An informed electorate is the greatest bulwark of democracy.
Westporters understand this is a very important election. “06880” is doing our part, to help Westporters understand candidates’ perspectives on a variety of issues.
Once a week, between now and Election Day, we’ll ask the men and women running for 3 important boards — Selectmen/women, Planning & Zoning, and Education — one specific question.
We’ll print their responses verbatim.
This week’s question for the Board of Selectmen/women is:
Controversies in town include the redevelopment of Saugatuck, the Cribari Bridge, and affordable housing. Many of those details are out of the hands of the selectmen/women. But residents look to Town Hall for leadership. How would you address those 3 issues?
==================================================
Independent Party-endorsed candidate David Rosenwaks says:
Westport is indeed facing some major issues including the development of Saugatuck, the future of the Cribari Bridge, and affordable housing. These topics are often framed as controversies, but I see them as opportunities to show what leadership should be: visionary, independent, and accountable.
As the first Independent Party-endorsed First Selectman candidate in Westport’s history, I am uniquely positioned to enable change in Westport, unburdened by historical party battle lines. I am ready to work with anyone who wants Westport to be a better town for all of its residents.
Over the last 5 years, I have dived into the Westport community as an elected and appointed official and as a volunteer. By constantly engaging with the public and the people who serve the community, I understand the issues impacting our citizens and what Westporters want to see accomplished by the next administration.
David Rosenwaks
Saugatuck
Revitalization can bring vibrancy, but not at the expense of neighborhood scale, traffic flow, or community values. Development at Saugatuck is a quality of life issue.
I will pursue a proactive approach: first, listening to our residents’ vision for Saugatuck; second, aligning resources within town government to set clear parameters for infrastructure and aesthetics; and third, engaging developers with a defined town perspective while seeking common ground.
Today, conflict has led us into costly legal battles. Tomorrow, with collaborative leadership, we can negotiate toward a shared, sustainable vision and action plan.
We must put the needs of residents first, ensuring access to all without burdening our community with increased traffic and negatively impacting businesses and home values in Westport. We need to work together with local business owners, developers, the State and other relevant stakeholders to devise and implement workable and sustainable solutions.
Cribari Bridge
The Cribari Bridge is both a historic treasure and a functional necessity. The challenge is to ensure safety while honoring heritage.
Success will require genuine collaboration between the town and Connecticut’s Department of Transportation — an area where the current administration has stumbled, as seen with the CTDOT facility renovation on Sherwood Island Connector near Post Road. I will ensure residents have a meaningful voice in weighing trade-offs, and serve as Westport’s advocate in every negotiation with the CTDOT.
The Cribari Bridge initiative should be integrated with planning for development at Saugatuck and aligned with the overall growth of our community. Preserving your trust in the process is just as important to me as preserving the bridge itself.
Affordable Housing
Connecticut statute 8-30g requires every municipality to have at least 10% of its housing stock classified as “affordable.” Westport currently sits at around 4%.
But this is not simply about compliance; it’s about ensuring our community remains accessible to families, seniors, and young people. Too often, the absence of long-term planning has left us with divisive oversized proposals instead of thoughtful integrated solutions.
Initiatives like the Affordable Housing Trust Fund are important steps, but they fall short of a comprehensive vision. My commitment is to lead a transparent, resident-driven process that balances affordability, infrastructure, and aesthetics with the preservation of Westport’s character.
It starts with our residents and includes functional town government and concludes with a comprehensive plan shared with developers.
The Larger Choice
These issues highlight a broader decision: do we continue with reactive, partisan politics, or do we embrace proactive, inclusive leadership that listens, plans, and acts responsibly?
I am running for 1st selectman to bring independence, transparency and accountability to the people I serve. Together, we can shape a clear, inspiring vision for Westport’s future.
Your voice. Your town. Your government.
================================================
Republican Party-endorsed candidates Don O’Day and Andrea Moore say:
Last week’s question was, “What is the most important issue facing Westport?” Our answer was the inability to get things done. That same headwind applies to this week’s question, particularly when it comes to the Cribari Bridge.
Saugatuck Development
Saugatuck should be developed. While the immediate future of Saugatuck remains unsettled, inactivity on the surface does not mean inactivity below the surface.
It’s no secret that an appeal of the P&Z decision has been filed, and a large 8-30g development — with little local zoning control — is very possible. However, development without an 8-30g protection is also possible, but it requires continued discussions with developers.
Discussions with developers can be very productive, as long as all proposals from those discussions are thoroughly reviewed in public with extensive community input. All deliberations and votes must take place in public.
What we should do: Encourage the continuation of dialogue with anyone who has a serious proposal for Saugatuck, as long as all relevant concerns raised during the Hamlet process are addressed. Other towns in our region have successfully worked together with developers (Darien, for example) without the uneven playing field of 8-30g protections. We can increase the number of housing options — both market-rate and affordable — in Saugatuck, while adding retail options that enhance the area.
Andrea Moore and Don O’Day
Cribari Bridge
A beautiful (particularly during the holidays) but very old, state-owned bridge that is narrow and difficult to cross. Renovations or a full replacement have been discussed for a generation, but decisions about the bridge’s future have been avoided for years. Realistically, no real plan for Saugatuck would be complete without a decision on the future of the Cribari Bridge.
What we should do: The Connecticut Department of Transportation is likely to recommend a full replacement for the Cribari Bridge, and Westport has a generational decision to make. Do we continue to kick the can down the road?
While renovation is preferred, should the facts unequivocally show a replacement is the only option then Westport’s 1st selectman, town leaders, and state representatives must do all they can to ensure that any new bridge is aesthetically consistent with the existing one.
More importantly, to every extent possible, Westport must work with the state to mitigate the flow of large trucks onto the bridge and through Saugatuck when I-95 is backed up. To be clear, any scenario that results in the town of Westport owning and being financially responsible for the ongoing maintenance or eventual replacement of the existing bridge is fiscally irresponsible and must not be considered.
Affordable Housing and 8-30g
Affordable housing is a necessary and important part of Westport’s future. There is not only a shortage of affordable housing in town for young families and seniors, but town officials also haven’t done enough to fully explain the rules surrounding affordable housing and the 8-30g statute.
Simply put, 4% of the dwellings in Westport are categorized as “affordable,” versus the 10% requirement under 8-30g. Because of this, we are routinely targeted by developers exploiting our affordable housing shortfall.
What we should do: Double down on efforts to identify land or vacant buildings that can be used for affordable housing. Westport has strong partners in the Affordable Housing Committee, Westport Housing Authority, Homes with Hope, and the Planning & Zoning Commission. We must be ready to act quickly when opportunities arise.
We should also encourage “friendly” 8-30g projects, as Darien has done, by working with developers willing to collaborate with the town. Finally, we need to communicate better so everyone understands the challenge.
It is all about strong and effective leadership.
==================================================
Democratic Party-endorsed candidates Kevin Christie and Amy Wistreich say:
It’s no accident that these topics are often grouped together. Not only are they hot-button issues for Westporters, they also represent opportunities for the 1st Selectman to lead and build consensus on what works for Westport.
Let’s start by focusing on how the selectmen can lead and drive results. Education is not under the purview of the selectpersons’ office, yet we expect and deserve that every candidate weighs in.
Similarly, Saugatuck, Cribari and affordable housing fall mostly under the P&Z and our land use bodies, but because they have a huge impact on the future of Westport, our leaders should lead by providing their perspective and vision.
Kevin Christie and Amy Wistreich
Saugatuck
For Saugatuck, there’s still a path to realize the potential for a transformative project that is good for the village and Westport.
Getting it right for Saugatuck is much more than a P&Z application issue. The selectpeople’s office should be prepared to facilitate the broader conversation about the future of Saugatuck. Considerations like impact on traffic, parking, density and retailer viability concern all of us and should be part of a community conversation. We’ll make that happen ASAP.
The Bridge
The Cribari Bridge is a perfect example of an opportunity for the selectmen to lead. Discussions with DOT have been going on for more than a decade, and the bridge continues to deteriorate. DOT’s options have been on the table all this time. What DOT needs is a motivated partner in Town Hall.
When elected, we will jumpstart these conversations to drive to an agreement before we risk having the bridge become impassable, with the resulting traffic chaos. Our priorities will be to make the bridge safe for drivers, bike riders and pedestrians (i.e., make it a bit wider), while also ensuring that it does not become a highway bypass for 18 wheelers.
Height-limiting gantries on either side of the bridge may be the solution. We’ll also weigh the pros and cons of DOT’s offer to reroute Route 136 from Compo South to the Post Road, allowing the town to take control of Bridge Street and the bridge.
Housing
Affordable housing is an issue growing in urgency, statewide and across the nation. Appropriate planning will protect what makes Westport special while making room for the housing our seniors, workers, and families need, while also preserving open space.
Westport has a role to play, and the Democratic-led P&Z should also be recognized for the efforts they’ve made in recent years. We have a robust inclusionary zoning plan; a model for other suburban communities. We’ve approved SmartGrowth-consistent projects along the Post Road, and have championed both accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and “middle housing” that works in towns like Westport.
Westporters sometimes feel helpless about the adversarial 8-30g projects being proposed by cynical developers. Westport’s leaders can help define the kinds of affordable housing projects we’d welcome, and then facilitate those outcomes, with ideas like offering up town land for development or streamlining project approval within desired zones, saving developers from years of expensive litigation.
Our community already has many tools and resources in place: the Affordable Housing Plan, the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, the Affordable Housing Committee, the Real Property Committee, the Westport Housing Authority and Homes with Hope. We just need the right leadership to bring them together into a cohesive action plan.
We have the right large project management and budget experience, the right land use expertise, and the right temperament to handle controversial and complicated issues — and we will, with the best interests of Westport in mind, take action.
====================================================
Kevin, where did you get the idea that “height limiting gantries” can be placed on a state route to prevent large trucks from crossing the bridge? DOT has been nothing if not consistent that if Federal dollars are used to replace the bridge or alter its geometry, by law it MUST be open to “all legal loads”. There’s ALREADY a dedicated pedestrian walkway on the bridge so it’s not immediately clear why you would want to blow up the oldest operable swing bridge in America to obtain a feature which already exists. Several local people with good knowledge of this situation have tried to contact you. I don’t think anyone has had success. So be it, but you have to decide what’s most important because you can’t have your cake and eat it too.
I just noticed now that Kevin had contacted me by email before I posted this comment. It would be unfair to not acknowledge that fact. Thank you, Kevin.
Thank you, Morley, for modeling good civic behavior :-), much appreciated! I’m sure Kevin will be happy to talk with you further about this complex issue, he’s a very good listener.
I would like to know whether each of the candidates would consider appointing a much needed Town Charter revision commission.
This is the only question I have for the 3 candidates.
Please note that if a full bridge replacement option is selected, a temporary bridge would need to be built during construction. Is there open land on either side of the river to do so?
No problem…eminent domain 😜🇺🇸
I think this was done the last time the bridge underwent major repairs. The accesses to the temporary bridge were unchanged from the Calibri Bridge and the temporary bridge was actually curved so its center was opposite the rear of the the restaurant which preceded the Parker House.
I’m ready for a selectperson that is geared towards the constituency. I appreciate the comments of all the candidates, but David Rozenwacks to me is the person who wants to “start over” in the town leadership vs the residents dynamic. He wants to do what’s best for Westport based on what the residents require, not what he wants or believes should be done.
His business background at various levels provides knowledge and experience is leadership on various scales.
I was brought up short by Mr. Rosenwaks’s comment that, with regards to the Cribari Bridge, process matters more than the outcome. Of course process, transparency, and trust matter — and we’ve had precious little of that on any number of issues over the last 4 years. But outcomes absolutely matter, certainly with regards to Cribari, housing, and the future of Saugatuck. We need Selectpeople who will reach out to all stakeholders, really listen, do their homework, be transparent about processes and decisionmaking – but who will ultimately act, who will lead the professional team we have at Town Hall, not be led by them, who have strong relationships with decisionmakers at the State level, who bring fresh energy, new ideas and creative solutions. So many important issues have stagnated in this town over the last four years without a firm hand on the tiller — it’s time for a change.
That’s not what Mr. Rosenwaks said. He said: “Preserving your trust in the process is *just as* important to me as preserving the bridge itself.”
Thank you for clarifying such an important point! This is essential not to disform others through mixing up words.
Thanks Tim for clarifying that. It is exactly what Mr. Rosenwaks stated. Not sure how that statement could be construed as coming up short.
Larry Weisman, you read my mind! But I would start first with a re-do of our zoning laws. Our zoning regulations were drafted decades ago, and the town has evolved substantially since the last century. I urge the selectmen and women to consider prioritizing these two issues as both would help tremendously in addressing our biggest problems in town.
With the utmost respect David, I think that you missed an opportunity to show us your leadership and collaborative skills during the earliest stages of Long Lots School building project.
When I was at your house with the gardeners a couple of weeks ago and I asked you why you didn’t do more to help the parents collaborate with the gardeners instead of being pitted against each-other. (The pitting between gardeners and parent cause by the first select women and the building committee lead by Jay Keenan and Don O’Day)
You answered by saying it was a difficult time for you, navigating between your belief in a community garden and being a parent at the school. That is true it was difficult but you didn’t help improve the situation publically.
The parents have had a substandard school for years, just like KHS many years ago and the smoke and mirrors of the committee and the the administration duped us all. Some examples, the 8-24 that got switched at the end removing the garden from the town property, not the school property. The repeated promise from Jay and Don that said, “everything on the property will go back on the property” was what, a lie? I believed them.
The on going narrative by Don O’Day that the gardeners should have packed up and left their 20 year old home just because an appointments committee said so at step one is a false narrative.
To be fair, while Don O’Day was the worst of the lot (I keep thinking about Jay Keenan saying “you wouldn’t expect us to remove something without a plan to replace it” – well, what’s the plan, Don?}…
Maybe Mr Rosenwaks could have done more while on RTM, but Mr Christie certainly could have joined Mr Harrington in speaking up against the destruction of the gardens and preserve. He had many more opportunities to do something… anything… and he chose expedience over doing the right thing. That he now says the Community Gardens are a priority seems like empty rhetoric designed to save the votes of this group of constituents.
Did Rosenwaks use the word “unburdended”? OMG!! He could be hilarious if elected, almost got my vote!
I’m glad to see each candidate has taken a bite of the apple, but now I think the candidates are tip toeing around the issue of the Cribari Bridge… and with good reason:
It has been a political “third-rail” for candidates since before 1985, and candidates for several offices who have advocated its replacement have consistently lost elections with the lowest vote totals. If I remember correctly a Coalition for Westport P&Z candidate advocating its removal got less than a third of the vote of the next lowest vote getting candidate…
Certainly nostalgia plays a small part in the longevity of our National Historic Bridge, but what most Westporters realize is that the Bridge stops CTDOT from developing a full fledged access road from Exit 19 Fairfield to Exit 16 in Norwalk. The bridge carries between 13,000 and 16,000 vehicles (safely) per day, but its weight and height limits won’t allow tractor trailer trucks.
It seems to me that each candidate realizes that the previous administration has left them with hands tied and a burning fuse on a time bomb.
In February, 2024 First Selectwoman Tooker gave up the leverage Jim Marpe had reserved for the town by freeing $4,100,000 Transportation Improvement Program for CTDOT’s Cribari Bridge Prroject… without consulting the stake holders who had worked on CTDOT’s Planning Advisory Committee for 18 months. Then CTDOT brought their already decided plan to the Westport Town Hall auditorium on May 15 of this year as a state-hosted meeting (no Westport public noticing needed) and limited invitations to the stakeholders (whom Tooker excluded from the WestCOG decision.)
Is there a Westporter living in any neighborhood that doesn’t consider him-, her- or their self a stakeholder in The Cribari Bridge?
My initial read on the various stands:
O’Day and Moore are going to get the best lipstick possible for the pig they’ve inherited in the name of fiscal responsibility (which seems ironic given the current—was it “Mercedes?”—party’s appetite for expenditure.)
Christie—if he gets a surge of public support—might be able to leverage public opinion and a connection with a same party governor to ameliorate the damage.
Rosenwaks is correct to point out how poorly the current administration has coordinated with CTDOT, but misses the point that the current administration merely appears to have given CTDOT free rein in everything and Westporters no say in anything whatsoever. Process is important, but what’s the strategy?
All of this speaks to what seems like a terrible relationship between Westport leadership and state leadership at the legislative and executive levels. Dealing with the state DOT seems like a disaster between the post road, the bridge and the project behind Walgreens. Why are our leaders unable to call Hartford to at least have a conversation and represent our interests? Why is Saugatuck something that town leadership all seem to be unwilling to have a hard conversation about? How can we push forward on being a good neighbor in the state as well as representing our own interests? Mostly, I think some connection between our leaders, the public and the state leaders needs to happen (and hasn’t under the current administration).
For the democrats. What exactly does re route 136 from south compo mean ?
David spent a short time on the RTM and has no other leadership or committee experience in Westport. He has lived here for less than 5 years. He began his music career at 31 but what lived or career experiences would qualify him for such a demanding leadership position? He does not appear to hold a candle to the qualifications of Kevin Christie or Amy Wiestreich. Although I I understand he’s very personable, this is not HIS time to be the First Selectman of Westport.
Does anyone really believe that platitudes these candidates say in order to garner votes during the run up to the election will mean much once in power, has not learned from Westport’s past. “Accountability”, “Transparency”, “Resident inclusion” etc etc etc. Yeah, right.
As I recall, Mr. O’Day voted to silence residents by filtering their petition rights. Mr. O’Day admitted to voting counter to his constituent’s desires. Mr. O’Day helped prevent our Charter authorized Public Site and Building Committee’s participation in the Long Lots replacement – thereby intentionally eliminating other viable options and resident involvement. Mr. O’Day likely knew exactly what Jen Fava meant when she emailed “Well I guess they found out” – i.e. the intention to destroy the community gardens for a baseball field.
(His running mate Ms. Moore was wholly complicit in every Tooker debacle – including labeling residents who had differing views as being “obstructionists”, and sitting silent while Westport residents (many being senior citizens) were vilified and labeled as a danger to children because of their garden shovels.
Yes, as these candidates expouse: “Experience Matters”…but not how they intended. Instead it’s the experience that Westport’s residents had to endure due to their bad decisions, actions, and repeated failures, that matters in this election.
It’s a no brainer: No Moore O’Day.
Regarding Mr. Rosenwaks. A completely unremarkable RTM term. Zero public support for the community gardens…or for the Public Site & Building Committee to provide assistance. No attempt to reinstate full resident petition rights. No active support for Jenny Johnson, Sal Liccione, Clarence Hayes’s attempts to return resident voice. Perhaps “quiet” subcommittee participation…but little if any public advocacy at the podium so that the electorate could actually hear what he says/thinks/believes. Go along to get along is commonplace for newbies like him… just not qualification to be Westport’s CEO.
It’s been stated that Mr. Rosenwak’s impetus to become First Selectman is because redistricting will impact his children. A personal interest. If so, it’s important to note that, for obvious and good reason, the Town ethics rules require his complete recusal from that redistricting discussion and decision making since it will benefit his family.
Perhaps in a few years.
In Westport’s last election, the third party ticket (TJ Elgin/D’Onofrio) garnered about 64 votes while Ms. Tooker won by only 67. Perhaps their candidacy impacted the outcome – perhaps not. However this year there is extraordinary danger that Mr. Rosenwaks’ candidacy will significantly dilute the democratic votes resulting in yet another republican victory we will all have to again endure. Most residents I speak with agree that outcome is the worst possibility.
And I imagine that this is something Mr. O’Day is gleefully counting upon.
Mr. Rosenwaks should think about that long and hard.
What he ^ said.
Jay — Not sure where you heard that, but redistricting has already taken place, and the affected students (including David’s children and my own) have already moved schools. There is absolutely nothing more to be personally gained or lost on that front. Please correct your misleading and factually inaccurate statement above.
Hi Julie
Nothing to correct…as I said it was stated by several reputable sources as prime motivation. . I also cited if it is true then the ethics rules would apply.
And as I’ve also been told, the last word on redistricting has definitely not been spoken.
Kevin Christie and Amy Wistreich talk a lot about leadership and consensus, but their statement doesn’t actually say what they plan to do.
On Saugatuck, they call it a “transformative project” and promise to “facilitate conversations,” but they don’t say what transformation they’re aiming for. Will it mean more housing, more retail, or preserving what’s already there? Saying “we’ll make that happen ASAP” without any details isn’t leadership, it’s just talk.
With the Cribari Bridge, they admit the issue has been dragged out for more than a decade, but their solution is to “jumpstart conversations” and “weigh pros and cons.” That’s what’s been happening for ten years. Residents deserve a clear answer. Are they planning to preserve the bridge, rebuild it, or replace it? The town doesn’t need another round of meetings. It needs someone ready to act.
Their section on affordable housing sounds good on paper but offers no new ideas. Listing committees and programs isn’t a plan. The current Democratic-led P&Z has had years to address 8-30g and housing affordability, and it hasn’t made real progress. Their mention of “offering up town land” raises more questions than it answers. Which land? How will it be funded? What will it cost taxpayers?
Overall, this reads like a collection of talking points, not a roadmap. Westport needs leadership that’s willing to take a position and follow through, not just host more discussions about what might happen someday.
If Mr Christie doesn’t win, that will be the fourth consecutive Democratic Party loss in a BOS race in a Town that leans to the left. Nobody can blame Mr Rosenwaks for that pattern of DTC incompetence.
I find the preemptive “blame” to be troubling as it targets someone who fairly petitioned his way on to the ballot – clearly voters wanted an alternative to the two choices of the party establishment. (The same thing has happened in the BOE race.)
(The Elgin campaign didn’t cost Jon Steinberg the election four years ago, a DTC member with a vendetta did. That whole situation was 100% nuts.)
I am a registered Democrat, but I am not on the DTC – and I am not involved in the Rosenwaks campaign, either. If the DTC establishment is so concerned about the electability of Mr Christie, maybe they should withdraw his candidacy, so that he will not play spoiler in a race between former establishment Democrat O’Day and left-leaning independent Mr Rosenwaks.
The DTC is risking control of both the BOS and the BOE because they fail to recognize the concerns of their constituents. I don’t understand how progressive voters can put this partisanship over values.
(Does anyone else get serious NYC mayor’s race vibes? Where the establishment on both sides have their hair on fire because voters want to support a candidate who is not beholden to anyone? We should all find that refreshing.)