The election is over. The Parker Harding renovation is on pause. Time to turn our attention back to Westport’s largest-ever capital project: a new Long Lots Elementary School.
Larry Weisman
Larry Weisman is longtime observer of — and participant in — town affairs. An attorney who defended SNCC workers in the South, as well as a Staples High School graduate who lost his student deferment after protesting the Vietnam War, Weisman moved his practice to Westport in 1979 and concentrated on zoning law.
He has represented the Gault Saugatuck project, Westport Library, Aspetuck Town Trust, Compo Beach playground effort, and many other major projects. Larry writes:
Lost in the heated debate over the Long Lots school and Westport Community Gardens is the role that could and should have been played by the Public Site & Building Commission.
The PSBC is comprised of professionals well qualified to evaluate the project in the first instance, as well as to review the recommendation favored by the 1st Selectwoman which would eliminate the Gardens to accommodate a ball field.
Here’s what the Charter has to say on the subject:
Unless otherwise expressly designated by the Representative Town Meeting with the concurrence of the First Selectman, the Public Site and Building Commission shall be designated as the school building committee as that term is defined in the General Statutes.
In the case of the Long Lots School, the 1st Selectwoman, supported by a vote of the RTM (not the RTM with the concurrence of the 1st Selectwoman, as suggested by the Charter), bypassed the PSBC and appointed her own hand- picked school building committee.
It would be fair, it seems to me, to ask why she did that; whether the RTM when it voted was aware of the Charter provision (most members were not); and if they had been, might they have asked why a new committee was necessary; and why has she refused, even after the fact, to grant the PSBC’s request that she refer her committee’s recommendation to it for further review and evaluation. What is she afraid of?
The Long Lots Elementary School project will be Westport’s largest capital expense ever.
In my view this has all of the hallmarks of a process carefully engineered by the 1st Selectwoman to avoid informed dissent and minimize public participation so as to produce a predetermined result.
Unfortunately for the citizens of Westport, these tactics do not necessarily produce either the best or the fairest result, nor one in which the public can have unqualified confidence.
I for one would be much more comfortable with the result, whatever it may be, if the project had been or now would be scrutinized by the PSBC which is, for good reason, designated by the Charter to serve as “the school building committee” unless there is a compelling reason to replace it, which does not seem to be the case in this instance.
I urge the RTM, which failed to take into account the relevant Charter provision when it voted to confirm the 1st Selectwoman’s committee choices, to redeem itself by adopting a Resolution asking, directing, imploring — whatever phrasing is appropriate — the 1st Selectwoman to refer her hand-picked Long Lots School Building Committee’s findings and recommendations to the Public Site & Building Commission for further review and public comment.
I asked Larry what the Public Site & Building Commission itself thought. Chair Joseph Strickland says:
The Public Site & Building Commission is comprised of experienced professionals in construction and development projects, and as such is uniquely qualified to serve as the school building committee as contemplated by the Charter.
I have every confidence that, given the opportunity, we will be able to make constructive suggestions that will benefit the project and the town of Westport. It goes without saying that the more qualified people who look at the project, the better it will be for everyone concerned.
Charter? We have a Town Charter? I’m sure there is a legal “opinion” which says it is merely a piece of paper that can be ignored in this case. Anyone else seeing a pattern here?
John, I may have to report you to the Ministry of Truth. The Charter is (now) just a serving suggestion. As it happens, the Public Site and Building Committee is obviously very busy and can’t risk getting bogged down by frivolous construction projects like LLS.
With respect and civility,
Morley
Does the charter mention anything about impeachment?
Section C38-6 covers the recall of elected officials.
Westport is one of only 5 municipalities with that option in the state.
Wake up! ______ says it’s too old to count.
Yes, he actually said “Why should we have to follow something that was written 75 years ago.” Shocking.
Now this man makes sense! Another avenue to pursue to get the best results. The Selectwoman seems to think her say is the final one and wants no disagreement. You weren’t elected to be a dictator.
The administration ignored my suggestion to have an impartial citizen’s group appointed. Now I see from Attorney Weisman’s letter that there is already one in place, the Public Site and Building Commission, which is also being ignored.
I wrote earlier that many of us in Westport believe that the merits of the Selectperson’s Committee have not been adequately explored. The elimination of a revered, community asset built over decades by a diverse, multigenerational group of citizens should not be discarded without most Westporters agreeing it is necessary, which clearly is not the case. Good governance and fair dealing need a hearing.
Ken Bernhard
Thank you Larry. Unfortunately, the town Charter uses the language “shall be designated” and we know what the RTM and town attorney think of the word “shall” – in their definition it means “may or may not.”
This first select woman is proving to be quite corrupt, perhaps it’s time focus efforts on her removal.
Westport needs to be detookered.
Now that elections have passed and we have a brand new Board of Finance, will they step up and state that $100 million is unacceptable for LLS.? The private sector can build the most expensive, green, 100,000 sf special use distribution and warehousing building for max $400/ft ( I know, I’m doing it), why $1,000/ft for a school building? Has no one in our Town government heard of value engineering? Is this a case of the proverbial $1,000 hammer the government is known for? The capital market is the worst it’s been for this type of project in over 20 years, perfect timing for this undertaking. At least one successful candidate for the BOF campaigned on the need to scrutinize the LLS project very closely. I hope that promise is followed through. If the subject of this opinion piece regarding the bypassing of the PSBC is true, the scope and expense of the project is even more troubling. Perhaps the bloated budget is the typical penchant of projects in Westport having to be the premium, best of the best wish list of the end users? Maybe the PSBC / BOF can bring some fiscal responsibility to the project. Perhaps the “inconvenience” of renovating the school would be the more responsible approach instead of an open checkbook. “Westport residents can afford it” is NOT fiscally responsibility. There are a list of important capital projects that should be considered on a holistic basis, for example, the need for new EMS ambulances. Fiscal restraint affects Town affordability directly through taxes so effective control will help keep Westport relatively affordable against competing interests in southwestern CT and all our property values strong. Yes, good schools also affect that value but stationary bike desks (never used) and $1,000/each for picnic tables (yes, both real expenditures at Staples) don’t make for great academic results. Picnic tables! What, no wood shop classes at Staples available to make them? Simplistic, yes. Symptomatic of a larger mindset, I believe so.
Amen! First, too many people involved have stated that a NEW school was predetermined – why? Why not have construction experts render a view on a renovation that isn’t “best of the best”, etc? The info provided to date has a renovation costing alot more than a rebuild – sounds like those involved fit the data to substantiate their pre-determined desire for a new school. If a new school makes more sense AND makes capital sense, great. Let’s build a good, adequate building that is fiscally sensible and won’t require a major tax hike.
Why did it take so long for anyone to let the rest of us know what the town charter says?!? The first select woman, should be well versed in the town charter and since it states “SHALL”, not may, it NEEDS, to be followed! Where is the town attorney who should be advising her properly?!?
Thank you, Beth Berkowitz.
That’s just what I was thinking. We should all read the Charter!
Especially if you are on the RTM.
Finally the voice of reason. It’s about time.
Is his last name spelled “Weisman” or “Wiseman?”
The First Selectwoman?
What does she gain with the total rejection of every element of good, solid leadership that benefits all of us living in Westport…and is compassionate in the application of that leadership.
The growing concern is whether this apparent failure of leadership in the current Long Lots debacle is a case of “pay to play”, or is this a case of dislike and denial of all the parties, who have demonstrated their love and passion for what the Community Gardens have come to represent in this Town? Or was this simply an abdication of her leadership by giving it up to other parties instead?
Definition of “Shall” is clear and not subject to alternate interpretations. It seems however that established definitions of words no longer matter and interpretations are now the new standard.
Hi Larry
Petition the RTM‼️
Whoops 😂
Thank you Larry. Also, thank you Ken Bernhard for his tying a role of the Public Site and Building Committee to the recommendation of Jen Tooker, Jay Keenan, Don O’Day and, I gather, the other members of the LLBC, recommending the replacement/destruction of the Community Gardens with an adult size ballfield.
Thank you Mr Weisman for pointing out the difference between SHALL and MAY!!
It finally sounds like Westport may get its cake and eat it!!
A lawfully prescribed path to keep the Community Gardens and The Preserve intact while getting an updated state of the art LLS.
Basic common sense would have indicated long ago the Babe Ruth ball field could have and should have been sited someplace else (and not at the expense of a town treasure)!!
Larry Weisman’s wisdom and experience should speak for itself, especially as his resume includes a term as Westport’s Town Attorney.
For those in charge who prefer to rely upon past practices as basis for our governance today, here’s a little history that will support that point of view as well.
The Public Site & Building Commission was tasked with overseeing the design and original construction of our library and also the renovation and conversion of Bedford Elementary School to our Town Hall.
Architect Richard Swift Campbell, employed as PS&B Commission Engineer from 1978 until the mid-1980’s, oversaw the construction of both projects on behalf of the Town.
Full disclosure: He and I not only worked together to assure the conditions of the Special Permits for Town projects were fulfilled prior to the occupancy of Town Hall, we became the best of friends and remain so today.
I guess the question is, did Jeff Weiser know this and ignore it, or is he unfamiliar with the terms of the Town Charter?
Those who don’t recognize the difference between “Shall” and “May” might contemplate the following: General Douglas MacArthur did not say “I may return,” and civil rights protestors did not sing “We may overcome some day.” And “may” certainly takes the “shalt nots” out of the Ten Commandments.
There were issues with the formation of the LLSBC.
I don’t believe his was one of them.
Chapter 21 of the Town Charter says, “Unless otherwise expressly designated by the RTM with the concurrence of the First Selectman, the Public Site and Building Commission shall be designated as the school building committee.” Chapter 21 also says, “The Public Site and Building Commission shall consist of 9 members, who shall be electors of the Town, appointed by the First Selectman and confirmed by the Representative Town Meeting.”
I can’t speak as to why the First Selectwoman gives the appearance of not having confidence in the members of her Public Site and Building Commission and felt the need to request a school building committee that did not include any members of that commission.
I did question if it was proper for RTM members to serve on the school building committee. The Town Charter does not permit a member of any elected or appointed board or commission of the Town to serve on the RTM. In the past, I would not have questioned it, as I believe the Town had distinguished a committee as being distinct from a board or commission. However, at that time, the First Selectwoman had recently made the decision to treat the TEAM Westport Committee to the same standards as boards and committees. I brought this up this double standard during the RTM meeting designating the LLSBC. With the Administration’s reasoning for why this was different and permissible simply summed up as, “’cause we said so.”
I don’t have an issue with the Selectwoman placing the request of a school building committee before the RTM. No matter how a motion gets before the RTM it then becomes the RTM’s to approve, modify, or reject. No matter how it got before the RTM, once approved by the RTM, that school building committee has been designated by the RTM.
Shall means shall. There are 4 ways that the Charter provides for having a matter placed on the agenda of the RTM a request from either the First Selectman, two Representative Town Meeting members, or 20 electors of the Town or the RTM Moderator may place any item on the agenda. Even if the Selectwoman’s request of the school building committee was backwards it had the right to be presented.
If any member of the RTM believes that a item on the agenda is improper for the RTM to hear they can stand and let their objection known when it is motioned to the RTM. it can be removed with a 2/3 vote of the RTM.
Shall means shall. The First Selectwoman requested it placed on the RTM agenda and on the agenda it shall go.
Jen Tooker has shown a lot of ignorance and incompetence in almost all of her decisions. I hope we can override her biased decision regarding Long Lots and the community gardens.