Gardens and Long Lots Preserve (not shown) are to the left of the parking lot in the lower left corner. (Drone photo/Brandon Malin)
Plans A and B — which call for the renovation of and addition to the existing school — raised concerns among committee members due to undersized classrooms. Members said those plans fail to meet state Board of Education requirements.
Plan B would replace the gardens with a baseball diamond.
Plans C, C-ALT, D and E call for the complete demolition and reconstruction of Long Lots Elementary School. Plans C, D and E would require relocation of the garden, while Plan C-ALT would allow the garden to remain at the expense of Long Lots’ baseball diamond.
Plan C would relocate both the school and the garden.
Advocates for the community garden voiced support for Plan C-ALT, arguing that moving a garden of this size is “impossible,” and that the only way to safeguard it is to keep it where it is.
James Mather, a longtime Westporter, said, “You can’t move a garden that took 20 years of work. Your casual indifference that the garden is a potted plant is disgusting.”
Some gardeners expressed concerns that their interests are being overshadowed by sports fields. They demanded that a Parks & Recreation Department survey detailing the usage of the sports fields on Long Lots property be publicized before any decisions about which plan (or plans) to move forward with are made.
Westport Community Gardens, and adjacent Long Lots Preserve.
“We see the care that you take in deliberating athletic fields, and we don’t see that with the gardens,” gardener Toni Simonetti said.
“I just can’t believe that this far into the process we don’t have any record of how utilized the lower-level baseball field is, and we’re considering destroying a garden that is treasured and loved by 120 families,” Mather’s wife Karen said.
Long Lots School Building Committee members debate Plan E (shown on large screen). (Photos/Mia Bomback)
Ex officio committee member Liz Heyer — who also sits on the Board of Education — reassured the gardeners that their voices and opinions were being taken into account. She noted that board members previously voted against plans that would limit parking access to the gardens.
The committee’s intended timeline also posed controversial. Chair Jay Keenan expressed a desire to request an 8-24 (municipal improvement review) from the P&Z or secure funding from the Board of Finance in the coming weeks, ideally presenting to the Representative Town Meetings on November 14.
John Suggs, an RTM District 9 candidate advocating for the garden’s preservation, likened this timeline to the “moral equivalent of the Amy Coney Barrett being rushed through the US Senate confirmation process one week before the election.”
“Believe me, the voters are pretty speaking out on this,” he said.
The committee plans to make their recommendation after receiving price estimates from Newfield Construction, expected within the next one and a half to 2 weeks.
(Reporter Mia Bomback is a Staples High School junior, and a writer for Inklings)
(“06880” is your hyper-local blog. Please click here to support our work. Thank you!)
How do we justify bulldozing a 20-year treasure – the only Gardens/Preserve- with a baseball field that is not needed?
As per Peter Perry: “There are now ONLY 4 teams in the majors (grades 5-7) which is approximately 45 kids…compared to a decade ago there were 10 teams and we had enough fields….there are certainly enough full size fields even without having Long Lots as being one of them”.
And as per Christopher Haggerty: “I went into the Westport Advanced Baseball website and looked at the master schedule. Here are the facts: Long Lots field is not a field that is played on by presently attending Long Lots students. It is a full size field currently being used by 13-14 year old children. The Spring /Summer season is from April 1- July 31. For 2023 there are 6 days the Long Lots field was being used for the season.” I believe Christopher added that there were available baseball fields on each of those play dates.
Why doesn’t Parks and Rec. and the LLEBC have this information at their fingertips already? We’ve been waiting weeks for this information! Why destroy a beloved 20-year old ecological/environmental gem used by 120 families daily for almost six months of the year when enough baseball fields are available?
As a Gardener, Bananarama’s “It’s a cruel, cruel summer” has been a theme song as we’ve seen this opaque process played out in which stakeholders had zero input back in September 2022. Again, this is all ‘new’ and raw to us as ten months later, word of this plan slipped out in June 2023.
Since then, the process feels analogous to a cat toying with a mouse struggling to survive. We have been kept in the dark, are starting behind the eight ball, have asymmetrical information and have to climb a mountain to get our footing and try to re-shape their preferred plan of bulldozing the Gardens/Preserves and putting up a baseball field.
As 99%+ of Westport residents were kept in the dark on this initiative, it only seems fair that there is light going forward – that individuals running for election go on record on where they stand with the WCG/Preserves remaining where they are.
Of Course, last night, Jay Keenan said he is hoping to push this plan through before the elections – which will give their plan the advantage/protection from new members running to save the WCG/Preserves. I guess the LLEBC likes baseball and hardball politics. If you care about fairness, transparency and democracy, you should hope this plan strikes out.
But take heart supporters of the Garden/Preserves, it’s not even the seventh inning stretch. I refuse to believe Westport is OK with cueing up “They Paved Paradise and Put Up Astroturf” as Michael Calsise has said.
Don’t it always seem to go
That you don’t know what you got til it’s gone
They paved paradise and put in a baseball field?
Please do not let this happen to our vital community gardens
It sends a message to our town and sets a precedent that green spaces don’t matter to Westport or our planet.
This process has been opaque from the beginning, I suppose I should say at least from the middle since all discussions and planning were happening completely behind closed doors before June.
I haven’t understood the fixation the committee has on a brand new giant baseball field. I assumed since it was so integral in these plans that there must have been a demonstrated need for it, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. I expected that the committee would have done some sort of research to truly understand the demand and utilization of the existing fields in Westport (and of course share it with the town). Instead we’re nearly at the point where the committee will make their final recommendation, and residents are seeking this crucial information on their own.
Since we don’t have this vital information, we instead need to rely on our observation skills. I attended middle school in Stamford, and back then little league was much bigger than it is now. They had (and still have) two full size baseball fields, which were occasionally used by little league then but were primarily used for students to run laps around, play capture the flag, and play pretty much any sport other than baseball. I drive by that school frequently today, and in the last 10 years utilization for the purpose of baseball has gotten so low, that they’ve actually been able to build a garden for use by the students in the outfield.
I’ve watched it grow over the years from a few pumpkin vines to a full fenced in garden, and I have to admire the school’s willingness to adapt what became a wasted space into a thriving garden space for students. As the effects of climate change become more forceful, we need to be thoughtful about mowing down beneficial green pollinator spaces. The idea that we would take out one of those spaces to create a pesticide filled dead zone, with no ecological benefit, to favor a sport that’s declining nationwide, is devastating.
Adding insult to injury is the fact that a new baseball field would rarely be used (clearly not by the students), and that the committee and Selectwoman Tooker are planning to push this plan through before elections, to take away any chance Westport residents have to make their voices heard with their votes.
Lost in the shuffle is a fundamental flaw in the Long Lots School planning process which has not received adequate attention.
I start with the understanding and assumption that this is a Board of Education project initiated and governed by the April 21,2023 document entitled, “Elementary Education Specifications for Long Lots Elementary School and Stepping Stones Preschool”. That document states the conclusion of “multiple studies” that “a Renovate Like New …would not be cost effective or practical compared to construction as new on the existing site.”
Nevertheless, when the Long Lots School Building Committee was appointed by the First Selectwoman, it was charged with providing”feasibility studies for both a new build and renovate..”, thereby contradicting and overriding the conclusion reached by the BOE and authorizing duplication of “multiple studies” upon which the BOE relied, without explanation or justification.
One cannot help but wonder what is going on here; why the project was effectively taken away from an elected Board and turned over to an appointed committee with a contradictory charge; and why the BOE did not object to its conclusions being overruled and contradicted.
And, once it became apparent that the Building Committee, working with its expanded and expansive charge, was considering solutions which threaten the continued existence of the Community Gardens in its present location and configuration, why were the gardeners not invited to participate directly in the planning process and engaged by the Committee in a good faith attempt to find an acceptable compromise?
Why should we tolerate a process which, instead of encouraging broad participation and compromise, has pitted the administration and its appointed Building Committee against our neighbors who have worked long and hard on an unfunded citizens project to create what everyone agrees is an enhancement to the town?
And finally, why in the world does the BOE sit idly by while its plan and its conclusions are being ignored and its authority usurped?
We should all be asking and demanding answers to these questions.
What? Suddenly the decision depends on Newfield Construction? Why aren’t other construction companies bidding for this job?
Dear Town Residents:
We continue to try to find a path forward that gets a new school built while simultaneously keeping, in their current state, the 20-year old Westport Community Gardens and recently established Long Lots Preserve, a model of suburban open space rehabilitation.
It definitely can, and we believe should, be done.
The Board Of Education wants a new and improved Long Lots Elementary School. It is needed. The specifications given to the Long Lots School Building Committee‘s include play areas and fields adjacent to the new schools, gymnasium and cafeteria. In one of the likely scenarios, that puts the Westport Community Gardens and Long Lots Preserve a couple of hundred yards away.
The Board of Education and the Superintendent have reiterated that at no point, did they discuss utilizing the property that the Westport Community Gardens and Long Lots Preserve sit on. In fact, the Garden and Preserve were seen as a welcome buffer between students, new construction, and the residential homes to the south side of the school.
Only during a recent Board of Education meeting did it come to light that the decision to consider covering the Westport Community Gardens and Long Lots Preserve with a ballfield came from the Chair of the Long Lots School Building Committee.
Finding a new spot for the gardens will essentially kill them. Many of our gardeners are up there an age. Starting all over again after 20 years is, for many, untenable. It is also a slap in the face to 20 years of hard work, over 100,000 volunteer hours and incredible dedication to environmental stewardship.
You are not going to find a new location for the Long Lots Preserve. Hundreds of native trees, shrubs and wildflowers have been planted there. The biodiversity on this property is amazing. The place is brimming with life. On a planet that seems to be falling apart at the seams, putting an environmentally sterile ballfield over an ecological preserve just doesn’t add up.
There are proximately 20 fields in town. There is one Westport Community Gardens and Long Lots Preserve.
We certainly wouldn’t be looking to cover the only ballfield in town if the Westport Community Gardens were having a school built on them.
We need a community garden as a diverse asset in town, serving part of our diverse population and their interests. We need green open space provided by the Long Lots Preserve as we try to maintain a healthy environmental balance in the face of rampant development.
We need ballfields for kids to play on as athletics are an incredibly important part of growing up.
We do not need a Babe Ruth sized baseball field covering the Westport Community Gardens and Long Lots Preserve. It does not serve the educational or recreational needs of the students at Long Lots Elementary School. It is not part of the Long Lots Elementary School. What we need is for the Department of Parks and Recreation to come up with equitable resources for the playing fields that will be lost during the construction of the school.
The gardening community and their guests (your neighbors) and the other entities that have been involved in and benefit from this property, including the Westport Garden Club, Grow a Row, Eagle Scouts, Girl Scouts, SLOBS, resident neighbors and dozens of organizations and businesses in town, are not selfish for wanting to protect this absolute gem. This is not “me” versus “we.”
Thank you for reading this.
Louis Weinberg, Chairman
Westport Community Gardens
Director, Long Lots Preserve
The Westport Community Gardens and Long Lots Preserve are not fungible — or just a piles of dirt to be bulldozed. Over countless volunteer hours, we’ve created a truly magical place through grit and sweat, through neighbors helping neighbors, young and old, and through a commitment to future residents and the Earth, itself. From people to native plantings to pollinators, the Gardens and Preserve are an integral part of the fabric of the Westport Community and they should be celebrated and treasured for residents and students to experience and enjoy.
Hey, it’s me again…
I forgot to mention that the Westport Community Gardens and the Long Lots Preserve are now partnering with the Westport Public Schools to provide a plot (growing space) at the Westport Community Gardens and conduct field trips to the Gardens and Preserve. This will serve the educational needs of grade 2 and grade 5. This is just the beginning. This is not a ploy to save the gardens and preserve. We have been looking to build this relationship since we started as a community garden 20 years ago.
As I mentioned in a much lengthier comment on this blog (in a previous story), the educational opportunities presented to both Stepping Stones and Long Lots Elementary School students, as well as the rest of the district, are unlimited.
There are dozens of studies that show that incorporating gardens and open space in school curriculums increases student engagement and increases test scores. Communities around us, and across the state and country, are doing it. We should be too.
Thank you for reading this.
Lou
After reading the comments above and listening to all those that spoke at the Town Hall Meetings, I cannot fathom how the BOE and others have not achieved Moral Clarity. The Moral and Right thing to do is save the ONE and ONLY 20 year old Westport Community Garden.
What could be the ulterior motives at this point ?
The word “PRIVLEDGE” is often used these days, especially in affluent Gold Coast towns of Fairfield County CT. Do yet more resources….Land & Money….need to be given to yet ANOTHER Sports Field for the most privledged youth demographic in America?
Do the right thing. Get some Moral Clarity. Save the Westport Community Garden for the Salt-of-the-Earth Demographic.
Kim Crosby
Now that it looks like the current RTM will be taking action on this matter after the election, it seems entirely appropriate to have RTM discuss the matter at its Oct 3rd meeting. Curious why a petition hasn’t been circulated to get a Sense of the Meeting Resolution Re Long Lots on the Oct 3rd agenda.
Every time I see an aerial view of Westport public facilities and town property, I’m shocked at how much space is covered by parking lots. Perhaps there are some occasions/locations where parking structures are appropriate and worth the extra cost from a long term investment perspective.
Each of the Long Lots options has more space for parking than it has for the school buildings.
Perhaps we can square the circle here by investing in a multi-story parking facility which takes up 1/4 of the square footage, and allows for more playing fields, green space and preservation of the gardens.
3 story (one underground), would provide 4 levels of parking, be no higher than the school, and could also reduce the space for in/out traffic that connects the disparate parking areas in the current designs.
New to town and this debate. It would cost more, but perhaps it’s a worthy investment.
And perhaps consider putting an athletic field on top of the parking garage. It’s been done elsewhere!
From what I understand, John, the RTM Moderator, Jeff Weiser did not want a petition put forward for this to be discussed by the RTM ahead of final approvals. Sound familiar?
I did put together a petition and received the necessary signatures, but did not submit it after being discouraged from doing so by the Moderator. I respected his concerns.
In hindsight, that may have been a mistake. Though, in hindsight (as we’ve seen) the petition might well have been ignored. Maybe the Moderator should ask the LLSBC chair what a Little League field has to do with the Ed Specs for the project?
I appreciate that the Moderator does want to respect the process. I think what he may not be understanding is that there are others who have no respect for the process and who are trying to push the matter to a result they want, even though that result goes against decisions made by Town boards and RTM twenty years ago.
The LLSBC is trying to act as if we are deciding what to do with this land for the first time, when the Gardens and Preserves decisions were made twenty years ago.
I hope someone in this Town will have the sense to say, “first do no harm.”
Chris, that is chilling. In a number of ways.
Not too late.
After attending LLSBC meetings and familiarized myself with others in addition to my research, these are some facts I’ve garnered to date:
– The LLSBC’s charge did NOT include eliminating or retaining any existing site features like The Gardens and the Babe Ruth baseball field.
– Babe Ruth baseball fields are designed for high school players, not for elementary school use.
– According to data from the Parks & Recs Department there are currently 23 baseball/softball fields in the Town of Westport, of which 4 are Babe Ruth fields, including the field at Long Lots Elementary School.
-Some of the cost of building a new Long Lots Elementary School is likely to be reimbursed by the State of Connecticut. The costs associated with building a new Babe Ruth Field and/or relocating The Gardens will not.
– A needs assessment study of baseball fields in Westport was not conducted as part of the LLSBC’s process. Baseball field use information was recently requested from Parks & Rec by the building committee, but the specificity of the request is not known and a response has not been received to date.
– The LLSBC’s stated goal is to submit the preferred development option of the six proposals in time for Board of Finance review in October and RTM review in November, both hearings to be held prior to the forthcoming election.
In my opinion, as a professional planner with 50 years of practice in municipal process and with no agenda other than to offer my observations through the lens of my skill and experience, this is what I would recommend if I represented the Town in this matter:
Defer the LLSBC’s final selection until a comprehensive needs assessment of all 4 existing Babe Ruth fields has been provided to determine if a 4th field is required. If so, must it be located at Long Lots Elementary School or are there alternatives?
In addition to this information being an essential element of the building committee’s choice of design options, won’t the Board of Finance have a need to know and in terms of costs that will be borne entirely by the taxpayers?
The delay would also resolve the issue of proceeding with hearings before a lame duck Board of Finance and RTM.
If there are more compelling reasons to rush to judgement not presently in evidence, I’m confident they’ll be made known now, in response to my comments.
Gloria Gouveia
Since I’m quoted (actually paraphrased) in this article I just want to set the record straight as I am not a plagiarist!
Original authorship of the “potted plant” analogy rests with Miggs Burroughs in a recent comment on a blogpost here – a fact I acknowledged when I commented at the meeting. I’m happy to own my comments last night and I stand by them, but I saw Miggs’ prior post a couple of weeks ago and I thought it was a neat way to look at the issue.
Yet I still hear LLSBC committee members shrug and say things like “well we’ll just put it somewhere else…” That comment is what really set many people off last night.
Voting members of the committee have made clear in public on multiple occasions that despite their charged mission, renovation will likely not be their preferred option and yet they spent the first hour of the meeting discussing renovation options last night.
They also have no idea, (because Parks and Rec – shocker – have no idea) how often the ballfields are used and for what purpose.
Yet the committee wants to rush to a decision before the local elections are held soon? Ask yourself what business would seek authorization to spend what is being contemplated without a full appreciation of all the facts?
I’m just shaking my head at this mind-boggling process where the outcome seems to be predetermined whatever Westporters think and the rules of the game constantly change to rig the result that a few people have predetermined. The public is owed more transparency than that as our tax dollars will pay for the project.
Someone made a comment about respecting volunteer service – I heartily agree but respect is earned not granted. It’s a two way street – and the committee broke a trust by planning in secrecy to begin with and not involving all stakeholders.
This can all be repaired, but please stop with the condescension and let’s work together to build a creative solution for the school (BOE), our students, youth sports, the neighbors, the gardens and any other interested party.
There is no need to wait for Parks and Rec to provide that information. It’s public information and very easy to gather. All the information that is needed (the master schedule) is on the Westport Advanced Baseball website. That’s where you will see how much or in Westports case how little the 4 Babe Ruth size baseball fields (Staples, Wakeman, Doubleday and Long Lots) are used. I’m still baffled why any option with a baseball field is still being discussed since the usage or in this case lack of usage prove this field is not necessary. And with participation in baseball at an all time low in Westport that trend won’t be changing for a very very long time time if ever.
Peter thanks for this- please publish links to this blog if you have them so we can do analysis on them.
I am proud to be a Board of Education member that voted to send a message to the LLBC about protecting the gardens in their current form. Unfortunately the motion didn’t pass.
With respect, I think to WAIT to get the proposal is the wrong approach. It maybe too late then. The initial Board of Ed discussions were misleading in my opinion because building on top of the gardens was described to be highly unlikely given space concerns.
It is disappointing the the Parks and Recs department has STILL not provided basic information so close to a decision being made by the LLBC. I think that is unacceptable. Maybe it’s not a priority for them?
I see little to no chance of the LLBC recommending that the actual school will be on top of the gardens. The NEW school MUST be the top priority. But assuming that school doesn’t go on top the garden – then both the Westport Community Gardens and Long Lots Preserve MUST stay.
We need a NEW school that will take up to 40% shorter time period to construct AND keep the Westport Community Gardens where they are.
Thank you Robert.
When I listen to the LLBSC, their emphasis on this feasibility study is what’s good for the town, not the Gardens and Preserve.
I have heard this stated in many parts of the country, called eminent domain for private property. The issue here is the Gardens and Preserve are already Westport town property. As I have been to the Gardens thousands of times, I have been amazed that I rarely see games played at the ballfields. I am dismayed as we are in the middle innings of this feasibility study and that the LLBSC has yet to obtain a usage report from Parks and Rec. Yet at the onset, they have taken Parks and Rec to the Gardens and Preserve and taken 13 boring samples to review what could be done to install new ballfields. A simple person could ask why wasn’t the ballfields usage field developed and reviewed early on? Why wasn’t the Gardens and Preserve not informed and brought into the process earlier?
Now read my first statement, again. If the mentality is that the Gardens and Preserve are Westport town properties, then the Gardens and Preserve never had a chance to survive in its current location. If sacrifices must be made for the better good, make sure you state your facts and move forward. The Gardens were relocated 20 years ago, and unfortunately, the Gardens were pawns then, and I’m afraid that is the case this time around.
Even though there are gardeners even amongst the LLSBC, I don’t think they understand what it means to be a Westport community gardener. If they did, they would have seen the transformation of the Gardens over the last 2 decades. I have been there for over 11 years, and I have seen the transformation. The pollinators have slowly come back, first by the dozens, now by the hundreds and thousands and more. For the first 10 years, my crops were plentiful, even though my best traits were growing weeds with my black thumb. I have spoken to dozens of gardeners, enjoyed and marveled at the oasis, made peace with nature, cured and pulled the weeds, etc. Mother Nature is slowly changing, as global warming has pillaged my crops this year. Unfortunately to start anew and relocate where the average gardener age is above 60 is both sad and distasteful. I would not want that on my conscience.
But once again, read my first sentence. The Gardens and Preserve are considered second class citizens. Prove me wrong, but if that is the case, we never had a chance.
James Mather is so smart and aware. As are the dedicated gardeners. There must be thoughtful, analytical dialogue that is transparent and adult for the entire Long Lots area.
James Mather states: “I’m just shaking my head at this mind-boggling process where the outcome seems to be predetermined whatever Westporter’s think and the rules of the game constantly change to rig the result that a few people have predetermined. The public is owed more transparency than that as our tax dollars will pay for the project.”
James, unfortunately in Westport (and I presume in many if not most Towns) this is not a unique situation, as paternalism is wedded to the politician’s soul.
In my limited experience, the RTM moderator requesting those who wish to petition the RTM “to respect the process” far too often means the following:
After a year of work the LLBSC will present a recommendation into the approval pipeline. To paraphrase the mantra generally asserted by Town Hall: “there will be ample opportunity for resident commentary at each stop along the approval pathway” – i.e. at the various Commission & Board silos where the LLBSC will make their presentations.
However, residents understand that the opportunity to provide “comment” (by written communication and/or oral testimony limited to 3 minutes) IS NOT anywhere equivalent to proactive transparency and actively inviting resident participation into the investigatory, deliberative and decision-making process – i.e. a “seat at the table” for residents to participate in deliberative decision-making. That omission is not accidental.
In my limited experience, the approval process pathway our RTM moderator referenced usually goes as follows:
Conservation: They ensure that any proposed project conforms to the environmental impact rules, regulations and laws. They DO NOT consider whether or not a project is something that the majority of Westport residents want…they say that they must stay in “their lane”.
P&Z: Likewise, the members of the P&Z ensure that any recommended project conforms to Westport’s rules, regulations, ordinances and laws. They may discuss the fact that many residents abhor the project; however ultimately they generally say that they must stay in “their lane” for fear of appearing capricious in their approval decision-making. In other words, if it “checks all the regulatory boxes” they too must stay in “their P&Z lane”; and it is for others to determine the “value” or “desirability” of the project.
The Board of Finance: In the past the BOF chair explained that the role of the BOF is to determine 3 things: A) Is the money for something that Westport needs? B) Is it something that Westport can afford? C) Is there “value” in the request? Is the money for something that Westport residents actually “want” has been a historically ambiguous criteria because without a referendum, that criteria is open to interpretation, manipulation and “crony influence”. Also, for the BOF to deny a “Selectman’s supported” request takes a courage too often absent from these decisions. And again, the BOF chooses to “Stay in their parochial lane”. In this instance, no one will deny that a new school is necessary, that Westport must afford it, and that a new school will provide immense value. Whether or not it is something that the Westport residents desire will likewise be uncontested. For the BOF to deny the LLBSC’s request would be tantamount to significantly delaying the residents a needed new school AND probably result in taxpayer cost inflation. As as happened before, it is likely the BOF will approve the LLBSC request and “punt” the Community Garden’s demise to the RTM while stating that questioning the LLBSC recommendation and the fate of the Gardens is not “under the BOF’s purview”.
The RTM: So now it becomes the responsibility of the RTM to over-rule the BOF and deny the requested/approved appropriation. I’m not certain, but THAT might require 70% of the voting RTM to accomplish. Although the RTM’s “lane” is broader than the others, it is uncertain that the RTM will have the ability to deny any First Select-person his/her desire. In this instance the supporters for athletics will make their case. Supporters for prioritizing education will make their case. Supporters of retaining the Gardens will speak – although their case has already been sufficiently aired. Perhaps proponents of relocating the gardens might speak. The PRC director will likely speak – but it’s likely THAT support has already been nailed down by her employer. Private phone calls, arm twisting, and partisan influence can occur despite the RTM allegedly being “non-partisan”. A vote to overturn the BOF will require RTM’ers believing, and publicly claiming, that they know better than the Westport LLBSC comprised of intelligent, deliberative, caring fellow residents who have voluntarily dedicated a year or more of investigation, evaluation, discussion and contemplation. “Trust” in our Town officials, and the “Benefit of the doubt” for hardworking thorough committee membership is a mantra frequently articulated by RTM members. AND again, an RTM vote to deny at this “eleventh hour” will have the same delay and inflationary repercussions – something RTMers are understandably reticent to do.
AND, like an attorney examining a witness before knowing the response, it is bad policy to pose a project unless the votes are assured, because to be denied is an embarrassment no politician wants to endure.
Too often the remnants are the individual silos pointing fingers at each other, each one deflecting accountability, and denying their own responsibility. THAT is how the process is formulated.
My point is that IF the Community Gardens are to remain intact, the time is NOW to obtain that assurance. Once the LLBSC gets injected into the “approval process”, it is usually rides a train where despite some bumps on the rails, the tracks are generally downhill.
This situation is just another example that the “process” the RTM moderator references and promotes is often a seriously flawed charade feigning resident involvement. Not always, but too often, as desired projects get shepherded around and through any encountered resident resistance.
The only other option is to force a Town referendum, which has its own difficulties and outcome uncertainties…but at least with a referendum you might know what the “majority” thinks.
The cry “remember in November”, thereby implying that Town oversight and accountability must take place “at the ballot box”, is far too inefficient and blunt an instrument to be immediately tangible and impactful. Issues and projects come and go, bluster subsides, “news cycles” pass. To be efficiently effective there needs to be a method of holding Town Hall officials more contemporaneously accountable. The RTM is considering a revised Citizens Review Board to provide residents immediate oversight of our Police, Fire and EMS providers. Personally I have zero concern regarding our Fire and EMS providers, and the conduct of Westport’s admirable police department is rarely at issue. Far more pressing, and generically relevant, is providing Westport’s residents contemporaneous oversight of our Town officials regarding transparency, conduct, information, responsiveness, and proactive resident involvement. THAT is the only way to ensure our residents meaningful accountability and a seat at the table.
As always, JMHO
Dr J
Jay, well said. Loved “ a seriously flawed charade feigning resident involvement. ”
Wow. Dr. J you’re just crushing it. Well done. A civilian review board that had a broader mandate as you suggest would be an incredible help to residents who find themselves up against entrenched department heads and other town officials who mistreat taxpayers without fear of consequence.
Dear Parks & Rec: Nothing to say about usage of Westport’s four existing “Babe Ruth” (full-size) baseball fields for middle school children….especially the one that was located at Long Lots Elementary way back when it was a Middle School? Why the silence about current usage? Asking for a friend…..
It’s wonderful to see that Lou and the schools are all about the Gardens. It’s been 20 years coming, and glad the separation over the years will now be over.
Now that the BOE, Lou, and WCG are on the same team, and saving of the Gardens in the current location seems to be a priority of both the BOE and Gardens.
I love the fact that after 20 years with zero collaboration between the BOE and WCG we will now have harmony and educational field trips to our community gardens.
As one who grew up with Gardens in Westport at both grandparents homes, and ours, the value of growing your own vegetables, along with the constant nurturing each growing season brings, was invaluable.
The simple solution, in my opinion, is the dreaded word the BOE and some parents don’t want to hear – “REDISTRICT.”
Yes, let’s keep the new or refurbished Long Lots School where it is. Why move it? If we have to move the kids for a 2 year period, they will survive, as those middle school kids ours survived the Coleytown mold disaster a few years back.
That move was done in a short time with moving parts that consisted not only students, but faculty, transportation and furniture. No debate, No calling out fellow residents, no blaming each other; just Westport working together.
Kids will adapt, they always do. One may say, “oh to0 many kids in one place” etc. The Long Lots teachers and faculty are going to moving temporarily as well. If you look at a 2 year plus school year it is only 360 days.
This saves the gardens. Unfortunately, they to will most likely have to hold of planting for 2 growing seasons.
What everyone MUST UNDERSTAND, this will be a “construction zone” access will be limited, as state and local insurance regulations will come into play.
The good news, the gardens stay in place. The pollinator pathway stays, as does all the native trees, etc. The volunteers of the Long Lots Building Committee (thank you all for your hard work and do not deserve the criticism) can move forward with getting a new, or refurbished Long Lots for our community.
The question remains, does the BOE and parents of our elementary schools want to see their kids moved? Will the WCG folks be willing to wait 2 years plus to plant again?
My father always said to me “a good deal is when everyone walks away a little dissatisfied.”
Thank you all for listening to my two cents, from my take all this as a resident.
Respectfully to all, as we are all in this together!
Jimmy Izzo
Jimmy thanks for this and for the creative thinking which has been largely absent from this process.
I do not have a garden plot (full disclosure – my wife does) so I cam’t speak for the WCG committee, but if this were a compromise position that left the gardens intact I would urge the garden community to accept it. I think the neighbors would be thrilled too but again I can’t speak for them.
I’m sensitive to the disruption to our young students that it would cause of course and it would be helpful to hear from Long Lots parents what their view is and where you think the best place is to educate them while the new school is built.
Hey Jimmy. Saying that Lou is all about the Gardens is like saying Jimmy is all about sunrise photos. Let’s grab coffee sometime my friend. We can talk about how the Community Gardens have been trying to work with a public schools for 20 years. We can talk about harmony and education and other great things.
Thanks, Lou and others here on what I believe is not only indifference to the need for open green space such as the gardens and preserve, but also the well-represented desire of ELECTORS who have had to insert themselves into this very-not-transparent process.
The Committee SAYS they care, they listen, they garden. Yet there has been no visible effort or action to answer the many questions raised about why more, new athletic fields take precedence over the single and beloved community gardens and preserve; athletic fields that are in NO WAY meant for the use of Long Lots elementary students.
Parks and Rec (both the department and appointed commission) have been suspiciously silent in these discussions. They have been asked repeatedly by citizens and elected officials for answers or even a discussion. CRICKETS! The domain of non-school athletic fields lies squarely in the P&R lap. (and not in the “judgement” of an appointed school building committee).
Also, last but not least: LLS neighbors concerned about problematic water table issues have gotten no concrete answers to their concerns. (The borings report is completed but STILL NOT PUBLICLY AVAILABLE despite requests at every LLSBC meeting I’ve attended). there are also traffic, noise, pesticide pollution, and other effects that concern neighbors.
No answers!
Why, why, why, why, why?
Good job, Mia! I see journalism in your future.
Toni
BA in Journalism, 1979
James, here is the link you requested
http://www.westportyouthtravelbaseball.com
From April – October ’23 Long Lots baseball field will be used 6 times & one of those times was for a practice. In every instance Long Lots was being used @ least one of the other big fields (Staples, Wakeman or Doubleday) were available. Not one time were all 4 big fields scheduled for use on the same day let alone the same time. Any option prioritizing a baseball field over the Westport Community Gardens should be immediately taken off the table. Its ludicrous that’s its still being discussed.
Thank you Peter!
If, as another commenter said, the State will pay a portion of the school construction cost but NOT the cost of destroying the Community Garden / Preserve and building a new full-size baseball field, isn’t it unfair to target Westport taxpayers with that cost when useage is likely to be “light”….at best.
I smell mendacity. In the first public meeting of the Long Lots School Building Committee, after their intention to kill the WP Community Garden/Preserve became known, and they publicly aired their plans, in May, the head of the committee announced to the overflow crowd of gardeners, “I’m not gonna sugar coat this for you. There’s not one plan that doesn’t affect the garden.”
Then he asserted, “It’s the school’s land and they can do what they want with it. We’ve been tasked by the Board of Ed” to figure out whether to build a new school or renovate.
The Garden/Preserve is not on School property; it is on Town property.
At last week’s BOE meeting, the BOE Chairwoman professed surprise that the Garden/Preserve is up for destruction, undercutting the committee’s assertion that the BOE had directed them to take the garden.
Who was it, the BOE asked, who decided that the garden was to be put into play?
The head of the LLSBC said: “I did.”
Well, well.
BOE pointed out that the Ed Specs make no reference to a taking of the garden/preserve. Head of the Garden/Preserve, Lou Weinberg, pointed out that the Ed Specs make no reference to using the land that is not contiguous to the school itself.
Upon further questioning, the Building Committee Chair revealed that he has had clandestine conversations with Parks & Rec. (Later, a member of the BOE would refer to the actions of the LLSBC as “sneaky.”)
We gardeners/preservers only learned seven months into the LLSBC’s process that they were planning to kill the garden [you cannot ‘move’ the garden without destroying the garden]. We’re now 4 months out from that first meeting where we expressed overwhelming opposition to the most-favored plan of destroying the garden. Throughout the past 4 months, other Westport citizens expressed their outrage.
‘What is taking so long?’ asked the Chairwoman at the BOE meeting last week. The Committee replied that they’d been “tweaking” the plans. Had they gone back to the drawing board as requested by the public? No, they were tweaking the bathrooms for the lowest grades and sending their tweaks back to the architect – wasting tax dollars and time on minutiae. Dragging their feet so that when they present their deceitful plan to Town, the pressure of time will be felt to accept it.
Building Committee anticipates shovels in the ground next Summer – the height of nesting season. We have migratory birds raising families in the Garden – at least 11 migratory species and at least 8 year-round species. Migratory species are in drastic decline, including hummingbirds who have nested in the Garden for 20 years. It is against federal law to disturb nesting migratory species.
The LLSBC shows no compunction about killing the pollinators who nest in the ground [“moving” the garden kills the pollinators] and whom the Garden has nurtured for 20 years. LLSBC doesn’t care that killing the Garden contributes to the dire pollinator apocalypse and the avian apocalypse by destroying their habitat. It is because of this kind of benighted careless compassionless selfish sickening bulldozing of habitat that we are in a climate catastrophe.
More mendacity comes from the Committee’s assertion – to the surprise and consternation of BOE — that the entire property is to be fenced, including the Garden if it were to be left in place. What a needlessly petty decision. The Garden/Preserve is ALREADY fenced. Access can be designated to the Garden just as access for the children to the school can be designated and monitored. Gardeners haven’t trespassed on school property over the past 20 years; why would we visit a construction zone?
LLSBC says they need parking spaces. Come on. Pequot School in Southport staff use the parking lot of the nearby Congregational Church. In Wilton, the multinational corporation ASML, the chip manufacturer that powers the world, provides a shuttle bus for employees to parking areas.
The sanctimony of the Chairman of the Board of Finance, speaking as a member of the public at the Board of Ed meeting, was astonishing – ‘everyone has to give a little and feel a little pain, the garden, the school….’ We’re not talking about a 10% cut of staff and expenses across all departments of a corporation to make budget. We’re talking about killing hundreds of species of animals who have lived in the garden — an island of biodiversity that has been a bulwark against extinctions. But he and LLSBC want a ballfield.
The Committee has not provided meeting minutes and has produced only spare agendas. They have done everything possible to avoid their plans being learned by the public. They have sought input from parties who would love to have access to the Garden/Preserve land while absolutely ignoring the input of the Gardeners who have spent twenty years creating a Town asset. The Garden was established originally and approved by multiple Town Boards. Why is this unelected committee allowed to ignore that history?
A petty despot committee under the direction of a feckless First Selectwoman made private plans to put a playing field or parking lot on top of the Garden/Preserve. Because it’s easier for them. Because they want to. On top of the Parker-Harding mess, the destruction of the Garden/Preserve makes it clear that the First Selectwoman is incompetent and incapable of anything but misfeasance, preferring photo ops to leadership.
I look forward to our Parks & Recreation Commission issuing a simple statement, namely
“The Parks & Recreation Commission recognizes the Gardens and the Preserve as both park land and recreation space. The Parks & Recreation Commission does not support the demolition and loss of existing parks and recreation space. We hope the Gardens and the Preserve will remain untouched”.
Wishful thinking, it certainly should not be.
perfectly stated!
I have lived in the Long Lots School District ever since moving to Westport. My children are Long Lots alumni. I am also a member of the Westport Community Gardens so, of course, my husband Ed, and I are very interested in the future of Long Lots School, the WCG and the Long Lots Preserve. We support improvement of the school but we do not support sacrificing the Gardens and the Preserve for another ball field, a ball field that isn’t even used by the school. The Gardens and Preserve are unique in town, maybe in Fairfield County. They should not be sacrificed for another baseball diamond. The Gardens and the Preserve must be protected in any future plans for Long Lots School.