Sandra Rose has lived in Westport for 5 years. Her 3 children attend Westport Public Schools. She is a member of the Long Lots PTA, and has closely followed the Long Lots reconstruction project since its inception. Sandra is also part of “Parents for a New LLS.”
Westport’s Planning & Zoning Commission is weighing the approval of an 8-24 application that would allow construction of a new Long Lots Elementary School, and the relocation of Stepping Stones Preschool.
This isn’t just a vote about land use — it’s a decision about what kind of town we want to be.
The P&Z votes tomorrow (Monday). In that vote, the Commission has an opportunity — and a responsibility — to invest in our future.
After all, this isn’t just about a building. It’s about over 600 elementary school students who are learning every day in a facility that is outdated, overcrowded, and falling short of modern safety standards.
It’s about teachers and staff trying to do their jobs in a space that was not built for the needs of today’s learners.
The original Long Lots Junior High was build in the mid-1950s.
It’s also about our youngest residents, as the plan includes a new home for the cherished Stepping Stones preschool.
If the P&Z does not issue a positive report on the 8-24 application tomorrow, Westport risks missing the state’s critical filing deadline. That could mean forfeiting eligibility for state reimbursement — funds that would significantly ease the financial burden on local taxpayers — or worse, delaying the entire project until 2027. That’s not just a missed deadline; it’s a missed opportunity for every child currently enrolled, and for the many more who will follow.
Unfortunately, at least one vocal opponent has already threatened to invoke a town charter provision that allows just 20 electors (or 2 RTM members) to appeal key land use decisions to the full RTM.
That’s not a democratic groundswell — it’s a stall tactic. Another way this essential project could be held hostage by a small but vocal minority, at the expense of Westport’s children — and our taxpayers.
We cannot allow that to happen.
Opponents have called the proposed new school design a “Taj Mahal,” a “gilded cage,” even a “resort.” But those labels mischaracterize what’s truly at stake.
Rendering of the new Long Lots Elementary School.
We are not building a monument — we are building a school. A modern, functional, state-of-the-art school that will serve more than 600 Westport children and future generations to come — one that finally meets updated educational and safety standards, from secure entrances and emergency systems to infrastructure that’s built for sustainability and resilience.
The new design also thoughtfully allows for greater community access during off-hours by enabling sections of the school to be closed off securely, making the property more welcoming and usable beyond the school day.
Some opponents have gone even further, targeting members of the Long Lots School Building Committee — a group of volunteers who have donated countless hours of their time, knowledge and energy to a process that’s been transparent, deliberate, and community-focused.
Instead of appreciation they have faced repeated personal attacks, with some critics accusing the committee of misleading the public, or worse, deliberately lying.
Long Lots School Building Committee meeting. (Photo/Toni Simonetti)
It’s difficult to identify the true source of this disdain, but it often feels less rooted in fact than in a broad, reflexive opposition to our first selectwoman and anything connected to her office. Personal politics aside, that kind of cynicism helps no one — least of all our children.
It’s no secret that much of the opposition has come from members and supporters of the Westport Community Gardens, frustrated that the proposed plan displaces the garden’s current location.
Yes, this project impacts the Westport Community Gardens — a space that holds meaning and memories for many. As someone who values what the gardens represent, I don’t take this lightly. I take no joy in seeing them move.
But we must be honest: It is no longer feasible for the gardens to remain on the Long Lots site. The educational and safety needs of the new school make that impossible.
Aerial view of Long Lots School and (left) the former Community Gardens.
It’s time to respectfully close that chapter and begin a new one — a community-driven process to find a more permanent, equitable home for the gardens. One with room to grow and thrive long into the future.
This does not have to be a zero-sum choice. We can honor what the gardens have given our community while giving our students and teachers the facilities they need — safe, welcoming, and designed for 21st-century learning. We can come together and reimagine what the gardens could be — not diminished, but renewed.
Let’s seize the chance to expand access to a larger, more inclusive, more permanent community garden — one that serves not just 100 families, but many more. Let’s invest in it together, just as we’re investing in our public schools.
But first, we must act on what’s urgent: building the school. The focus now must be on approving the 8-24 application. Once that’s done and the project is underway, we can turn our full attention to planning a new, improved home for the gardens.
Let’s not pit green space against education — but let’s also be clear: the needs of our children must come first. That means building the school now, and working together to create an even better home for the gardens next.
If you share this vision for Westport’s future, please take a moment to email the Planning & Zoning Commission at pandz@westportct.gov, and urge them to issue a positive report on the updated Long Lots School 8-24 application tomorrow.
Our children, our gardens, and our community will benefit from your support.
(“06880″‘s Opinion pages are open to all. Email submissions to 06880blog@gmail.com)
While I don’t live in Westport any longer(Next door Fairfield) though born and raised. Just about every school in Westport has undergone some form of renovation or reconfiguration since their original construction. While some schools have been completely rebuilt, others have undergone extensive renovations and additions to meet evolving needs. Long Lots was built in 1953
It’s a year younger than me and even I have had to rebuild my knees. The building’s age has presents ongoing maintenance challenges, including issues with leaks, mold, and heating/cooling systems. I would image with all the above mentioned concerns it’s time to retire its tired old bones and give today’s kids(and future) a safer more productive atmosphere in which to learn and thrive. The gardens can be incorporated into the new design if desired. While gardens grow and thrive isn’t that what people want for the most vulnerable amongst you?
To Sandra Rose and all residents of Westport both past and present:
Thank you for your thoughtful and impassioned letter regarding the 8-24 application for the proposed Long Lots Elementary School and relocation of Stepping Stones Preschool. As Chairman of the Westport Planning & Zoning Commission, I want to assure you — and all members of our community — that the Commission takes this responsibility with the utmost seriousness.
We understand that this application touches on issues that extend far beyond land use. It reflects our collective hopes for the future of education in Westport, the stewardship of public spaces, and the well-being of generations to come. We recognize the significance of the moment and the deep feelings it has stirred across town.
Our role, however, is not to weigh in on politics, nor to be swayed by pressure from any side. Our charge is to evaluate this proposal in accordance with the law, our regulations, and the long-term interests of the community. That means engaging in a thorough, deliberate, and impartial review — guided by planning principles, transparency, and respect for all voices.
We are listening. We are studying all the facts. And we are committed to conducting our work with care, diligence, and integrity. Whether in support or opposition, every perspective deserves to be heard in a process that is fair and focused on what’s best for Westport.
I assure you that the Commission will do its job — thoughtfully, professionally, and with full awareness of what is at stake.
Sincerely,
Paul Lebowitz
Chairman
Westport Planning & Zoning Commission
Bravo Mr. L and thank you. The P&Z Commission under your chairmanship has been a role model in governance. I may not always agree with your positions, but I respect the integrity of the process at the PZC. Others should take note.
Greens Farms School was built in 1927. Long Lots was built in 1954. Why aren’t you complaining about Greens Farms School as being outdated? (I was at GFS in 1952 and Long Lots in 1959, just as a side note.) So the school building built in 1927 is just fine? But the school built in 1954 has to be leveled so students can study in a modern school.There was another elementary school built around 1957, but torn down around 1983 because there weren’t enough students in town to justify keeping it open. ( I was there 5th and 6th grades.) Too bad the school was torn down because some of the 600 students at Long Lots could be transferred. By the way, GFS was closed for a while because there weren’t enough students. Then it reopened. Student population in town is like a roller coaster. Student population will eventually drop again.
Correction- Long Lots opened in 1954, so it was built in 1953.
Greens Farms actually had a $16million renovation in 1997 but would seems looking at that would also be beneficial. But as with most things you must look at the most crucial. And I guess it’s really not my business just giving my thoughts.
I support the school, but the email address that your author uses is not valid. My comment was sent back to me saying the address is not recognizable (atpandz@westportct.gov)
David, The correct address is: PandZ@WestportCT.gov
This commentary is so full of inaccuracies I am not going to waste time addressing them all.
— No delay in construction related to state review
Missing the June 30 grant funding deadline in no way delays progress on building this school. Nor does it negate the opportunity to get state reimbursement. Missing the long-known June 30 deadline merely pushes out the state’s consideration of about $15 million in reimbursed expenditures.
The one-year delay currently on the books recall construction was supposed to start a year ago) lies at the feet of those in charge of the project.
—A positive 8-24 has been in place since January 2024.
Miss Rose might ask why in the world we need a new 8-24 when one has been in place for 18 months.
— This is absolutely about land use and what kind of town we want to be
One just needs to ask the property owners most affected by an intensification of use, flooding, clearcutting, traffic and noise. It is their quality of life and home investments that are being dragged through the Muddy River. The self involved mantra of “its about the children” is out of gas. One might ask the private owners of they private road Trailing Rock to better manager their water runoff and keep it from flooding their neighbors on Hyde Lane and Meadowbrook, since money doesn’t seem to be an object here.
— Threats of an RTM petition to overturn the PZC?
I have not heard of this. Who is espousing it? It is not a bad idea, but the concept did not come from me. What I have brought to the public’s attention is their right to referendum on a whopping $108m expenditure… or a petition to have the RTM and its committees reviews the Conservation Commission and FECB decisions since those were jammed together in a rushed hearing.
– “Secure” after- hours use of school property?
What are you talking about? After hours, the public lands are open to the public.. Most especially, athletic league play of all manner, and not just the tiny tots. It’s a big step up in neighborly disturbance compared to to Hunt club pickleball courts, or subdividing lots near wetlands. The real intensification of use comes NOT FROM THE SCHOOL. But rather from state-of-the art ball fields intended for everyone except the K-5 crowd. (Well, pushing the school north does actually intensify the use of land for neighbors on the north side. )
—The gardens
This town is still shell shocked from all the malicious manipulations employed to erase the award winning gardens from Hyde Lane. Personally, I would love to garden as far away from here as I can get (and in fact I do). A new garden site has been proposed by those who care (certainly not Miss Rose). The town has chosen to outright ignore this perfect alternative.
— this isn’t just about a building?
Why yes it is. A very expensive building. The most expensive elementary school around, despite efforts to mask that stone cold fact with mathematical manipulations of the comparables. Very few members of the public who will have to dig deep to pay for this have NO IDEA WHAT THEY ARE BRING ASKED TO PAY FOR. Why is that? Because the town won’t let you see the numbers. Why is that? Take a guess.
— By the way, the numbers are absolutely, without question, public information. And they are available to members of the public who know how to assert their right to them. I have done that work. You’re welcome.
Do not be duped into believing executive sessions are necessary to spend taxpayer money. Nothing could be further from the truth. By the way, in the state application document for cost estimates there is not a single penny under the line item “athletic fields.” Zero. I have a lot more questions about the financials, but this crowd isn’t that interested so I’ll take that discussion elsewhere.
—$100 million is not chump change
A quality education has nothing to do with the “pretty picture” of a school. Our hard earned money is better spent on teachers and school programs. This school is extravagant as far as school buildings go. The BOF itself called it the Mercedes Benz of schools. By the way, Long Lots School is in deplorable condition and I would have pulled my kids out of there a long time ago. Temporary modular school classrooms would have been a healthier, less expensive and quicker route to a new school.
— Nobody hates your children. For godsakes stop this insane insult and grow up. What annoys me most about this is the self absorbed, uninformed, selfish approach to what kind of town Westport is or wants to be.
What shoukd truly raise hackles is the manner in which we are being “governed.” The s hook project, downtown parking. Text amendments that allow projects such as the Hamlet. And yes, destruction of the one and only community garden.
I will never stop fighting to represent the rights of the public, truth to power, if some of the public does not give a damn that their rights are being trampled upon. In the manner of the great Elizabeth Warren, I will persist.
I could keep going in rebutting the ridiculous assertions contained in this opinion, but I have better things to do today. I’m going shopping for some garden plants.
Ya had me till Elizabeth Warren. 😜🇺🇸
Tom
LOL! I may not agree with everything she promotes, but she has my respect for standing up for her beliefs and for her constituents.
Thank you for sharing your perspective so candidly. While I strongly disagree with both the tone and many of the assertions you’ve made, I do agree that passionate engagement is vital to our local democracy. That said, passion should never be mistaken for accuracy.
On the state grant deadline: Missing the June 30 filing does, in fact, delay the town’s ability to secure reimbursement for this year—potentially over $15 million in public funds. Whether that delay affects the construction timeline remains to be seen, but brushing off that financial impact does a disservice to taxpayers.
On the 8-24: A revised 8-24 is being sought because the current project proposal has evolved significantly since January 2024, including changes to building footprint, field layout, and overall site use. Pretending this is bureaucratic redundancy ignores the Planning & Zoning Commission’s legal responsibility to review current facts, not stale ones.
On land use: Yes, this is about land use—and about children, schools, and long-term community investment. Framing it as either/or is disingenuous. Responsible planning balances neighborhood concerns with public benefit. This project has undergone multiple revisions and hearings, incorporating environmental studies, traffic analyses, and hours of public testimony.
On the suggestion of an RTM petition: You now say the idea didn’t come from you, but you’ve raised it publicly, and your wording has led many to interpret it as a threat. That may not have been your intent, but it has contributed to an increasingly hostile atmosphere around a project meant to benefit children, educators, and families.
On after-hours use: The school will, like every other public school in town, serve both its students and the wider community. That’s not a scandal—that’s a feature of Westport’s values. If you oppose recreational access for all ages, that’s a conversation worth having respectfully, not through exaggeration about “tiny tots” or “state-of-the-art ballfields.”
On the gardens: The claim that supporters of this project have malicious intent toward the community gardens is simply untrue. Many of us deeply value the gardens and have worked hard to propose realistic, beautiful alternatives. The suggestion that we are heartless or dishonest is unfair and undermines any good-faith dialogue.
On transparency: No one is trying to hide costs. Public officials have repeatedly made documents available and explained cost drivers in open meetings. If you’ve obtained more detailed financials, great—share them openly, and let’s review them together. But do so without suggesting that anyone who disagrees with you is ignorant or complicit.
Finally, on tone: You say no one “hates our children,” yet you deride concerns for their learning environments as “self-involved” and “out of gas.” You accuse others of selfishness, then claim moral superiority for going shopping for garden plants. Civic discourse deserves better—from all of us.
We can disagree, but let’s do so respectfully, with facts and with a shared commitment to making Westport the best it can be—for everyone.
To only address two points. First, what does a disservice to the public is to have a LLSBC, that has not provided an itemized budget to the people who are paying for it, suddenly say last week that they need $10 million more dollars than they thought.
Secondly, re: “A revised 8-24 is being sought because the current project proposal has evolved significantly since January 2024.” That is simply incorrect. Almost immediately after having an 8-24 approved that included the Gardens, the FS attempted to foist unsuitable space on the Baron’s property upon the Garden membership. The LLSBC never provided a plan that included the Gardens, after the 8-24 was approved. The Administration was simply appeasing P&Z with an that 8-24, and never intended to abide by it.
1. As I said, the only delay is in applying for consideration by the state for reimbursement. It does not negate our ability to get reimbursed
2. An 8-24 is in place to get a school built. Proceed.
3. Land use issues. There are a lot more salient land use issues than you care to acknowledge. There are a lot of children in this town; not all of them enrolled at LLS. We are taking care of the LLS problem — rather late in the game but it is getting done. The LLS neighbors, who have a right to certain living standards with respect to their investment in their homes, are basically screwed by the current proposal. Do they count?
4. Petitions and referendums: These are meant for when the public wants a voice in what is being decided. A ballot vote on a $100 million spend is not unheard of; in fact, it is commonplace in many towns and cities. What is unheard of is not giving the public an opportunity to scour the numbers.
I think the PZC is the most democratic process of all, save for the fact that they rely on the applicant’s attorney for legal counsel.
I relay information about the town charter provisions to petition the RTM for a review of the Conservation Commission and FECB. I pointed to the charter provision for a citizen referendum on ANY town appropriation over $500k. I have not spoken a word about a petition to overturn the PZC, which is in your original opinion piece. Accurate Details matter. Your details are lacking in accuracy.
5. The town has deliberately WITHHELD the financials behind the $108 million proposal. Please provide the info if you have it. I FOIA’d it, and found it within the application for a state grant. Have you reviewed the numbers? Can you tell me how much we are paying for HVAC in this new school? (Hint: $12M). Can you tell me what “Other Site Conditions” means (price tag $5.4M)
Engaging in comment section arguments rarely leads to productive dialogue, yet it seems that, increasingly, our town’s discourse is being reduced to the same small circle of voices debating back and forth. I hate to engage in this but I cannot sit back and watch fellow town members be attacked for writing a letter with the hope of collaborative planning for the future of Westport.
Toni, you’ve positioned yourself as a defender of democracy and a voice for the people. But may I ask: do you live near the site of this proposed project? Will your home be directly impacted by the upcoming construction? Does Muddy Brook—formally known as such (remember facts matter)—flow through your property? I ask because, for some of us, this issue is quite literally in our front yard. I live directly alongside the brook and am still advocating for this important project. I trust the expertise of the engineers and flood specialists involved and understand that the high project cost includes significant investment in improved drainage—an investment necessary for long-term community resilience.
The Flood and Erosion Control Board has reiterated that water retention will improve in every tested scenario. If that’s the case, then what exactly are we opposing? It begins to appear that opposition to this project may have less to do with environmental or logistical concerns, and more to do with resistance to building a new school altogether.
You’ve suggested that temporarily placing over 600 students and 100 staff members in modular classrooms during construction is a simple alternative. That may sound straightforward on paper, but it reflects a limited understanding of the complex day-to-day realities of running a school. These decisions require more than theoretical solutions—they demand deep practical knowledge and a commitment to safety, continuity, and quality education.
Furthermore, you often claim to speak on behalf of the neighbor community. But have you engaged directly with the neighbors, other than the handful that agree with you? Especially those most immediately affected by the project? For instance, have you spoken with the resident whose home now faces a future view of classrooms instead of green space—and who still supports the project because she sees its broader benefit? She’s not alone in her sentiment. There are many who are willing to look beyond personal inconvenience for the good of the town as a whole.
You’ve also framed yourself as a champion of fiscal responsibility. Yet, the building committee has clearly explained that disclosing financial budget estimates before the sealed bid process could lead to higher costs for taxpayers. This isn’t about secrecy; it’s about strategy. Once bids are submitted, every financial detail will be available for public review—hundreds of pages of documentation, fully transparent and open to scrutiny. Page by page, so you can go line by line and question every expense down to the cost of the copper wiring and HVAC knobs. However, without any expertise or knowledge to know what the actual items should cost, I’m unclear how this information is relevant to you, but it will be yours to do what you will with it.
Your efforts may be well-intentioned, but I urge you to consider whether they are helping or hindering our collective progress. In seeking to protect democracy and represent the people, we must be sure we’re not unintentionally speaking over them.
At town meetings they sometimes beg us to just say we agree with the previous peeople who spoke so we don’t get redundant. Well I will unequivocally say I agree with Toni. I also don’t know where we would be on all of these town issues with out her nose to the grindstone approach on sharing the facts with the public and the press. Thank you Toni and all the others who continue to watch, listen and learn.
Eloquently written subliminal platitudes with a $100m price tag. Here’s another, less eloquent version:
We need it; we can’t go on without it. It’s for the children; they deserve it. It’s urgent; the children will suffer. We cannot sacrifice the future; the clock is ticking. Learning requires modern thinking and ideas; we must expand our horizons and not live in the past. Safety, health and security must be our priority; you cannot put a price on it. We will find solutions; where there is a will, there is a way.
Westport is being, “over-imagined.” This school is a “shrine” to the parents and community and it has nothing to do with education of the children. This massive elementary school project, along with others like Saugatuck, are eroding the small town, community feel of Westport in the name of progress….or “the children.”
We should have “community referendums” on projects of this magnitude and consequence.
“To everything there is a season… And now…. It’s a Time to build”. To our Gardeners.. I understand your passion. Use this moment… Get a nicer garden set up.. Have irrigation more accessible.. Ask the town to guarantee it’s location for 50 years to insure it’s location for a few generations.. And let our next generation learn in an environment more suitable to this millennial. Thank you..
Wow, five whole years?! Good for you..
I may have lived here for five years, not fifty—but that doesn’t make my voice any less valid. Westport is not a private club with a minimum tenure requirement. It’s a community, one that welcomes new families, fresh perspectives, and continued civic participation. I care deeply about this town—enough to show up, speak out, and stay engaged, even when it’s uncomfortable.
If longevity were the only measure of insight or commitment, then change and progress would never happen. I respect the history here—but I also care about the future. That’s why I’m involved.
I wrote my op-ed not to provoke, but to lower the temperature of the discourse and encourage a more civil, collaborative path forward. I believe we can disagree without resorting to personal attacks, and that productive dialogue is still possible—if we’re willing.
Thank you Sandra for writing on this important topic. Unfortunately there will be commentators who will have nothing to add on this topic except to ridicule or attack your character. Rest assured though that those commentators do so because they don’t have any value to add to this important conversation.
The P&Z on Monday will have a decision to make, and there is no doubt that this decision carries a lot of weight.
On the one hand, there is an urgent need to build a new school and because of that, there is no longer any place for a community garden. If they do not issue a positive report for the amended 8-24, the project could be delayed even further until an 8-24 can pass. If the RTM overrides the P&Z decision, but we miss the state funding deadline, then this will cost the town upwards of 1 million dollars in financing cost (mentioned in last Board of Finance meeting).
On the other hand, there is a demand from the Westport Community Gardens (WCG) to guarantee a new location at Burr Farms athletic fields. Over the past year, Mr. Weinberg resisted any discussion for a new location until it came with guarantees, guarantees that the town cannot possibly do. The P&Z cannot submit an 8-24 or amend one. The only way they can influence a submitted 8-24 is by their vote. They could decide not to vote on the amended 8-24 on Monday and ask the town to submit an additional 8-24 with a new location for the gardens. This will certainly cause delays and unnecessary cost to the town. I would argue that this will certainly be beyond the charge of the P&Z and constitutes an abuse of their role. A new location for the gardens must follow a process, the same process that the new school has been following. The only feasible location was Baron’s South, but that was rejected by the WCG. To find another location, the process will take more time, and the Parks & Recs director already opened this door as part of the master plan.
The P&Z commissioners have a very critical decision to make. I hope that the discussion on Monday will be focused on the matter at hand, because not doing so will have undesirable and financial consequences.
There is a path forward. We can have a new school, and community gardens in the future. It is high time to tackle these two separately. A new school is a higher priority for the town at the moment.
Mr. Nader.
I respectfully request that you stop using my name and attempting to represent what I think.
We have never spoken, I have never met you. I appreciate your passion on the subject, but your representations of my thoughts and actions are lies. You are a liar. Please stop lying.
If your comments are coming from others and they are not your own, you are being lied to.
Thank you.
There is no misrepresentation.
– You have sent a public comment to the P&Z and published it as an opinion piece on this blog this week requesting for a guarantee to move the gardens to the Burr Farms athletic fields.
Reference: https://www.westportct.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/108188/638848170655324532
“Please do not approve an 8-24 without a provision to provide equitable space for a new community garden either on the Hyde Lane site or at Burr Farms Fields”
– There are other references in the past year where you have been quoted that you were not given any guarantees for a future location.
Here is one: https://westportjournal.com/community/last-harvest-uncertain-future-sows-seeds-of-sadness-at-community-gardens/
“I was not given any guarantees about a future location,” Weinberg said. “The only guarantee I was given is this whole place will be destroyed,”
Please is not a demand. Requests are not demands.
This is second grade stuff, Mr. Nader.
Oy vey.
Good luck to you. I wish you well.
Joe, it would be less disingenuous of you to say, “we can have a new school and the ball field that I want, now, and the community gardens in the future.” But you don’t want the ball field tackled separately.
Chris,
Given the choice between community plots or a multipurpose field, for sure I would advocate for a multipurpose field. The field right by the school will be invaluable, not only for the school and youth athletic sports, but also for summer camps that many parents depend on.
In terms of land use, that question has already been made in the amended 8-24 presented to the P&Z board. It makes zero sense to tackle a portion of the site separately. They need to finalize the plans and start the work. In the pre-application, I did not hear objections to the proposed changes.
The athletic fields existed before the community gardens were added. The decision to add the gardens in their current spot back in 2005 was because that space was neither needed by the school nor by additional athletic fields. Post-construction, the site is no longer the same as before, so we can’t keep referring to the past.
Fortunately, we have over twenty multi-purpose fields in Westport, already. Think about someone other than yourself, for a change.
The reason there are more athletic fields than gardens is because the former has more demand in this town. So your argument that there are over twenty fields does not add much value to the discussion.
You also make it sound like a dichotomy where we can only have the fields but not the gardens. This is also totally untrue as I have said it many times that I support the gardens in Westport, and I hope they find a new place soon.
Then you continue with some personal attacks that my arguments are not valid because I am only thinking about myself. That statement has no merit whatsoever.
My advise to you is to educate yourself on logical fallacies if you are not familiar with them already, and avoid using them to make your arguments so weak and irrelevant.
This is very nice attempt at speech writing while furthering the false narrative that’s been put forth by a small vocal minority many times.
Some of it is a very solid and honest plea for a new school.
Then, as expected, Miss Rose sets up the pins and knocks them down.
If the First Selectwoman had stated that she wanted the Westport Community Gardens and Long Lots Preserve placed back where they are post-construction or wanted the plans to maintain the gardens and preserve in first place, the Long Lots School Building Committee would have followed her wishes, and the school community would have supported it. So the comment “But we must be honest: It is no longer feasible for the gardens to remain on the Long Lots site. The educational and safety needs of the new school make that impossible“ rings hollow.
My guess is that Miss Rose, while offering platitudes of empathy for what has been created with the gardens and preserve, has never reached out to, nor spoken with, the people who officially speak for the Community Gardens; the Steering Committee and its Chairman, Lou Weinberg. Neither has the Long Lots School Building Committee since its inception more than 2 1/2 years ago.
While it is not particularly easy to craft a persuasive essay as the one presented by Miss Rose above, it is even more difficult to understand how she came up with comments in her last few paragraphs which read as a political stump speech promising to seek a better future for the Westport Community Gardens. Those parts are easily the most insulting.
“Reimagine what the gardens could be — not diminished, but renewed.” What does this even mean?
“Let’s seize the chance to expand access to a larger, more inclusive, more permanent community garden — one that serves not just 100 families, but many more.” Inclusive!?!?
Many more? This paragraph is laughable.
“That means building the school now, and working together to create an even better home for the gardens next.” Of course! Kicking cans down the road is easy. We’ve been doing that since we were kids!
How easy it is to discount something that you have no vested interest in. If nothing else, this process has proved that.
The vast majority of people in this town who have followed this issue know very well that the Tooker administration has no intention of following through on Miss Rose’s colorful vision for the community gardens. I expect Miss Rose knows this as well.
So I encourage the Planning And Zoning Commission to go the extra mile and get the school built. Simultaneously, address and respect the long-term value that the gardens, the preserve and the green open space, adjacent to Long Lots Elementary School, bring to the town and can bring to the thousands of students that will benefit from this new school.
Bifucate the 8-24 and get the school portion done now. Address the adjacent land use issue soon after.
Our children, our gardens, our environment and our community, especially the neighbors in the Long Lots neighborhood, will benefit from your support.
And, one last time… drumroll please… The Westport Community Gardens/Long Lots Preserve community has no interest, nor has the power, to delay building a new Long Lots Elementary School. Anyone who promotes (or has promoted) that false narrative, is lying. If that false narrative is, or has been, promoted by a public official or one running for public office, they are lying and not fit to serve.
Are you telling me 50 million dollars can’t fix the Long Lots problem? Spend 50 million and save 50 million in taxes/cost.
Jack, of course it can. Staples HS, Greens Farms School, Bedford JHS (on Riverside Ave.) Coleytown JHS were all renovated. But why spend 50 mil when you can spend 100-120 mil?
Renovation has already been considered for Long Lots and compared to a new build before a decision was made. The new build was chosen because it was less costly.
Now that is absolute and utter balderdash ! To suggest it would be more expensive to renovate and add on to that school is rubbish. It would ABSOLUTELY not be anything like as expensive.
As for barons south as a replacement location for the community gardens, it was as insulting as it was malicious.
It is a poisoned soil, shady, hilly and utterly inappropriate in EVERY sense of the word choice. An insult !
The 8-24 ruse including the gardens, purely asked for, in order to shut ppl up, and get it passed, to then behave as though the gardens weren’t even a factor ! A DISGRACE, cunning, sneaky and arrogant.
Is this the Westport we want to live in ? Not me !
I think this rush, was purposely created by leaving matters til the very last minute in hope a gun is put to all relevant bodies heads.
And you conveniently mention rtm potentially overturning PZ as an option.
That is akin to “warning” the PZ to affirm the new 8-24, or else…
But this is not only about the gardens.
It is about the details of the costs which I for one want to see.
I want to know why HVAC is 12-13 MILLION. Can you give me any rationale.
I want to know why electrical is 9 million !!!! Again please let me know if I am missing something. Oh and I have plenty large construction experience.
HVAC on the high side using state of the art systems in gas and electric , highly efficent for a building of this size is 2.5-4 million….
So where is 13 million coming from.
If we can do it for 2.5-4 million and save 10 million then that is absolutely and without doubt what we should do..
electrical ? It is inconceivable it could ever cost 9 million..
it should be a max of 3 million, and I am being generous !
So where oh where is this costing coming out of because these numbers are crushingly off.
I presume so is EVERYTHING else in the costs. So you see, this is what we are concerned about.
It is “our” money being spent, and “we” want to check and vet the numbers. I most certainly do not trust the rtm or the board of finance to do that as well as I can.
And we want to make certain the selectwomans feet are held to the fire on a new spot for the gardens. As they should be.
If they are not it will never find a new, suitable and appropriate home.
To sign off on this new 8-24 would mean gardens being in limbo and god forbid at the mercy of a selectwoman who has gone out of her way to screw the gardens over SINCE DAY 1.
And since the gardens have a home in the original 8-24 it is only proper they get one assured and guaranteed now.
Oh and by the way, this new 8-24, excluding the gardens was the plan all along.
And that is contemptuous and vile !
As usual, Toni Simonetti is a source for accuracy. Just to add, a delay in seeking State funding is just that, only a delay. The Town would have to advance the funds involved, but the State would still be obligated to provide a share of the cost if the school otherwise qualifies. The cost to the Town would be the interest cost during the interim. Also, an 8-24 was approved which provided that the Gardens would remain where they are or be relocated to another site on the Long Lots School property. The present Gardens site is not on School property. i believe the vote of the P&Z on a new 8-24 will address where, if anywhere, the Gardens should be located. If the P&Z now agrees that the Gardens cannot be located as provided for in the present 8-24, one would hope that a new Gardens location would be recommended or at least the P&Z express its desire that a new Gardens location be found and made available.
The dig about creating a “more inclusive” garden is maddening and insulting. Unfortunately, it seems to have been distributed, along with “The WCG is a private club” as a talking point for those who wish to discredit the Garden and its members. ANYONE at all who lives in Westport could join the Garden. There was never a waitlist longer than a handful of names. No one ever waited longer than a couple months to get a plot. For those who still don’t know what a community garden is: A town amenity under Parks and Recs that allows residents to sign up to lease a gardening plot for a nominal fee. It is not meant to be a public park, and yes, it locked to prevent theft. Please, for those with their strong and uninformed opinions, go to the American Community Gardening Association’s website and educate yourselves.
Don and Dave, You’re both spot on and I’d like to add that Toni Simonetti is brilliant and I basically agree with everything she writes! She should be the next Selectwoman in town!!
Brilliant idea Jack ! She is everything you just stated. And with integrity to beat the band.
So this still all boils down to-
Build a school or renovate
Does an athletic field have to replace the garden and preserve
If so – a agreed on place for the community garden spelled out
Tough decisions to sell to the community at large
By the way, I have my 1960-61 Long Lots Junior High School yearbook in perfect condition, and I’ll bring it to the July 17th Compo Beach get together.
I love these opinion pieces Dan. Opinions are just that, and it take a bold person to put themselves out there, especially in 2025.
I was a resident from 1967 – 2017, went to schools that no longer exist. Someone made a comment about Sandra only living here for 5 years as if tenure is a badge of honor. You should be embarrassed by your comment. This blog is plenty filled with passionate alumni and at one point we were all newcomers.
As someone with perspective, Westport has and hopefully will always have two differentiated characteristics:
1) Westport welcomed the Jews when many did not (personally I’m 25% raised Catholic, shout out Assumption Chirch) and has extended that to each and every race, color, and creed. As a Burr Farms El kid in 4th grade, I distinctly remember making dreidels while singing Jingle Bells.
2) Westport is 100% about the schools. Greenwich and Darien have shorter commutes, Fairfield has better beaches. But no one can beat the schools (tangentially related to the Jews TBH) which is the real reason your house is what it’s worth.
These schools eventually all need to be replaced, not renovated. We put our three daughters thru the full 6 year KHS experience and it’s the same building I entered in like 1972. Except there are “temporary” classrooms that must be 30 years old by now. For much of their tenure there were no ceiling tiles because of all the mold.
Buildings get old, and those shuttered for the summer age even more rapidly.
In a town that routinely tears down beautiful historic homes (we restored one), your jet fuel is young families with and creating kids.
Build all new schools, you can grow gardens anywhere.
Great post Sandra Rose, I hope some of these comments don’t dim your love of the town, even with its faults there are rare better places.
I beg to differ. Schools can be built anywhere. Gardens cannot. They need excellent soil, sunshine, not shade and level land.
If it were that easy Tooker would have come up with an appropriate and acceptable replacement spot, such as Burrs farms.
Fact remains the gardens are being evicted and must be found a home.
There is no doubt that especially over the past 12 years the lack of almost any meaningful maintenance on schools has meant mold issues etc..
shame on the administration for letting them go to hell.
Since we all have to share in the burden of school replacement, even those of us who do not have kids in the Westport public schools, then we should all have an equal say. It’s not like people get to choose whether they contribute or not.
So the gardens must be found an assured and guaranteed home NOW.
And the costs which look to be 40-50% over priced need to be reigned in and squarely justified.. cos right now on just HVAC and electrical, I see 15 million that can be saved still using top of the line everything.
You had me at “those of us who do not have kids”. You can stop typing.
“Westport is 100% about the schools” is ridiculous.
75%? 90%? But to act as if nobody else matters, like you seem to be doing, is absurd, when you are asking for everyone else to pay for the schools.
Pretend for even a moment that anyone else in Town matters in the slightest, except for the people with children in schools. Yours is an embarrassing take.
I’m honored to have a personal troll, yet another childless poster.
Ciara runs some sort of local business. I’m a big fan of small business. I bet most of her patrons are families with children from Westport.
1. Contrary to the gaslighting presented here and in other forums, there really wasn’t a clear economic or strategic vision & rationale offered for why a new school is necessary vs. what should be a much cheaper and acceptable renovation. I’ll cede that “decision” isn’t returning to the public forum
2. IF a new school – multipurpose campus really – is to be built, then why isn’t there a rationale discussion about consolidating the elementary schools from 5 to 4? Perhaps this school would need some modifications if that’s the vision. Is it? What IS the vision? Long term, cheaper for the town to operate one fewer school. Easier to flex up/down with population changes over time. And the ONE-TIME redistricting would not be the tragedy some may opine about.
There’s been a ton of “debate” about this school, sports fields, and the garden but bigger picture, how about real town discussion on the above??!
Mark, that is a very valid and interesting suggestion.
Especially with all the affordable housing we are being told to expect, and the possibility of many, many more young families,
That might make a lot of sense.
Hartford is not going to care about overcrowding in our schools.
We will simply have to accept everyone who lives in the town regardless. Including all the children the haiwatha development will bring.
Since the school appears to be coming in at a number close to 50% over what any sane number would be.
If they build it 200,00 square feet instead of 130,00 then the number of 100 million should not change much.
And we will not be left panicking over schools or overcrowding when affordable housing arrives.. which it will.
Great idea.
Sarah Morrison
I spoke with two neighbors on the North side, separately, just this week, for starters. They seek me out, in fact, and I have sought them out. I have been in communication with neighbors since Day 1. I even know some who moved, and took their kids out of LLS. I’ve listened to them at every meeting. So yes, I am in touch with neighbor issues.
I’ve also listened to several neighbors around the block, over near the Hunt Club. Have you heard their complaints about two different NIMBY issues (The Hunt Club, and the subdivision of a lot? They know what it is like to have their personal home space disturbed. And they got two hearings by the gracious FECB, for example, to make their case. The Hunt Club also game them two bites of the apple (they’re still not happy). And those are whiny issues compared to what neighbors face at LLS.
And I want to make decisions about spending MY money, and I have every right to question the veracity of a $100M expenditure. I believe keeping this data from citizens is illegal, and holding thinly veiled executive sessions to keep the public out is as low as it gets. As for the bidding process, contractors already know this is the highest cost school in the highest priced neighborhood.
I do not understand the day to day complexities of running a school, but I witnessed first hand how the island of St. John deployed modular schools following the hurricanes that destroyed all its schools. This is not a fair comparison to, nor seemingly acceptable to affluent Westport, but temporary schools is/was attainable.
Regarding the financials, once the appropriation is approved, its to late to ask if this project is extravagant. Appropriating my money is more important to me and I bet we could get twice as much out of the budget versus whatever you say happens in the bidding outcomes.
Finally, the FECB and Conservation Commission had one shot at this project, in a jammed “unusual” joint meeting. New documents were presented live during the meeting and not made available ahead of time. And interesting concept for using the north fields as part of the stormwater management was a great idea, one that could have really helped those northern neighbors and even downstream properties with water issues. I believe this idea warrants more time and discussion. It wasn’t pursued by the LLSBC because, the consultant said, it would mean eliminating the athletic fields.
Democracy is important. Just turn on the TV and watch our US Military turn their guns on our own right now. It’s a democracy if you can keep it.
Toni, you absolutely have the right to advocate for your interests, just as we all do. And while I’m deeply appalled and sick over what’s happening in LA and across the country, I think it’s a stretch—and frankly inappropriate—to draw any type of comparison to the state of democracy here in Westport.
Here’s something we all need to face: the athletic fields are essential and non-negotiable. Westport needs these fields. We already rely on them heavily, and yes, they’ll be offline for about two years during construction—but that’s a compromise we’re willing to make for the long-term benefits of this project.
I honestly don’t understand your lack of compromise and the constant resistance to athletic facilities when these fields serve so many people in town, not just the school.
Undermining the experts is exactly how this country got into this mess in the first place. If you’re not an architect, a civil engineer or a professional building contractor, it’s hard to imagine how you could be in a position to determine the validity of the various plans and costs presented. If you’re not a neighbor, it doesn’t behoove you to speak as if the neighbors are a collective body, because I assure you they are not. Not on the north end, the south end or directly across the street. It is certainly within your right to express the notion that you’re not comfortable with the way the town is spending your tax dollars. However, it doesn’t need to be done so under the guise of standing up for “the people” and tearing down the experts that have worked so diligently to bring this project to fruition. No one takes pleasure in raising peoples taxes; but every single member of these various oversight boards is a taxpayer and just like you and I, will be asked to foot the bill for the very project they are voting on.
Sorry Sarah,
You are just plain incorrect.
Toni has spoken as she stated with many neighbors who do not see it as you do.
And that is their perogative.
As for undermining experts ? By that do you mean the geniuses we have on llsbc who haven’t a clue how to price anything.
If you do please do give those of us who have been in construction for many years the benefit of the doubt here.
JUST THE HVAC – is 3x what is customary.
Just that one line item can save 10 MILLION DOLLARS !!!!!
What is going on here.
So IMAGINE AWAY, HVAC FOR THAT BUILDING SHOULD BE AT A HIGH END 4 million..
yet the architect, civil engineer and contractor on LLSBC, have us at 13 MILLION. Experts on blowing our tax dollars.
High end 4 million.. llsbc- 13 million.
This is FACT !
Imagine going through the rest of the line items !
“Tearing down the experts( lol) who have brought this to fruition “
What are you talking about ?
Clearly no experts in our midst.. since I can save 9 million in the blink of an eye just on hvac.
And another 5-6 million can be saved on electrical.
You need to understand these numbers are OUT OF CONTROL.
I cannot even begin to wonder what is going on here because the spend does not correlate with the result we will get.
Spending tax payers money like drunken sailors is not ok.
The public getting access when the rtm moderator feels like it, I’m inclined to agree with Toni, borders on illegal.
13 MILLION FOR HVAC, PROVES our point.
It is OUTRAGEOUS, and unacceptable.
If we are expected to pay for this then we want to do our own due diligence. As is our right.
Especially those of us who understand construction, many far far, better, it appears than the members of LLSBC.
As for “undermining the experts is exactly what got this country into this mess in the first place”
Exactly what does that mean.
What experts did we not listen to ? That got the country in this mess ?
The ones parading through cities now in masks like bounty hunters ? Hunting people.
Those experts ?
I SEE NO EXPERTS !
We want a school ! You want a school. We want to pay a fair price for that school. Not some out of whack figment of “so called experts “opinion ON A COMMITTEE OF AMATEURS.
We also want a guaranteed appropriate place for the gardens, BEFORE any new revised 8-24.
Funny thing, burrs farms is pretty perfect.
Yet you all continue to hate on the gardens.
Quite amazing.
To Sandra Rose, I think it’s the underhanded land grab that ticked people off the most.
The selectwomans tantrums and arrogance over refusing to find a workable alternative for the displaced and evicted gardens. It doesn’t sit well.
Not having a replacement for the gardens is just as non negotiable as not having your athletic fields.
I’m not sure what part of that you do not understand.
It’s very simple.
Paying 13 million for something that at the high end should be 4 million SHOULD BE OUT OF THE QUESTION.
Paying 9 MILLION, for electrical which should be 2.5-3.5, is UNACCEPTABLE.
What is actually going on here ?
David Loffredo, I have no idea where personal troll came from. I have not trolled you or anyone else for that matter.
– a childless poster ! Huh ? Not sure if that was a swipe at Chris Grimm or at me. Nor do I know if Chris has children or not. That is none of my or your business.
I have 4 children ! Yes all mine. None second marriage.
I have lived in this town for 22 years.
I simply stated not everyone’s children go to Westport public schools.
There are plenty other reasons to live in Westport. One being the beauty of a community garden. Possibly the only thing I’ll agree with you on is the crappy beach is certainly not one of them.
As for Darien and Greenwich schools, I have not taken the time to see where they sit in state rankings. I imagine it is much of a muchness.
If you were still living in Westport I have no doubt you would want to vet the 100 million dollar spend, on the first of many schools.
By rights, in order to not put our town into hoc, and consequently our residents, on this singular build, an efficiently run town, would be doubling mill rates..
not adding a couple percent.
There’s a reason Westport has the lowest taxes in the state.. it’s called smoke and mirrors. A ruse.
This administration for at least a decade or more has not increased taxes, or minimally.
It should have. And by 5% a year … every year.
That’s the reason nothing was ever maintained. Lack of funds. Lack of foresight.
Now we are all going to pay the price. Borrowing at historically high interest rates and as usual kicking the can down the road.
You cannot even make this shit up !
Your made up HVAC and electrical costs are not fact, they are disinformation. Stop making up numbers and trying to pass them off as fact. You have no idea what you are talking about.
This comment thread has run its course. It is closed to further comments.