Last Sunday, during her State of the Town address, 1st Selectwoman Jen Tooker mentioned her support of the Baron’s South property (adjacent to the Senior Center) as her preferred site for the Westport Community Gardens.
A new home is needed, due to upcoming construction of a new Long Lots Elementary School. The gardens are now located just south of the school.
Today, gardeners received a letter from Tooker. Dated January 29, it says:
I hope this letter finds you well.
I wanted to communicate directly with each of you to provide an update on the Community Garden. This letter confirms that the Westport Commumty Garden and the sports fields located on the Long Lots Elementary School campus are closed effective December 31, 2024 to all non-school activities.
I understand that some equipment remains at the garden site, and gardeners are requested to remove those possessions during the month of April.
Plots at the Westport Community Gardens. (Photo/Bill Armstrong)
However, the real purpose of this letter is to again make the offer to relocate the
Community Garden to the Baron’s South property.
By way of background, in October 2023, the feasibility study for the Long Lots School reported that a new school was needed to replace Long Lots Elementary school. As First Selectwoman, I concurred with that analysis.
In that study, because a new school would be constructed concurrently with the ongoing operation of the current school, it was apparent that the entirety of the campus, including sports fields and the Community Garden area would be
utilized as a construction site for at least 3 years.
With that in mind, I made a proposal for the Community Garden to be relocated to the town-owned property at Baron’s South. That central location, next to the Westport Center for Senior Activities, is an enhanced, accessible and viable location due to the on-site infrastructure, parking, and water access.
The proposed Baron’s South site is near the Senior Center’s garden (above).
Personally, I believed this was a win-win situation, and had the proposal been accepted by the Community Garden representatives at that point, there would have been limited, if any, impact on the spring, 2025 and future growing seasons.
In my opinion, both the town and the gardeners would benefit from this option — a new Community Garden without time constraints for its members, ADA-accessible, adjacent to the Senior Center and walking trails, designed in cooperation with the gardeners, a short walk to the Library and downtown shops, with water and electricity.
A Community Garden that can be operational long before 2028 is the best long-term solution for current and future gardeners, and for the town of Westport.
As it currently stands, the Planning and Zoning Commission’s 8-24 report from January, 2024 does include a smaller version of the garden to be rebuilt on the Long Lots campus, but not at its current location, and at the conclusion of the construction of the new school.
Realistically, this will not occur until 2028 at the earliest. That means no gardening will be taking place at Long Lots, in whatever final form it may take, for at least 3 growing seasons, and after that time, with no access during school hours.
The Community Gardens (top left), and the current Long Lots Elementary School campus. (Photo/Brandon Malin)
I thought the time is now to reiterate the offer to build a new and fully accessible Community Garden at the Baron’s South site and remove the ga:r:den from the Long Lots Campus.
Certainly, there is a process that will take some time to achieve thls option. This includes approvals for land use and permits from P&Z and Parks & Recreation, as well as approvals for appropriation from the Board of Finance and Representative Town Meeting (RTM).
I understand that some are concerned with the soil compatibility at Baron’s South. The town hired independent environmental sc1ent1sts and soil experts who have researched and studied the soil in that area.
These experts have deemed the land at Baron’s South perfectly suited for a
community garden.
Enclosed you will find a schematic drawing of a proposed Community Garden at Baron’s South.
Schematic drawing of proposed Community Garden at Baron’s South.
Included in this proposal are items that were expressed as “needs” or “wants” during the multiple discussions on the relocation, most recently during 2 on-site visits in October, hosted by myself and Department of Public Works d1rec!or Peter Ratkiew1ch, as well as during Long Lots Schqol Building Committee
meetings.
They mclude:
1. Clearing the area for garden plots
2. Removal of additional invasives
3. Grading along slope to flatten grade
4. 8′ deer fencing and below grade animal fencing
5. Water Service
6. Electricity
7. Provide timbers and topsoil for raised beds
8. Composting Area
9. Wood chip deposit/storage area
10. Porta-john location with screening enclosure
11. Community Garden gathering area
The Town continues to express its desire to work collaboratively with the Community Garden representatives.
Since early October, 2023, when the LLS feasibility report was first published,
the primary goal has been to relocate the garden to a more accessible, well-functioning, efficient, expanded and enduring Community Garden to serve as a community asset in Westport.
All the while, the intent was to.make the transition to the Baron’s South property so that gardening seasons were not lost, and that your community gardening efforts could continue and thrive. I know this is important for many of you.
I also trust that most agree with that ideal and will be amenable to working together to make that happen for the betterment of our community members.
I would like to hear from each of you, and encourage you to please reach out and contact me at the selectwoman’s office (selectwoman@westportct.gov) to continue the conversation and bring the Community Garden to Baron’s South.
The closing of the Community Gardens at Long Lots, M*A*S*H final episode-style. (Photo/Sally Kleinman)
(“06880” covers the Community Gardens controversy — and every other news story in town. If you appreciate our 24/7/365 work, please click here to support your hyper-local blog. Thank you!)
This is very simply a BAD idea. There is already a shortage of parking many days at the Senior Center. And a good portion of our constituents are mobility impaired. Where will the gardeners park??????
Maybe a second study should be initiated.
Molly you didn’t know that the senior centre is one of this towns preferred spots for staff to park ? Oh yes.. tookers doing !
Oh I do agree with you that it would be outrageous.. but please send a letter to the chairman of PZ to ensure it is not included in staff inventory…
The town hired “independent soil experts” who “researched and studied” (but didn’t test) the “land in Baron’s South”? Exactly what land in Baron’s South did they “research and study”? There’s over 20 acres in that park. Where’s the report? The last soil analysis (Thunderbird 2020) stated that the contaminated soil in the Baron’s Dump did not constitute a public health hazard because few members of the public accessed the site and thus the chances of anyone coming in direct contact with the soil were slim. But now it’s “perfectly suited” as a community garden?
The “Town” is expressing its desire to work collaboratively? Please. Baron’s South is being stuffed down the throats of the gardeners as if they’re geese (pâté, anyone?). And “soil compatibility”? That’s a lovely way to put it. Westport has a long history of ignoring potential/likely toxic sites (Cranbury, Silent Grove/Nike, the original nursery/Community Gardens), and/or doing half-assed remediation. Plus, let’s face it: It’s only a matter of time before we’ll need Baron’s South for a football stadium, anyway. Ballfields are forever; gardens not so much.
Given the state of the country, and the constitutional coup we are living now, this all seems trivial to me today. Nevertheless, I do have some quick thoughts, FWIW;
1. The Baron’s South parcel under consideration is significantly sloped downward from the Senior Center to imperial. Imagine running a wheelbarrow full of soil or woodchips uphill/downhill. Now imagine you are 60, 70, 80 years old.
2. Much of the flattest land at the top of the parcel is in the deep shade of several mature trees on private property. Most vegetables and fruits need a full day of sun.
3. This particulate area of Baron’s South was used as a construction waste dump, including toxic materials. Because it was “cleared” environmentally for pedestrian use doesn’t mean it is safe for agriculture. There are no recent soil tests to acknowledge what really lies there, this waste dump will be disturbed when it is used in efforts to level a portion of the area
4. All of the forested habitat adjoining private homes on Foxfire will be clear-cut , according to the Public Works Director. It is not clear if the adjoining property owners are aware of the clear-cutting.
5. The main reasons for the lack of space at Hyde Lane are two-fold and carefully laid out with the intended consequence of displacing the town’s only community garden: provide peak parking for afterward hook pickups, while empty buses circle nearby, and build a non-school oversized athletic field for NOT elementary school purposes. This adequately squeezes out the garden, and the geothermal wells are standing by as a backup to relocate there. It is possible for the athletic field to be build elsewhere, leaving the garden untouched.
6. This letter is the first official word on the garden closing date of Dec. 31, 2024, despite many earlier pleas for an answer. No surprise the garden closed retroactively, in a letter dated Jan. 29 and received on Feb. 6.
7. In December, I was able to find a solution to preserve many garden artifacts, equipment and plantings at a beautiful nearby non-Westport public outdoor space, with the understanding that the artifacts it would be returned to the WCG if and when they desired. The offer was declined. I am not aware of any plan WCG has for saving/storing its common property, other that the town of Wedtport refused to help do do.
Autocorrect corrected: *…provide peak parking for afterschool pickups..,*
I think Toni should run for the job of First Selectwoman.
When she loses ! Huh ??!? I think not !
Well “Cindy.” Before Dan Woog removes your ill advised imposter bullshit post… let me respond.
Not leaving town. It’s called aging in place, and it’s what I and many other old people plan to do here in Westport. I am committed to making Westport conducive for all demographics, including the largest: “old” people.
I’ve been here longer than Tooker, and probably longer than you, whoever you may be. One thing is for sure: you are a coward.
Bleh. You are teaching your children well. Parenting not really your thing. Such a good example of cowardice and bullying. Go sit in a corner.
There is an available avenue to assess the toxicity of the plots proposed for gardening and to remediate any soil problems that might emerge. And it is a route the administration used last year (unsuccessfully) to help Roan file for brownfields remediation of three plots of The Hamlet property.
CT DECD Office of Brownfields’s window of application for assessment as well as remediation closes on March 7.
The First Selectwoman talked about this letter at the State of the Town presentation on Sunday — before any of the Gardeners had received it. There has never been any serious interest by the Administration in finding a solution to preserving the Garden, only in making this inconvenient obstacle to the Long Lots project go away. At the last Building Committee meeting, I watched as in work session the members redrew the plan to rotate the playing field in such a way that would effectively obliterate the Garden on the schematic submitted with the 8-24. (And yet they’re happy to benefit from the labor put into establishing the Preserve as a buffer with the neighbors.) Baron’s South is not a viable solution for all the reasons Toni cites and more. As she and Morley note, the tests done a number of years ago on soil displaced during the Senior Center expansion were aimed at identifying whether it was safe to walk on, not to grow fruits and vegetables in for human consumption. This has been a farce, and unfortunately one that has hurt members of our community who created a special place for themselves and others and have in turn been vilified and will see all their hard work demolished. Shame on us.
1. Pave Paradise
2. Put up a ball field lot
3. Extend an “offer” for a contaminated, shaded hillside as a solution.
Farcical and, frankly, shameful. November cannot come soon enough to boot this Administration.
Dear First Selectwoman,
Is this how Betty Lou would have handled this project? I think not.
People are going to find a problem with every location.
The criteria are pretty simple:
Flat
Sunny
Accessible
Not contaminated
No Brenda ! People are just not stupid. Nor are they inept.
This has always been the plan..
and we are sick of this first selectwoman !!!!
Sick of the antics. There is an 8-24 which includes albeit a sows ear for the gardeners, but it includes a spot for them.
I have a great idea !
Since teachers are not entitled to parking..
how about we run a shuttle bus from greens farms train station to the school at long lots.
It’s about the same distance as imperial to downtown.
Then the garden can stay in sunshine..
and the teachers can suck it up like Tooker thinks the downtown staff should.
Huh ?
You like that ?
It’s an identical comparison..
be very careful what you all ask for.
“By way of background, in October 2023, the feasibility study for the Long Lots School reported that a new school was needed to replace Long Lots Elementary school. As First Selectwoman, I concurred with that analysis.
“In that study, because a new school would be constructed concurrently with the ongoing operation of the current school,…”
So, let’s back up here. The LLS is in such poor condition and harmful to our kids that we need to build a new $110million+++ school immediately. And oh, yeah, while we’re in a spending mood, we’ll throw in some gangbuster ballfield as someone’s folly because we’re so good at keeping our schools’ coaches, plus, get rid of some pesky community farming crap because who values community farming anyway? BUT, it’s OK for our kids to attend the UNSAFE school for the next THREE years before we condemn it? And we’re doing this because, as she notes in her letter, the first selectwoman decided she thought it was a good plan?
Yup. Ironically, building a new $100 million school does not even register on the list of controversies in my mind. Tooker is using a decrepit LLS to cover up the destruction of a garden in favor of a GOAT ball field that IS NOT EVEN PART OF THE SCHOOL PROJECT. And, yup again, on the athletics issues, among others, at the schools.
There is no problem with the current location, so far, there just hasn’t been the political fortitude and common sense to protect this treasure that serves so many, mostly our beloved seniors.
This is horiffic.
again the gardeners a scape goat..
but what is more abhorrent is to try and feign caring about the community gardens even though she could not give two shits about it.
Tooker does not care where these gardens go once they in fact go !!!!!!
She has made that patently clear. She does not hear “NO”
She has in my opinion, bullied board of finance etc.. she just cannot hear no !!!!! A narcissist !
The queen of the Westport castle has no capacity to hear NO !
This gardener proposed move is bullying !
It’s garbage ! It is unacceptable to anyone normal !
Anyone who sees it otherwise is just a lunatic !
And as a tax payer I WANT a say in what my taxes pay.
Funny the 2 selectmen’s kids are in private $55k per year schools. Gfa and Hopkins.
Hmmmmmmmm !!!! Imagine that !
Let me tell you as someone “( actually paying for my kids education) “ I sincerely hope there’s no freebie happening.. because I need to earn 90k to pay 55k
And I save this town from the expense of another student..
This gardener stuff is utter crap !!!
The gardeners have supported this town… now they get screwed.
Unacceptable.
Disgraceful!
And pathetic.
The rtm should be ashamed of themselves.
A political joke of a body voting with no sense.. in my opinion.
Ciara
With opinions of Tooker in the toilet as these comments and previous ones on this site indicate, can you imagine what her run for governor would look like. ?her skin may be thick, but is she a masochist?
It’s a very small but vocal minority making these comments. I hope she doesn’t make governor, but it will take a lot more than a handful of jaded gardeners.
Yes, Alex.
I think my own unreachably low opinion of the woman gave credence to a wish that is overblown.
I might be jaded but I’m not a community gardener – just a concerned citizen. By the way, the Thunderbird soil analysis report for Baron’s South has been removed from the town website.
As a community gardener in town I love this plan, the accessibility to downtown apartments is great. I won’t even need to drive to access my plot, I can walk it! I think this location will benefit many who rent in the area and have no viable land themselves to garden. I think it’s a great way to show our community ideals by bringing this vibrant community green space to downtown!!!
Not a fan of the do-nothing Tooker administration, the word-salad letter, or the vituperative approach of some Long Lots parents regarding the gardens, but Baron’s South is objectively a better location, assuming the soil quality is comprehensively tested. It’s more central, more walkable, and makes better use of a property that at present is mostly wasted space. This doesn’t have to be a zero sum game, as frustrating as it may be to feel like the administration is cowtowing to the loudest and nastiest voices in the room.
I walk there often getting to and fro with equipment will not be flat to the site. read Toni’s comment.
Read the info about the parking at the senior center.
Maybe someone should tell the first selectwoman that moving a garden isn’t like moving furniture around your living room.
The site and the soil needs to be prepared; removing roots, rocks, amending with nutrients, i.e. compost etc.
As Morley has posted out about the soil test, one can reasonably call into question the results and the efficacy of the whole procedure.
I have been a member of the award winning community garden since 2007. Every spring and fall I spent weeks amending and working the soil.
The first selectwoman has been determined to undermine this community asset. Shame on her!
I hope the voters remember what has happened to the 100+ family members of our beloved garden.
Rather than see these letters and emails go back and forth I think it would be good to see ALL gardeners sit down with the First Selectman and other representatives included P&Z etc.
Find a solution together. Talk it out face to face.
To announce the contents of a letter in a public meeting and the people the letters were intended for had not even received them seems like an odd way of doing it.
I appreciate that idea, can you fathom why that wasn’t done before day one of the building project?
Don’t forget the documents that revealed all the conversations that were had with stakeholder except the gardeners. Appalling disrespect for beloved people who added with their own sweat equity a garden that should be regarded as another Jewel of westport like compo the library the levitt etc.
2 points. 1. Considering that any organization needs some operating rules/procedures, the Community Garden is governed by a steering committee. They are the ones that will make the decision regarding any wholesale move and, I assume, would be responsible for the operation of a new garden. From what I know communication between the steering committee has been non-existent. 2. For any new site to be viable it needs to be flat, accessible at ground level, sunny and the soil non-toxic. Without modification the plan presented by the First Selectwoman does not meet or is deficient in meeting these criteria.
I appreciate that idea Robert Harrington, can you fathom why that wasn’t done before day one of the building project?
Don’t forget the documents that revealed all the conversations that were had with stakeholders except the gardeners. Appalling disrespect for beloved people who added with their own sweat equity a garden that should be regarded as another Jewel of westport like compo the library the levitt etc.
I still struggle with the fact that this is a 100+ million dollar project paid for by all of residents tax dollars (the newbie residents and us who have been here 30+ years and more) and the town can not find someone creative/smart enough for 100 MILLION+ dollars to design a plan that builds a new school and keeps the gardens. Why was the garden space even included in the acreage in the first place? I do not pretend to be an expert but why if the property adjacent to the school property (not technically school property) was designated a garden by an 8-24 was it even included inn this plan? If it was not included in the acreage initially I’m sure they would have been able to come up with a plan for a new 100 million dollar school on the existing property.
Exactly Michelle, Political Leadership lacking. And we need more communitu outrage with out the vilification. a solutions based approach.
About one year ago, upon the inability of so many of us to save the Community Gardens, I decided no longer to be active in Town matters. Frustration and failure altered my future. Now, First Selectwoman Tooker has made a specific proposal. It seems only logical that she put together the details and the funding and pursue her proposal. The Executive Committee of the Gardeners should meet and agree to work with this proposal to achieve success. I am skeptical, but believe if our political leadership wants to accomplish something for the Town, that leadership should evidence the same and try hard to accomplish the goal.
First Selectwoman, will you continue to tell us we can eat the food if grown in the soil ?
Respectfully, the distance comparison is a little off (by about 1.5 miles) and you’re comparing an occupation to a hobby. Ones needed, ones not. Understand the frustration and appreciate the hard work by the gardeners (they have done an amazing job) but at the end of the day the needs of our children come first. Or is a garden more important than the children in our community?
That is such a BS argument. The town has 20+ sports fields and one community garden.
More than 65% of our taxes go to the school budgets. Suffice to say that “the children” already come first. I think what you are saying is that nothing but “the children” should matter at all.
The sports teams can share in the sacrifice just this one time, for a change.
The needs of the children are coming first. The needs of children are not reflected in the 100 million plus new school.
Not one gardener or Westport resident will or has disputed the fact that a new school is needed.
What about the needs of the rest of the community do they just not matter? What are you teaching “the children in our community” by destroying an environmental green open space resource for NOT a school actually but a ball-field?
Should we all just go away so you can have what you want without anyone questioning it? Both are equally important and the land adjacent to the school property was designated 8-24 for the garden and should have been excluded from the plan from the beginning.
Why don’t we teach “the children in our community” that we respect the planet and all of the people on it by being good stewards of the earth and keeping at least some of the town green? What do we teach the “children in our community” if we promise and designate something and then just pave it over when someone wants a new ball field? The school should have been designed on its current property. And the ball field should go somewhere else if it is absolutely necessary I’m sure they can find another place for it and if not I’m sure the “children in our community” will be just fine maybe they’ll even figure out how to climb a tree!!
That should say the needs of the children ARE reflected
Dear First Selectwoman Tooker:
I have been a member of the Westport Community Garden for four years. I thank you for your recent letter outlining a proposal for a new garden to be established adjacent to the Senior Center that would replace the existing one next to Long Lots School.
You list eleven “needs” requested by Garden members during various discussions of the proposal. However, you do not include one considered most vital by me and my colleagues– the need for adequate sunlight. The site proposed for the new garden is bounded by large trees that reduce available sunlight hours. The tree canopy shading this area is shown in “Google Aerial-21 Imperial Ave.” included in the “Baron’s South Stockpile-2019” collection of Town Website documents. Vegetables will not grow without adequate sunlight.
Your letter states that “experts have deemed the land at Baron’s South perfectly suited for a community garden”. Unless you are referring to experts’ reports other than those included in the Town’s website for environmental investigations of Baron’s South, I cannot agree with your assertion. I base my position on the July 10, 2020 letter to the Town of Westport from its consultant Thunderbird Environmental, LLC that states:
“Regarding risk to human health from arsenic in soil, the Site is located within an urbanized area and has limited usage currently but is occasionally accessed by the public for walking and exercising (running). Other forms of limited trespass are possible; however, the ground cover is well vegetated in areas not covered with buildings or impervious surfaces (i.e. asphalt and concrete). The vegetative cover and impervious surfaces greatly decrease direct human contact with Site soils and suppresses the potential for dust creation or soil erosion. Therefore, direct and indirect exposure to soil Arsenic at the Site is minimal and, therefore, risk to human health from arsenic in soil at the site is low. Based on the available information, direct or indirect exposure to soil Arsenic at the Site appears to be minimal. However, if additional assurance is needed regarding the potential risk to human health, a comprehensive human health risk assessment could be conducted to further quantify human health exposure and associated risk to surface soil Arsenic at the Site.”
Thunderbird’s report did not foresee the site would ever be used as a garden requiring removal of vegetation and contact by humans with raw soil.
Thunderbird did sitewide testing at various soil depths to determine background contaminant levels. It found the highest Arsenic concentrations present in surficial soils (surface to 3 inches below grade) at the Site. Thunderbird reported surficial soils at the site have an unhealthy average arsenic concentration at 18.1 mg/kg., almost twice the10.0 mg/kg level established in the Residential Direct Exposure Criteria (“R DEC”). The average of all samples from the surface to a depth of three feet exceeds the R DEC. As stated, Thunderbird’ s report presumed there would be minimal human contact with the soil. In fact, if the vegetative cover was removed and gardeners were in prolonged contact with soil there are unknown health risks. Without further testing of vegetables raised in this soil, one can only assume they would be contaminated.
If a community garden is to be established in the Baron’s South property, there should first be a comprehensive human health risk assessment conducted. This is so for at least two good reasons. First, those in contact with this soil should be protected. Second, without such a risk assessment study before human exposure, a jury could determine the Thunderbird report evidences clear notice of danger to the Town and callous disregard by it.
I have no suggestions as to how sunlight can be increased in the area without harvesting town trees and those of adjoining property owners.
apologies for the word salad. this will be revised and hopefully reposted
This idea of moving the garden to a hilly, contaminated and dark site is nuts.
Yes, we need a new LL school. We all want that. But the current unfolding project simply isn’t coming together as it should.
This massive building project will be disruptive and unsafe for our kids, will increase the risk of flooding for downstream residents, and quite simply will cost too much. Especially given that we have many other school buildings that will soon need attention/renovation as well.
Solution: relocate students like we’ve done in prior situations (working together as a community), tear the old school down and build a new one and the same place. Then we can have fields, playgrounds and a garden. All of that could be done in less time and at far less cost.
Dear 1st Selectwoman: If you’ve taken the time to read the 40-odd comments on your letter on Dan’s blog, the same important themes repeat: gardens need to be level, flat and sunny with good (non-poisonous) soil and sufficient parking nearby. Since we, like many other gardeners, are in our 70s/80s, steeply sloped land is a non-starter. The proposed site fails all those criteria whereas the existing community garden meets them all. Don’t you agree preserving a community garden at the Hyde Lane location makes more sense?
Ms Tooker:
This is in response to your letter of January 29th, wherein you ask for my feedback on your ongoing campaign to build a new community garden at Baron’s South. I have been an active member of the WCG for many years. I strongly disagree with your continued efforts to force us off our current Hyde Lane location in favor of a site that is so deeply problematic. Quite simply, Baron’s South is a terrible location for a garden. Many of us have looked at the site and have found it completely unsuitable. It is heavily shaded, it is sloped, and there is inadequate parking. Our present Garden offers plenty of sunshine, a flat open space and ample parking.
In your letter you stress the importance of “gardening seasons not being lost”. Surely we, the gardeners, get to decide what is most important to us. Many of us are willing to wait for a viable garden to be rebuilt at Hyde Lane (which is in the current 8-24), rather than make a hasty move to a site that will never work.
Given that you are determined to needlessly destroy Westport’s beloved Garden, and given the unnecessary and punitive time constraints that you have placed on us, many of us would be open to rebuilding at a different site. One that is sunny and flat and has adequate parking. Baron’s South has none of those things.
I will add that this letter is the first communication we have ever received from you on the subject of the destruction of the Garden. Your letter also informs us for the first time that the Garden is retroactively closed to us as of December 31st. We know that the school project has been significantly delayed. (We also know that you have falsely and publicly blamed “those gardeners” for the delay.) Why would the Garden be closed so far in advance of construction? This also feels punitive.
Your stated desire to “work collaboratively” with us cannot be taken seriously, given your actions throughout this disappointing and disgraceful process.