Dr. Jay Walshon is the retired chair of emergency services at Milford Hospital, former New Haven County EMS director, and 3-time president of the American College of Emergency Physicians state chapter.
Dr. Jay Walshon
He is the creator, photographer and author of the “Eye See You” children’s books.
He enjoys photography, painting and sports, and plays and teaches pickleball.
A 40-year Westport resident whose 2 childrens went through the Westport school system, he writes:
Considering its crucial role, I thought it enlightening to review the Parks & Recreation Commission’s 2024 accomplishments.
Detailed examination reveals that the entirety was spent on approving charity events, park sculptures, fee increases (though without expense/revenue data), the Compo Beach playground, a tree identification program, school restrictions targeting gardeners and dogo walkers, and prohibiting non-residents (and casual Westport residents) from using our public pickleball courts – milquetoast actions at best, while numerous consequential issues remain unresolved, unevaluated, unconsidered.
These include:
- A field utilization inventory (as promised), to define needs and scheduling
- Prioritizing public health to ensure the safety of materials that participants, observers and neighbors are being exposed to at PRD-controlled facilities
- Safe utilization of pesticides, herbicides and fungicides (including adjacent waters, wells, aquifers, residential property, etc.), and providing adequate notification of applications
- Environmental stewardship, incluidng transitioning to green alternatives in accordance with the RTM’s Net Zero mandate
- Identifying Parks & Recreation Department sustainability opportunities
- Community Gardens stewardship and protection
- Baron’s South maintenance, remediation and rehabilitation implement (comprehensive consultant analyses, recommendations, and a renovation concept was already paid for by our taxpayers
- Compo Skate Park safety and replacement
The Compo Beack Skate Park comes under Park & Recreation Department purview. (Photo/Larry Silver)
- Comprehensive Parks & Recreation Department audit, including expense/revenue analysis by activity
- Longshore Improvement timetable implementation;
- Longshore pickleball location (promised in 2023)
- Longshore clubhouse design, planning and fundraising initiatives
- Maintenance needs inventory, including equipment and deficient property
- Compo Cove access and public parking availability
- Winslow park access, maintenance, parking and utilization
- Compo Beach concessionaire contract (Hook’d evaluation and renewal/ replacement)
- Burying Hill flooding and infrastructure.
The list is substantial.
For example, the Parks & Rec Department’s $862,670 appropriation request (a 4-year lease of 12 pieces of gas-powered equipment) — absent the Parks & Rec Commission’s involvement and approval — illustrates their lack of initiative and failure to lead on a substantive issue.
Despite ample 2024 opportunities, not once was this important issue agendized for examination. It was a conspicuous strategy to bypass public engagement. It was a missed opportunity to initiate the exploration of viable “green” alternatives, suggesting passive rejection by town leadership of Westport’s Net Zero resolution and objectives.
While the motivation for such neglect and issue censorship can be postulated, what’s undeniable is the glaring absence of prioritized goals and objectives to direct the Commission’s energies, against which its efforts can be judged.
As 2024 reveals, the PRC remains primarily rudderless and reactionary. Organizations lacking clearly identified goals and objectives are defined by reactionary decision-making, and become vulnerable to stagnation, inefficiency, ineffectiveness, and mediocrity.
Accomplishments are constrained to items placed onto the agenda – and restrained by the lack thereof. Achievements are determined by what is discussed.
Acceding to my request would not only immensely benefit our community; it would significantly increase resident interest, and exponentially magnify the satisfaction derived by serving on this important dommission.
Considering the many neglected issues, valuable time and capabilities are not being optimally utilized. Our PRC could have accomplished more – much more.
If manpower constraints are an impediment, resident volunteers and local expertise can be recruited. The energy and capability of the RTM’s sub-committees can be utilized. Educational forums with recognized experts can be scheduled, and best practice guidance obtained. But that takes leadership, planning, and willingness to accept public guidance.
Dr. Jay Walshon would like to see items like the Hook’d contract be part of the Parks & Recreation Commission agenda.
I made this appeal at the Parks & Recreation Commission’s January 15, meeting, and in writing.
Last week’s meeting proved it fell on deaf ears. While our golf and fireworks charity events do require approvals, continuing an entire action agenda subsumed by such is embarrassing.
Currently there are no means for residents to agendize topics for discussion. Contact information of our PRC commissioners (other than the chair) is unavailable – even to our town clerk – insulating them from meaningful resident discourse.
While residents may share concerns at the beginning of meetings, all dialogue is strictly restricted to an agenda rigidly controlled by Town Hall.
A publicly endorsed list of goals and objectives is essential for the Parks & Rec Commission to transparently initiate these necessary discussions in earnest, and make meaningful progress in a timely fashion.
Stagnation on these imperatives must not continue in 2025. Perpetuating the status quo must not be tolerated by the public, the RTM, or the PRC commissioners themselves.
Perhaps the PRC commissioners should be elected by Westport’s residents, and thereby become accountable to them rather than to the first selectperson. However, that requires a tedious Town Charter modification.
Immediately doable remedies include
1. The above issues should be immediately prioritized and agendized to permit resident engagement.
2. There should be a reasonable mechanism for residents to get issues onto the PRC agenda for official public discussion.
3. The PRC commissioners’ contact information must be available, to enable and encourage resident discourse.
Any town deserves better. Westport deserves better.
==================================================
“06880” asked Parks & Recreation Commission David Floyd for comment. Here is his response:
The “Opinion piece” criticizes the Parks & Recreation Commission for various alleged omissions to act, secret subversive actions, and a perceived inability to listen to citizens.
Unfortunately, the writer is mistaken in several instances regarding the conduct, actions and purview of the PRC. This is somewhat perplexing, considering his consistent presence at PRC meetings.
Section C30-2 of the Town Charter states, in its entirety [my emphasis]: “The Parks and Recreation Commission shall establish policy for the maintenance and use of parks, playgrounds, beaches, swimming areas, boat mooring areas, playfields, indoor recreation areas and other recreation areas and facilities owned or controlled by the Town, except those under the jurisdiction of the Board of Education. It shall recommend and approve regulations for the use of parks and recreational facilities for adoption by the Board of Selectmen. It shall cooperate with other Town officials, boards and commissions and with private and public organizations concerning recreational plans and facilities.”
David Floyd
Public comment: PRC meetings are 100% open to the public, and do not limit the length or number of citizen comments. In fact, I have often been complimented (and criticized) for allowing citizens to speak at length about issues affecting our town’s parks and recreation resources — even permitting speakers to go on tangents.
By law, we are limited to discussing properly noticed agenda items as I announce at each meeting, but all citizens are welcome to address the PRC. The writer being a frequent, lengthy commenter. I forward emails to the commissioners, as is standard practice for appointed boards and commissions in Westport.
Transparency: Anyone who lived through the Longshore Capital Improvement Plan should recognize the level of transparency sought by the PRC. Fifteen months of plans, stakeholder meetings, public comments, open houses, public meetings. Decisions made in a public forum. All for the betterment of a park we all love and use extensively. Compo Playground, Art in the Parks, WestportMoms festival, and others further illustrate this bias for openness.
There will always be a prioritization of projects and adoption of policies. Every wish or desire cannot be acted upon.
As chair, I have chosen to focus the PRC on real world projects and issues we can solve (e.g., Longshore Plan, Compo Playground rebuild, smoking/vaping policy), and encouraging a “citizens first” attitude at Parks & Recreation Department. I do not apologize for that.
The Longshore Plan is a “real worldl project” for the Parks & Recreation Commission.
The absence of a P&R cirector and parks superintendent is an unprecedented situation never before faced by a PRC and P&R Department. It has presented challenges up and down the line, but the staff (top to bottom) have adapted, taken on additional responsibilities, and moved forward.
To this end, we have a new director starting. I look forward to working with him to adjust where needed.
Thank you to my fellow commissioners, the staff at the P&R Department, maintenance crews (P&R and golf) for your support and efforts every day.
(“06880″‘s Opinion pages are open to all readers. And we could not do what we do without reader support. Please click here to make a tax-deductible contribution. Thank you!)
I’d love to know more about “Winslow park access, maintenance, parking and utilization”. What does this mean? Paving more of Winslow? Removing invasive plants? I go to Winslow all the time and have no idea what this refers to.
Amen, Dr. Jay. To judge from the frosty, defensive response, it would appear that you hit the engine room. Thank you, as always, for speaking out. You give voice to what so many of us are privately thinking.
I’m with him. The first “him.”
Considering that he represents the First Selectwoman, the decision to attack my veracity and condemn the detail provided in my correspondence is not unexpected. But ignoring the truth
Mr. Floyd’s perplexity is surprising – it is precisely due to my “consistent presence” bearing witness to his PRC meetings that provides the lucidity, veracity and relevance of my commentary.
Perhaps unwittingly, the PRC Chairman underscores my points by delineating his Charter designated responsibilities. Save for the Dept of Ed areas, Westport’s residents are reliant upon his leadership and the PRC for the maintenance and use of all Town facilities. This is broad authority and responsibility that the current PRC seems reticent to embrace. Therefore, the continuing negligence of the long list of important issues I’ve enumerated violates his/their Charter responsibilities. As he himself admits, the continued degradation of Baron’s South, as well as the decision to turn a blind eye to the entire list, is his responsibility.
There was one more crucial Charter responsibility that Mr. Floyd delineated but intentionally did not emphasize: “It shall cooperate with other Town officials, boards and commissions and with private and public organizations concerning recreational plans, and facilities.”
On December 3, 2024 members of the RTM requested that the PRC discuss and explore green equipment alternatives at their January meeting and report back its findings. The First Selectwoman’s obstruction and angry rebuke at this request was shocking – and revealed who controls the PRC agenda. For what possible reason might the PRC violate the Charter by not willingly cooperating with an RTM request?
The comportment of the PRC chairman is not at issue; during PRC meetings Mr. Floyd is affable, polite and lenient when permitting the public to speak. Given the long list of compelling issues before us, it is the intentionally insipid content of his meetings that is deleterious and unacceptable.
As Mr. Floyd admits, the PRC is limited to discussing properly noticed agenda items. Again he makes my point that the PRC must agendize the issues that I’ve enumerated to permit public discussion and resolution.
Thank you Mr. Floyd for breathing life into all the criticisms that I’ve outlined in my entreaty.
I have worked with Jay Walshon on issues and also with David Floyd. I have also worked with our former Parks & Recreation Director, Jen Fava, and our former Parks head Michael West. I had long been seeking to remove Ms. Fava since she did her job poorly. Michael West was excellent. I recommended Michael for the position of Director. As to David Floyd, he too has dramatic shortcomings, though not as to his personality. Jay Walshon has many ideas and, like me, is wordy. Yet, Jay’s ideas and observations are usually accurate, certainly worth considering. The task of addressing our Parks & Recreation issues, especially Parks, has not been well handled by First Selectwoman. I only hope that will change.
*all of the Town’s numerous parks and Yown recreational areas. Please excuse the obvious typo.
Agree with most of what he says. Jen Fava never should have had that job. No transparency in the P& R board. Selectwoman doesn’t believe in listening to citizens. Only interested in her Photo ops . Big changes need to happen in Westport!
Dr. Walshon is correct: the P&R Commission has been majoring in the minors. Apparently, they were not even consulted on the lease-to-buy arrangement for almost $1 million in gas-powered equipment for Longshore. (Never mind that it is toxic for workers and the environment and never mind that we will likely get stuck with a lot of obsolete–if not illegal–equipment by the end of the lease.) Nor were they aware that P&R intends to install even more artificial turf–even though the experts say that it’s leaching PFAS and microplastics into our bodies and ecosystems. Nor could they answer even the most basic questions about the new $7 million shed at Longshore. (And yes, I am aware that they are trying to walk back that number.) And to make matters worse, this almost total lack of oversight is complicated by the fact that we have an RTM that is too timid to ask hard questions or even ask for more time to consider our options. Thank you, Dr. Walshon, for bringing this issue out into the open.
Thanks again to Dr. Jay for being an astute watchdog in our community. P&R, the department and Commission, are meant to be stewards of all public lands, open space and facilities in our town. There is a lack of vision, leadership, direction while many hugely important matters are being railroaded through by this administration and its sycophants on boards and commissions. The desecration of the community garden is but one symptom of a lack of leadership and vision in this area.
Perfectly said Dr. Jay, and to add to that list of abject failures,a new and disturbing development which is at least related to the PRC. A proposed $7 million dollar shed at Longshore.
Planning and zoning commissioners, voted against the shed’s proposed location for a multitude of valid reasons. They are the body we elect to protect residents of this towns property and zoning, and to ensure correct use of same.
Board of finance commissioners laughed it out of the meeting room but not before debating its mind blowing and nonsensical price tag, and size.
But here’s the most disturbing development of all.
2 partisan RTM members have taken it upon themselves to bring to an RTM vote, overturning the planning and zoning commissioners decision.
A stunning and politically driven move.
And one that IMHO is being done to curry favour with/to attempt to assist town administration in “getting their own way”. – brownie points
Also to make fools of our PZ and no doubt to remind them that if they don’t go along with the autocracy of town hall and what town hall wants, ( no matter how preposterous) that they, the RTM can seek to overturn decisions made by other elected bodies. Talk about an insult.
A very slippery slope and one that sets a dangerous precedent.
Autocratic to the core, their motives, although permitted by the charter, in my opinion have no moral justification whatsoever.
One of them has even taken it a political step further making a presentation to the RTC.
I thought the RTM is a non partisan body ? Apparantly not these 2.
I suggest
1/ replacement shed needs to be situated off Longshore property
2/ no thought or discussion has been given to the general public who foot the bill for this stupidity, and our thoughts on what it is will be housed in this monstrous shed.
3/ no PRC vehicles need to be housed in a shed. Anything with 4 wheels should be outside as has been for a century.
4/ this will keep the size of the shed smaller and the cost to tax payers
5/ costs to build a shed are $60-$100 psf.
There’s no elaborate moulding or trim, there’s not even a need for Sheetrock or windows in 80% of it. Throw a few windows and a refrigerator and toaster oven in the break room with some heating and air conditioning in only those rooms and done.
Good insulation and shelves.
Efficient use of space.
6/ drawing for such a simple building should be about $20k. A very very nice and large Shed should cost about 700k max.
Not sure what the 10x markup and budget are all about, but this is becoming a very expensive norm in our town.
People picking numbers quite literally out of their ass that make zero sense and are living in cloud cuckoo land.
How are we supposed to trust any of the processes in this town when our hard earned money is being spent like it’s free? And like we have no say in it. ZERO transparency.
I can only hope that the remaining 34 rtm members will look at these 2 jokers proposal and promptly vote it down.
This shed should be DOA.
I couldn’t agree more, Dr. Walshon! As a member of the generation, (now in my ’80s) that built the recreation
facilities into the superb facilities we know today — and
raised the quality of education by participating in Town
Affairs, Muniipal Govt. and especially the RTM — I have
repeatedly requested to the Dept. Director that a small
number of the Non-Resident Beach Passes be set aside
for Former Westport Residents.
It has fallen, as you say, on “deaf ears.” My emails and
voice mails have not ever received a response.
In my case, a former Westport resident for 58 years, it
is heartbreaking. All my precious memories are at Compo
and Burying Hill Beaches. Sincerely, Janice P. Marcus
(Mrs. Mark J.)