Pippa Bell Ader is a co-leader of Sustainable Westport’s Zero Food Waste Challenge. She is a frequent contributor to “06880,” on environmental issues.
Today’s piece is not one she wanted to write. She says:
What do the Connecticut towns of Bristol, Fairfield, Glastonbury, Old Saybrook and West Hartford have that Westport doesn’t?
They all have earned Gold Certification from Sustainable CT. Certification recognizes sustainability best practices in Connecticut municipalities.
Westport achieved Bronze in 2018 (the first year certification was awarded), and Silver in 2021.
But in 2023, when it was time to begin recertification (good for 3 years), our town administration chose not to.
Our Silver Certification expired. Westport has been sidelined in our pursuit of higher sustainability standards for our community.
As someone who dedicated time and energy to Westport’s prior 2 certification processes, I was deeply disappointed by the town’s decision. This is not the Westport I know and love.
The Westport I know is a climate leader, as evidenced by our town resolution to use best efforts to become a Net Zero Community by 2050. Without stronger advocacy by the town administration, I fear that this resolution will become meaningless.
Yes, achieving Sustainable CT certification is a lot of work. But the certification process can serve as a guide and impetus for the town.
The 13 action areas focus on the most impactful measures and steps a municipality can take toward sustainability, from ensuring well-stewarded natural resources and installing renewable and efficient energy infrastructure, to promoting the local economy, resilience and equity.
Composting is one key element of sustainability. (Photo/Scott Smith)
Westport is already doing a lot of good work. But there is more we must do if we want to ensure a sustainable Westport, and honor our town resolution. Right now, we are a far cry from using our best efforts.
Let’s recommit to our goals of becoming a Net Zero Community, and diligently work towards Gold Certification.
Even if we don’t complete all of the requirements for Gold Certification, we can meaningfully move the needle toward improved sustainability.
Non-profit groups such as Sustainable Westport cannot do it alone. The town must be a partner. Certification requires town administrative leadership, and support and engagement by residents, organizations and businesses.
Westport must not settle for watching from the sidelines as other towns surpass us. The Westport we love is a leader, not a non-participant.
To see the comprehensive list of the actions Westport could be taking toward certification — and in many cases, has already completed — click here.
It’s time to get in the game. Let our town leaders know that you want Westport on a level playing field with the other Connecticut Gold Certified towns.
Let’s go for gold!
(“06880” often covers the environment. And our “Opinion” pages are open to all readers. If you appreciate those missions — or any other part of this blog — please click here to support us. Thanks!)
Wow! How disappointing is right! Just another confusing, but clear message about how we are moving away from our town values about protecting the environment. 1. wanting to destroy a garden instead of protecting it. 2. wanting to cut trees from Jessup and long lots instead of protecting them. 3. wanted to cut trees in Barons South to build a garden. 4. not remediating soil after construction ofter building the senior center. 5. considering turf fields in town knowing the cancer risks to children’ and forever chemicals washing into our waterways. Wake up Westport! This is REAL! Who do we want to be?
Westport has evolved into a’tear down’ town! And the student population will decrease! It’s most likely it’s at its peak. Burr Farms Elementary School opened around 1957 and was torn down around 1983. Greens Farms Elementary School closed for a time because there weren’t enough students in town to keep it open. You have a Texas transplant in town who probably doesn’t understand this town. It seems like tax increases are exploding!
You don’t live in Westport. You don’t pay taxes in Westport. You don’t get a vote in Westport.
But, Susanna, I have a First Amendment Right to comment! Also many others comment who don’t live here anymore. Should Dan ban us all? Not a smart comment on your part!
Rude. Jack is a great supporter of hs hometown of Westport.
I no longer live in my hometown of Detroit yet I am a proud supporter and advocate for what Detroit has achieved.
Jack is a longtime Westporter and advocate. I love to hear his views.
Keep going Jack.
Toni, You brought tears to my eyes with your comment! I always said, “Once a Westporter, always a Westporter.” I’d say a 121 year history in the town qualifies me to comment. Or that my father was born in a farmhouse on Old Road also qualifies me to comment! I do want to make a comment in response to Scooters about going to Norwalk’s Drive-In theater. In 1939, my grandfather was offered $100,000 dollars for the Post Road property the golf range was on. It would have been a good profit, turning $5,000 into $100,000 on a piece of land that grew onions. He thankfully didn’t sell, but the guy supposedly wanted to build something called a Drive-In movie theater! I couldn’t make this comment because I had reached my limit of five comments.
Our Demographers find the opposite of your assessment. I’m fact some of our elementary are busting at the seams, some schools do have space. But we anticipate more growth
Abby, More growth by building new houses? New growth by building apartment buildings and having families moving in paying rent? New growth building more condominiums? And how much would the town need to grow with young families to build a new school? Due to the price of homes and the COVID buying surge, and the frustrations with traffic in town, I doubt very much the student population will grow. The Connecticut Turnpike swamped the town with new construction and put us (me) on a half day school schedule to hurry up and build Burr Farms School. I went to elementary school from 1 to 4 in the afternoon as other students went from 8 to noon.There’s nothing on the horizon to have a huge influx of new young students to make a huge difference.
Those were my thoughts also.
The destruction of the Garden will remain a stain on our town.
Exactly,,,a soft-headed decision made by a group of know-nothings. What better place for a community garden, then abutting a primary school? Versus an under-utilized ball field designed for older middle-school children.
Given the particular timing of this piece, it’s hard not to laugh. “Well stewarded natural resources”? Who are we kidding? Westport excels at many, many things but stewardship of our green spaces is absolutely not one of them.
who is responsible for the poor stewardship ?
A larger issue is that 13 CT towns get gold or silver certification, providing a reminder that a state with 169 towns has ample room for improvement.
As a long time close friend of Pippa’s, I will tell you her influence has made a huge difference in my choices as a consumer and to the environment. I started small. watching my choices when food shopping. Ask yourself, “…where will this container I am about to buy end up?” “Is it disposable/reuseable?” Next, try, just for a week to separate all food scraps from non food (most food can be composted, but there are some things to omit). Keep all the food scraps in the freezer if you like (no smell and easier to manage). You would be amazed at how much less refuse you have. Of course separate “recycling” from garbage but watch out for the black plastic and other items not recyclable. Urge local restaurants to change from non recyclable plastic. Even read where your food is traveling from. If my blueberries are coming from Chili, maybe I could choose something that isn’t using all that fuel to get to me, like a local choice. Try using waxed coverings instead of plastic wrap, your own water bottle and reusable containers. You will be shocked at how much refuse and money it saves. Once your awareness takes hold of your every day choices, you will want our leaders and our town to get on board. Ask them to support the zero waste challenge on or before the deadline. Maybe get involved and let’s all try just a little bit harder to do better. Your conscience will feel so much cleaner, I promise.
Prior administrations laid the foundation for achieving gold, building for a decade from bronze to silver status. This administration and its silent appointees have walk away, despite smiles and lip service to lofty net-zero goals. It’s not one action, but a series of steps that has stripped us of our silver status. Step by step we’re heading in the wrong direction….and it shows.
The Chamber of Commerce worked with Sustainable towards the bronze and silver certificates. If we go for gold we’ll aid the effort again.
I just don’t understand this administration (for whom I voted btw)..It seems that everything boils down to “my way or the highway”.. It’s a shame.
Maybe in two years, send them packing on the highway.(I used the word them, but you know what I mean.)
I will always care about where I chose to live and raise my children, I am sure Jack does too, what is your point about voting? if you can’t vote you don’t care?
But doesn’t a new Long Lots “Campus” bolster one’s resume for future endeavors?
Pippa’s a tireless citizen advocate for sensible sustainability efforts, and it’s shame she has to call out the town administration for being a laggard instead of a leader on this front. What to do? Think globally, act locally. First, vote by Tuesday for the ticket that believes in climate change and protecting the environment, not trashing it. Then join with the many local organizations that are trying to make Westport a greener, healthier community. A good place to start is at the Westport Library on Wed. Nov. 20, 7 pm, for a shared discussion on composting for sustainability and how to get to “net zero” with your own lawn and garden. Link to register: https://westportlibrary.org/event/composting-for-sustainability/
We have given up the gold standard in more than one important area during this administration. The track record of destruction and disrespect — for the earth, for Westport citizens, for good governance. — is long and continues to grow. Where are the checks and balances?
Westporters! Save the green space. Save the commitment to net zero. Save the Maple trees at Long Lots and property values around Long Lots. Save Jesup Green. Save downtown merchants. Save the community garden and Long Lots Native Preserve. Save our town from the ravages of autocracy.
Speak truth to power.
I agree with the commenters on the importance of saving our green spaces and doing all we can to promote, model, encourage and practice sustainability. This list of actions posted is laudable, however, they seem quite broad and town-wide. Are there individual actions we can take to encourage our town leadership to seek gold (or any!) certification? An email campaign or otherwise? I think many Westporters care about the environment and learning about specific, concrete and manageable steps would be very helpful to guide us.
Hi Tracy – Check out http://www.sustainablewestport.org for specific and manageable steps you can take to be more sustainable in many aspects of your life. We’d be happy to discuss more with you! The Actions provided by SustainableCT are generally townwide because the certification is awarded to the town, not a specific individual or an organization.
I’m a bit confused. This post suggests that Westport’s silver certification has expired however, a quick look at the Sustainable CT website indicates that Westport is both a “participating community” as well as maintains silver certification.
Separately, I’m wondering if the administration simply concluded that, like others have concluded about various other “certifications” and “rankings”, the results can be gamed and/or were mostly for vanity and/or virtue signaling with little actual value.
I would note that my town, Fairfield, is both “certified gold” and a “climate leader”. I find that difficult to believe given we were operating an illegal, unlicensed hazardous waste facility which ultimately spread contaminated fill across pretty much every playground and ball field in town as well as buried it under the beach parking lot and pavillion not to mention was on the verge of losing resident’s access to FEMA flood insurance for various violations.
Nonetheless, per Sustainable CT, we are Gold. How humiliating that must be for Westport. /s
I just googled the name Toni Simonetti and found out she has an Advanced Master Gardener Certification from the
University of Connecticut! Who’s more qualified than she is concerning the gardens? Plus she is a successful business woman! I definitely want to meet Toni the next time I’m in Westport. I am very impressed!
Hi Pippa, if we got our certification in 2021, then shouldn’t it expire at the end of this year? And if so, the town should have renewed it by August 2024 deadline?
I’d also add that once we have the new Long Lots building completed, the town should make a great leap in reducing greenhouse emissions. Besides the primary and critical goal of providing a safe and healthy environment for the children and the staff of Long Lots, the new school building is expected to use geothermal for heating/cooling, and solar panels for on-premise renewable electricity. This achievement will get us closer to net zero, and will be worth more than a paper certification.
Joe, you talk about the project using “we,” giving airs that you are the project manager or play an active role with the LLSBC. I’ve noticed you answer questions regarding project particulars (ex: insisting there is no turf field to which there was a recent budget request). What exactly is your appointed role with this project?
Laureen, “we” in my comment above simply means Westport. As for the rest of your comment, you seem to be jumping to a lot of false conclusions.
I don’t think there was been a budget request for artificial turf, and I can only recall a discussion in the board of finance meeting. Please check your sources to avoid spreading misinformation.
More than ever, Westport needs the ability to have mature discussions without raising the temperatures. We (Westport/World) have a lot of problems to tackle, and the way people are attacking the others when they don’t agree is a sure way to stifle progress toward solving said problems.
Joe,
I was at the meeting for the neighbors at long lots school with the building committee and the the turf field was brought up and their reply was they are not the people who decide what type of field. Thus my comment Wake Up Westport! Parents, do you want your children playing on turf fields? Westporters do you want more forever chemicals knowing what we now know?
As I have already mentioned, artificial turf has already been mentioned in the LLSBC update to the Board of Finance on Oct 9th. Artificial field costs were mentioned in the meeting as part of different design decisions they are looking at, including making the school a shelter decision. That does not mean that these are done deal. The committee will be coming back to the BOF with their final choices sometime in the spring. This might include artificial turf, and it might not. So far no budget request was made for artificial turf, or a town shelter.
Anyone who is interested in this topic should participate in upcoming meetings in various boards or subcommittees, including Parks and Recs, to make their voices heard.
My preference is for natural grass, but we also need to see how we can make our existing grass turf less hazardous, and sustain more game time. Natural fields need to rest so that they can be restored properly. Can we do anything to keep the natural fields in good conditions if we don’t have enough fields to take some offline? Do you have any thoughts on what can help here? Just saying no to artificial turf is not going to improve the fields. I would like to see a more comprehensive solution that can benefit all our natural fields.
Here is the BOF Oct 9 meeting recording (fast forward to 37:00 to listen to the turf update):
https://play.champds.com/westportct/event/617
Joe. For real science, see Wendy Batteau’s comments. You know nothing about environmental stewardship or you wouldn’t be supporting a school and recreation complex that is far too ambitious for the frail land upon which it will sit. Please stop puppeteering for the LLSBC and FSW. The winds of change are blowing.
Toni, I am not sure what you are trying to debate here. Anywho.
Joe
The debate is this: you are positing some kind of green science expertise by parroting about a biothermal provision (what are your qualifications?) yet athletic fields, especially turf, are not what I would call “green space” or eco friendly. Nor is planning two school footprints at once on land that is surrounded by wetlands with known flood issues. Nor is razing gardens and native plantings on same in favor of the 22nd compacted sports field Westport. I hope this clears it up.
Toni,
Even before the LLSBC had their first meeting, I was already advocating for geothermal, and sent emails to various town boards, and attended a Sustainable Westport meeting on that topic. That is because I am very informed on this topic and understand that over 20% of our emissions are due to heating and cooling. The design must account for geothermal from the beginning, otherwise we miss a great opportunity to get our town closer to net zero. You can read also the response of Sustainable Westport below where they also highlight the importance and their efforts in advancing renewable energy in municipal buildings.
The engineers who will be working on the new school building will be taking into consideration any wetlands on this site and follow the code to build the school. Also, they will ensure that water will be retained on site, and no additional runoff will occur during or after construction. In fact, they will even improve water retention. That message has been reiterated by the committee numerous times, and it is required by the state.
Why do you keep spreading disinformation and calling for the school project to be scrapped? Why do you think we are building the new school? You still don’t get it! It is very clear that all your energy is spent on one purpose at the cost of everyone else. Now you want to have a say on how much space the school should use, what size of athletic fields we should have, etc… You say that LLSBC or FSW are dividing the town. No, it is those who keep spreading misinformation or disinformation that are doing that. That is why it is super important that more people get informed, speak up, otherwise, the lies and the nonsense will be driving these important decisions.
Nailed it. Well said.
Thank you Andrew for your support of Joe’s comment. My niece is a current LL student, my nephew a soon to be, we appreciate your commitment to the children, the future.
Joe and Andrew
I do not spread disinformation. Please articulate the “disinformation.” I have not opined on geothermal but advocate for net zero. I am not an energy professional so I have not communicated any information about geothermal. I am aware it has the potential for energy savings, and also that some experts consider it outdated.
The engineers will work on the site to mitigate water issues, but they admit without the site plan it is too soon to say how successful they will be or how much the water mitigation will cost. The goal is no additional “water runoff” and hopefully better drainage, but no one has confidently indicated how this will be achieved. They said this, not me. No disinformation there.
Regarding what “the committee said several times,” the committee has said many things that I don’t believe, including that they have been transparent. For example, I challenged that the two meetings held recently were not being properly noticed. The town attorney got involved and, lo and behold, we got a last-minute public notice. Members of the neighbors meeting also asked for more transparency regarding the status of the proposed athletic fields, and was told only that it is P&R’s bit, and the LLSBC chair calls P&R occasionally.
I have no opinion on the size of the school, other than redistricting should have been done before Long Lots size was determined. Fact: This will be a mega school. There will be two impermeable footprints at the same time during the three-year construction schedule.
I do not care how many athletic fields you have, or how big they are. But not at the expense of a valued green space that is home to the gardens and native preserve — which serves the neighbors in absorbing water. And not made of a substance that ends up as a forever chemical in our water or that could be injurious to the unsuspecting children who will ingest it. Field lights are another matter and I suggest you stay tuned to the upcoming town planning discussion on lighted fields, dark skies, and related issues. No lights are currently planned for LLS fields but they also are not prohibited thus far.
I attended the neighbors meeting. I heard an awful lot of unanswered questions and concerns. One neighbor went so far as to say such disregard of the water issues should be “criminal.”
Finally, I will conclude by asking, when will these issues go back to the Planning and Zoning Commission, as promised? Many issues appear more problematic than originally thought and those have not been properly disclosed or aired. PZC is as much in the dark as “we” are.
This is a terrific post. It is unfortunate, however, that the leaf blower bill also did not pass as the pollutants and destruction of the top soil and the noise factor will now continue to poison us.
I appreciate this post, but I’m particularly concerned now with a point made by Janine Scotti. The decision as to whether request artificial turf fields be installed at Long Lots is about to be made. No!
These fields have been and are continuing to be banned in states and communities across the country. Mt. Sinai’s Children’s Health center and others strongly recommend against them, for excellent reasons. CT has a law banning PFAS (these fields may take advantage of a linguistic loophole). Atty. General Tong has filed an important lawsuit against manufacturers (with, as he has said, more to come.)
Here are just a couple of explanations of what PFAS are and how and why they exist in artificial turf. There is an extensive body of information also concluding artificial turf fields are serious health hazards – not just to the kids who play on them but also to the community water supply and public health. Many of the sources are scientific or technical but the topic has also been also covered by such mainstream media as ABC News and the Washington Post.
From: Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, or PEER, and the Ecology Center “Now lab tests show that both the grass-like blades and the backing of artificial turf contain the highly toxic fluorinated chemicals known as PFAS….
PFAS are known as “forever chemicals,” since they accumulate in the body and do break not down. Nearly all Americans’ blood is polluted with PFAS chemicals, which have been linked to lower childhood immunity, endocrine disruption and cancer. Children are especially vulnerable to harm from PFAS because of their developing bodies and PFAS chemicals’ persistence in the body….
PEER and the Ecology Center tested eight different samples of turf. They all tested positive for total fluorine, which suggests the presence of PFAS. PFAS are used in the manufacturing process to make the turf blades pliable enough for extrusion. The organizations tested for 36 types of PFAS, but there may be many other PFAS in synthetic grass. ”
From: The Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Institute (TURI)
“PFAS Testing in Artificial Turf Carpet
Determining what chemicals are present in a product can be challenging because chemical contents are frequently not disclosed by the manufacturer. Two nonprofit organizations recently tested artificial turf carpet and found evidence of the presence of PFAS in the material. The nonprofit organizations tested backing of both new turf and older, discarded turf. They also tested a number of samples of artificial grass blades (carpet fibers)….
One possible reason for the use of PFAS in the artificial turf grass blades is to serve as an extrusion aid. That is, PFAS is added to the polymer mixture before it is passed through an extruder. An extruder is manufacturing equipment that melts and forms the polymer mixture into its desired shape. The PFAS helps to prevent the polymer from sticking to the extruder. According to a researcher, artificial turf grass blades were previously made from low-density polyethylene, but the material had poor durability. Newer polymer mixtures have greater durability, but were not compatible with existing extrusion equipment. Therefore, PFAS were added in order to facilitate use of the new polymer mixture with existing equipment.”
I have supported building a new Long Lots to benefit the health, safety, and educational well being of our children and the community. Artificial turf fields will defeat that purpose. Let’s responsibly reject artificial turf now.
Yes. No more PFAS. I don’t care what new names the turf manufacturers give it.
Dan I encourage you to take Wendy’s comment and make it a stand alone article please.
She knows this subject inside and out.
Can we have more detail why Westport chose not to proceed with recertification? I would assume Sustainable Westport was consulted are perhaps involved in this decision making process?
The new Long Lots campus will be a huge step forward because we are creating a more energy efficient building and embracing geothermal. However, sadly it is also a giant step back in other respects – potentially losing a Community Garden that has proudly resided on Hyde Lane for 20 years.
I see a lot more opportunities within the Westport school system beyond Long Lots to raise our game with more solar panels and other initiatives. Do you know we still use 30-year old incandescent lighting in the Staples Auditorium ? Under-exciting new upgrade plans for the home of the Staples Players – we hope that will change very soon !
Firstly, a big thank you to Pippa Bell Ader! Westport’s past SustainableCT certifications are due in large part to Pippa’s volunteer efforts and her tenacity. She has been a tireless volunteer and crusader for the sustainability movement in Westport- initially through her participation in the Green Task Force (a town committee and predecessor to Sustainable Westport) and now as a Zero Food Waste Co-leader in Sustainable Westport (an independent non-profit organization).
However, Westport’s past SustainableCT certifications were ALSO due in large part to town leadership and the administration’s prioritization of sustainability in our community. Top notch schools and a flourishing downtown are nothing if we don’t have clean air, protected and preserved natural resources, flood resiliency and the ability for future generations of Westporters and our neighbors to thrive and survive. SustainableCT certifications are awarded to towns, not organizations like Sustainable Westport.
The path to SustainableCT certification, through the 13 action areas outlined by SustainableCT, is Westport’s PATH to NET ZERO.
Sustainable Westport met with the administration in the Fall of 2023 and advocated for SustainableCT recertification by proactively developing and outlining a plan/path to success.
And while we recognize, as Pippa mentioned and Bill addresses, that the certification process is arduous and frankly has some vanity components, it does provide town leaders with a clear roadmap to advancing sustainability.
Our public school (WPS) buildings represent the town’s largest municipal energy costs and have potential for significant improvement and savings. Last spring, Sustainable Westport coordinated a presentation featuring a local solar consultant and a prominent national solar provider for the WPS Board of Education’s Finance & Facilities Subcommittee and Elio Longo. The focus of the presentation was on expanding rooftop solar at Staples High School. The subcommittee chose not to pursue further investigation of solar on Staples at that time; nevertheless, Sustainable Westport remains hopeful about other opportunities to advance sustainability in our schools, including the new Long Lots School. We are committed to advocating, educating, and engaging residents on the critical environmental and health benefits of upgrading the efficiency of our physical buildings and infrastructure and transitioning to renewable energy sources.
As an independent nonprofit, Sustainable Westport is dedicated to educating and engaging local residents and businesses. Looking to make a difference? Visit our website, follow us on social media, donate and share our mission, and get involved. Want to amplify your impact? Let your voice be heard—contact your RTM members and local leaders, attend meetings, and share your concerns. Every voice strengthens our commitment to a sustainable future.