My Foray into Local Politics (3 of 3)

Library, Schlumberger , cell tower: Selectmen candidates take stands

By Macklin Reid, Press Staff on October 29, 2011 in Politics & Elections 

Unanimous in support of the $7-million Schlumberger purchase, selectmen candidates at the recent League of Women Voters debate showed a broad range of opinions when asked about the library’s building plans.

Library

Nearing its $15 million private fund raising goal, the library board plans to ask the town for the final $5 million needed for a $20 million renovation and expansion project.

An audience of about 50 heard candidates discuss the plan at Monday’s League of Women Voters event in the playhouse.

“The 500-pound gorilla in the room is town debt,” said Jan Rifkinson, the unaffiliated candidate challenging four incumbents for a Board of Selectmen’s seat.

Even without more borrowing, the town’s more than $90 million in long-term debt won’t be paid down until 2031, Mr. Rifkinson said.

“My personal feeling is, if the library can raise $10 million, it can do a fine job building a $10-million library. If they raise $15 million, they can do a fine job building a $15-million library.

“I don’t feel we’re in a position to offer them a $5-million gift,” Mr. Rifkinson said.

The case for backing the library’s expansion with $5 million was made most forcefully by board’s two Republican incumbents, Andy Bodner and Maureen Kozlark.

“The Ridgefield Library is an asset to the town,” Mr. Bodner said, and draws “over 1,000 people a day.”

The library is already semi-public. “The town funds 75% of its budget,” he said.

The library building is in need of basic maintenance repairs, which would cost the town about $5 million.

With the library proposal, the town can have a new $20-million library “for what the town would spend to simply patch the building together,” Mr. Bodner said. “I think it would be foolish not to.”

“The building is an older building and it does need repair,” said Ms. Kozlark.

“We’re talking about heating, air conditioning, mechanicals, roof repair … We’ll have to put money into that building anyway,” she said.

“As a town,” she added, “we’ve learned the lesson of delayed maintenance.”

The board’s two Democrats sounded more cautious.

Barbara Manners praised the library board’s fund-raising efforts, and its sale of the former Webster Bank building to Valerie Jensen who hopes to return it to its original use as the town’s movie house. But she was noncommittal about giving the library $5 million for the project, admitting to “reservations” on whether the library could control “operating expenses” at a new, larger building.

“I support taking this to referendum and letting the people decide,” Ms. Manners said.

Di Masters said, “A public private partnership is a remarkable thing, and it should be applauded.”

But she promised to scrutinize the library board’s plans carefully. “When it come to us, we will be charged with asking the tough questions on operating expenses,” she said.

Schlumberger

On the proposed $7 million Schlumberger purchase, the candidates all supported buying the 45-acre site to fend off potential high density housing. Their positions were distinguished largely by nuances.

“Forty-five acres with sewer and water and access is just a recipe for changing the way we do business.” Ms. Masters said.

She thought the town should buy the property, so it can exert stronger control over what it is built there.

“We want tax-positive development,” she said.

Mr. Bodner, too, spoke of the “risk of high density housing” on the site.

“I think we should purchase it, and as quickly as we can sell off pieces to recover costs,” he said.

“There’s definitely economic value,” he said. “I think we can quickly recover the cost.”

Once the town owns the site, Ms. Manners said, “we can have discussions about what kind of specs and controls we want to have” on the land before reselling portions of — while possibly keeping some for future town uses.

“I actually think it’s imperative that we buy that property,” said Ms. Manners.

“By the town purchasing the property we’d be masters of our own destiny,” Ms. Kozlark agreed.

Mr. Rifkinson backed the purchase. “I think we should take control of this property,” he said.

But he raised concerns.

“It’s going to increase our debt,” he warned. “Buying the property is only half the issue, the other half is the carrying costs, going forward.”

Cell Tower

After Tropical Storm Irene’s problems, should the town should try again to improve cell telephone service in north Ridgefield?

“I supported a cell tower in northern Ridgefield before Irene,” Barbara Manners said. “We lost a very good opportunity.”

With the first plan for a cell tower above Ledges Road voted down, she wasn’t sure it made sense to try again.

“We had a town meeting” she said, “and the people who support the cell tower did not come out.”

Di Masters agreed.

“The cell tower was unfortunately a hot-button issue with the neighbors,” Ms. Kozlark said.

The plan was attractive because it would improve cell service while adding 29 acres of open space land. “It could also have protected that ridge line,” she said.

Mr. Bodner most forcefully supported the cell tower.

“It’s absolutely inexcusable in the 21st Century the northern part of town does not have cell phone coverage,” he said. “I think we have to continue to look for alternative sites.”

Mr. Rifkinson offered his thoughts on what the selectmen had done wrong, leading to the defeat of the cell tower.

“Government brings forth some plans and says: ‘vote yes or no.’ It’s a problem in presentation,” Mr. Rifkinson said. “The voters should be brought in right in the beginning.”

My Foray in Local Politics (2 of 3)

Each of five Board of Selectmen candidates was asked what he or she hoped to accomplish if elected.

Andy Bodner, an incumbent Republican and former finance board member, said that over the years he’d been in office the town undertook a school building program to address space problems.

“We had inadequacies in our schools, our infrastructure was under attack,” he said. “A lot of money was spent, taxes went up quite a bit.”

Now, he said, the focus should be on “efficiency,” not expansion of services. “The bad economy and taxes are a concern,” he said. “Ridgefield is a special town. We don’t want to see it changed.”

He also spoke of the selectmen’s efforts to buy the 45-acre Schlumberger property and keep it from development as high density housing.

“Schlumberger is going to be a major issue,” he said.

His priorities are “improve roads, maintain education, and avoid turning Ridgefield in a large apartment housing development,” he said.

Maureen Kozlark, a Republican recently elected to fill a vacant seat on the board, added a $5-million contribution to the library’s $20-million project to her priorities.

“My goals going forward on the Board of Selectmen are maintain an appropriate level of taxes on the people,” she began. “Schlumberger … the library expansion is on the horizon and that’s going to be something we’ll be debating and hopefully supporting,” she said. “The library is one of our most used assets.

“Schools,” she added. “People move to Ridgefield for the quality of the schools…

“We want to maintain our small town feel, but be metropolitan in a way that we can enjoy the arts,” she said.

Democrat and longtime board member Barbara Manners said, “I want to see us owning the Schlumberger property.”

She spoke of “public private partnerships” that had combined taxpayer money with donor contribution to get big things done.

“Tiger Hollow is a great example, The Playhouse is a great example,” said Ms. Manners, who helped launch the creation of the playhouse.

“Now we have an opportunity to build a new library,” she said. “All those things add to the quality of life in this town.”

Incumbent Selectman Di Masters, a Democrat, said that while “Schlumberger is very important,” one of her main goals is to affect the way young people like the students in the audience looked at public service and public officials.

“The reasons I’ve been an elected official all my life is for civics,” she said. “People don’t get into public office for nefarious reasons. They do it for the good reasons.”

“I hope I can be an example to you as a public official,” she said. “That’s what I’d like to leave the town.”

Jan Rifkinson, an unaffiliated candidate for the Board of Selectmen who isn’t an officeholder, said, “I’m the outsider up here. All these people are on the Board of Selectmen. They’re incumbents, I’m trying to take one of their seats.”

Mr. Rifkinson described beginning to attend Board of Selectmen meetings three or four years ago, and trying to learn about the issues. “I started to ask a lot of questions — question after question after question. It became kind of a joke,” he said. “Sometimes they were explained to me satisfactorily, sometimes they weren’t.”

As a result his goals if elected include “greater transparency in government and more involvement of the general population,” he said.

My Foray into Local Politics (1 of 3)

Selectmen candidates explain their stands

By The Ridgefield Press on November 7, 2011 in Politics & Elections 

Schlumberger, the library, debt, budgets, priorities — serious issues face the town and selectmen candidates staked out their positions in response to questions from The Press.

Five candidates are competing for four open Board of Selectmen seats in Tuesday’s town election. The race features four incumbents — Republicans Andrew Bodner and Maureen Kozlark, and Democrats Barbara Manners and Di Masters — and an unaffiliated petitioning candidate, Jan Rifkinson, who has regularly attended and voiced opinions at selectmen’s and other town meetings in recent years.

For first selectman, Democratic incumbent Rudy Marconi will be on the ballot unopposed, so he was not asked to answer the questions.

The questions and answers the candidates provided, within word limits, follow.

What would your top five priorities be as a selectman?

Manners: Schlumberger, Schlumberger, Schlumberger.

Revisiting a possible regulation to restrict the ground floor of Main Street to retail businesses.

Encouraging Branchville’s planned growth to bring more retail and commercial to Ridgefield.

Ensuring the preservation of essential services that relate to townspeople’s health, safety and welfare.

Maintaining Ridgefield’s character and charm.

Kozlark: To sustain and improve Ridgefield’s residents’ quality of life.

To deliver services within our budgets to provide a high quality education.

To preserve our small town historical charm while adding to the commercial tax  base.

To continue efforts in maintaining infrastructure.

To work closely with town organizations on environmental/conservation initiatives.

Rifkinson: Greater government transparency.

Develop cost center accounting for every agency, property, charity and leisure pursuit.

Hire a professional labor relations firm to negotiate all labor contracts with Board of Finance consultation.

Replace agency wish lists with creative long-term planning

Strategic economic development must become a priority to help homeowners.

Bodner: Maintain the current level of municipal services and high quality educational school system, finish negotiating new labor contracts with health care and pension changes per fire contract, adequately address road and other  infrastructure needs, and prevent high density housing at Schlumberger. And, of  course, keep taxes reasonable.

Masters: I want to continue to help lead Ridgefield through these economically challenging times. I remain committed to preserving the quality of life that brings and keeps us in Ridgefield, through economic development and long-range planning, Schlumberger property, balance services and budgets, investment in our kids and community.

With close to $99 million in outstanding debt, where do you stand on prospective additions to the debt burden like $7 million to buy the Schlumberger property and perhaps $5 million toward the library’s $20-million expansion?

Manners: The Schlumberger acquisition is a financially smart move. The character of the town in future years is heavily dependent on that property’s controlled development. Forty-five acres in the town’s center for future commercial, residential, and municipal needs enables us to plan, not merely to react. The library should be decided at referendum.

Kozlark: The Schlumberger property is 45 acres centrally located which is serviced by town water and sewer. It has the potential of being developed as a high-density residential parcel. If this occurs there would be a significant strain on town services. I feel it is important for the town to purchase and control the development of this property.

The library building is in need of mechanical repairs so the town will have to spend money on the building under any scenario. An investment toward a new building makes sense with most of the cost borne by private donations.

Rifkinson: Our financial discussions must be long term, complete, transparent and anchored in Ridgefield’s economic reality.

Currently we are one of Connecticut’s most indebted towns. With no future capital debt (an impossibility), the $99 million we now owe can’t be paid off before 2031.

So here’s where I stand:

Ridgefield should increase its debt beyond the norm only as a last resort and only for something that would otherwise endanger the entire community.

The Schlumberger proposal presents that possibility but the library expansion certainly does not so I would not support a $5-million gift for its expansion at this time.

Bodner: The library has a leaking roof and other major structural issues that the town must address. If, for the same town cost of band-aiding the problems and still having a substandard facility, $15 million of private donations allows the  construction of a brand new library without increasing the annual operating expenses, then I support the initiative.

Leaving 45 acres of developable high density housing in the center of town is risky. Assuming that Schlumberger takes responsibility for the environmental issues, I support the purchase. Additionally, I believe that most of the purchase price can be recovered through controlled land sales.

Masters:The 45-acre Schlumberger property with town water, sewer and access to town assets is ideally suited for many tax positive development opportunities if the town acquires the property and is then able to deed restrict and guide the development of this centrally located acreage. Unbridled development on 45 acres in the center of Ridgefield with many hundreds of additional cars will dramatically change the business as usual in Ridgefield into the future. Daily business will forever be less convenient if the highest density is realized on that parcel. I support the purchase of Schlumberger. Library has done a great job.

What do you think the town should do about roads like many of those in Ridgefield Lakes that are technically private but function as public streets?

Manners: Ridgefield provides some maintenance and plowing on the private roads which have never met town standards and were constructed to be private. Bringing them to code requires vast sums for roadwork as well as legal costs associated with “taking” footage from people’s lawns. It would be better if homeowners through the Lake Association were to assume responsibility for bringing their roads to code. Then Ridgefield could then adopt them and all maintenance associated with them.

Kozlark: The Board of Selectmen have asked the head of our highway department to update us on the status of repairing our existing roads, number of miles of private roads in town, the current condition of these private roads and the estimated dollars needed to address this situation. After I have all this information, I will be able to make an informed decision about maintenance of these private roads.

Rifkinson: This problem is the result of inconsistency.

Only public roads should be serviced at taxpayer expense. That includes patching, gutter work, snow removal and bus service.

Because of a lack of transparency, some private roads have received town services in the past which are now threatened. Residents on these roads are confused and frustrated.

The selectmen must clarify the inconsistency and decide to adopt those private roads or charge for the services provided to them.

Bodner: Assess what the cost of upgrading the private roads into public roads would be, and then see whether a cost-sharing arrangement could be negotiated with the homeowners; otherwise, just maintain the status quo. Any change in the status quo needs to be fair to the residents who live on the private roads, as well as to those whose tax burden could be affected and do not.

Masters: Many of the roads may be too narrow to be classified as public roads. After a thorough investigation of ownership, there should be a maintenance plan  established. For those roads determined to be under the jurisdiction of the town  or still in question, I recommend exploring the scenic road option road for those very narrow roads which do not meet town standards. This would minimize cost, preserve neighborhoods and allow repairs to proceed.

The budget approved last spring was $124.5 million, a 1.5% spending increase that required a 1% tax increase. What are reasonable amounts for next year’s town and school budgets? Where should town should spend more or less?

Manners: Many people in town, possibly more than last year, are suffering from the continued recession and high unemployment. It is incumbent upon the BOS to keep taxes as low as possible while adequately addressing the health, safety, and welfare of our residents and the town’s future. Re the schools’ budget: It is up to the BOE to give us a number and for us then to make a recommendation after reviewing the essential needs of all town departments. Clearly our roads need maintenance and our emergency services need well-functioning equipment. These are the first priorities re town operations.

Kozlark: During these difficult economic times, we need to send to the voters a budget that maintains our town’s strong financial condition and also provides the level of town and school services that those voters require. As a community, we cannot stand still. We must develop a budget that supports controlled improvement and growth. This can be achieved through tough contract negotiations and finding maximum efficiencies in all operations. We need to make the thoughtful decisions. And we need to remember that Ridgefield is our home and the quality of life that brought us here must be preserved.

Rifkinson: Budgets have many moving parts. To quote “reasonable” budget numbers now would be a politically driven guessing game which is not my forte.

However, this important question should be asked and answered before labor negotiations begin, not before an election. That’s because three-quarters of our entire budget consists of labor costs. And to improve those numbers, I believe the entire negotiating process should be revamped so all labor negotiations are  performed exclusively by a professional labor relations firm.

Currently, I am not persuaded that we budget efficiently. Until I am, I will be skeptical at budget time.

Bodner: The economy is worse, taxes are higher, state aid to Ridgefield is lower, and long-term prospects for Connecticut are bleak – I think the goal for this year should be the same as last year, a 1% or less property tax increase. How the additional dollars, if any, are divided between the town and school budgets will depend on the priorities that are developed from the budgeting process.

The town cannot continue to neglect its infrastructure needs, which means a commitment to annually pave roads, repair roofs, and insure that essential emergency equipment is maintained and replaced as needed.

Masters: Each year the Board of Selectmen and the Board of Education present the town and school budgets respectively, which each board believes meets the needs of Ridgefield. Ultimately the responsibility for setting the size of each budget falls to the Board of Finance. The Board of Finance monitors tax receipts, projects future tax receipts, and weighs the ability of the taxpayers to absorb any tax increases. I have always viewed my job as selectman not to set the size of the budget but to balance the needs of all Ridgefielders, as much as  possible, while living within our means.

Something to think about?

The Greening of Ridgefield

By Jan Rifkinson

Ridgefield Press 06/07/12 

It was the last straw for me when the Board of Selectmen couldn't decide whether to say the Pledge of Allegiance before each meeting. While two or three board members voiced their opinions on this request by a town veteran, as a governing body they decided to check surrounding towns to see if anyone else followed this formality. 

This has become a frequent practice at the BoS. They like to hide behind common practice. They've become followers instead of leaders. 

So, it was to my great delight to read that every school in the Ridgefield School system has a garden tended to and harvested by the students.

Moreover, the food was used in their cafeterias. Bravo!

And most satisfying, the Ridgefield School system is the FIRST and ONLY school system in CT to do this. Kudos.

This is an example of leading with creativity, pro activity, responsibility and reality. 

School is not just about grades or SATs although those are certainly important milestones. No college is going to accept a student simply because they worked in a school garden but, I submit, it will make those students better people going forward.

At a young age they will learn that food doesn't come from a supermarket or a refrigerator. A lot of it – especially the most healthy of it – comes from the ground, delivered from seeds, soil, sun and water and nurtured by man with hard work. It's mother nature's gift to us. 

That knowledge -- and extrapolating those lessons going forward – is worth a bunch in the real world.

We need more of this kind of leadership. 

Pledge of Allegiance before the Board of Selectmen Meeetings - Yes or No? Well..... maybe.

Ridgefield Press Letter to the Editor

Published April 5, 2012

It strikes me that Ms. Manners is entitled to her opinion, discomfort and reservations about pledging allegiance to the flag of the United States of America before the Board of Selectmen's bi-monthly meeting but I also believe the Select(wo)men should be able to take a vote on this very simple issue without hiding behind some consensus polled from other towns. 

Ridgefield should do what it thinks is right for Ridgefield. Take your choice: we can lead, follow or fall in line.

To me this inaction simply demonstrates the board's "leadership" qualities. Ms. Manners had the courage to speak clearly to her convictions. I give her credit for that. Everyone else sort of punted. 

I, myself, do not say "under god" when reciting the pledge because I believe in a strict separation of church and state.

Should the Board of Selectmen decide to pledge allegiance at the start of their meetings, Ms. Manners can stand silently, in respect and if I am one of the three audience members usually at one of these meetings, I can recite the pledge, without enunciating the words "under god". And everyone else can do what makes them comfortable. It is a free country. Right?

The only point here -- for me -- is that the Board of Selectmen was not able to demonstrate some leadership and  take a vote on a simple request by a taxpayer for fear of..... what? .... losing the next election? 

Board of Selectmen members: Please learn to vote your real convictions, what you really think is right on ALL matters, big and small, no matter the political consequence and distinguish yourselves as the leaders you are supposed to be instead of constantly pandering to some group for next year's vote. 

In my opinion, it really diminishes you as a board.

Ridgefield Press Letter-to-the-editor > Special Referendums

As we glide towards the March 13th Library referendum, I offer these observations about all the separate referendums.

Is it a divide and conquer stratagem?

The virtue of the Schlumberger purchase won't be written for a decade. Meanwhile, we are saddled with an additional $500,000 annually which will affect some budget - - be it Schools, Parks & Rec, Police, Highway, Fire or your own.

Town income has increased barely 1% yet we have started talking about a budget in excess of two times that. What does that tell you?

Chief Roche wants a $4.5 million addition to the Police Station. We have already invested $500,000 for complete building plans without having laid single brick.

There is talk of refurbishing the Community Center to better handle emergencies for $4.5 million.

The library wants $5 million to expand.

Can a new Fire House be far behind?

The first Selectmen, thinks that by sliding one project into the budget one year and another in another year, he can say our debt will not increase. But the fact remains these are 20 year bonding issues so, at some point, the debt & debt service for these projects will be carried forward simultaneously.

And none of the aforementioned projects include the normal capital requests which have averaged $3.5 million over the past three years. (This year there are capital requests totaling $6,000,000.)

Don't we taxpayers have the right to consider everything on our plate before making a decision? Mr. Marconi said we would be “distracted”. I disagree.

Vote 'no' on the Library referendum on March 13. Move it to May along side the Police Station, the Emergency Center project, all budgets and capital requests (a staggering $6 million this year). Let the taxpayer's vote determine priorities. There would be a higher turnout. That's good.

Jan Rifkinson

February 16, 2012

Have we lost our way? > A Timeline

Introduction

The purpose of this time-line is to illustrate how Ridgefield's legislators have handled the 8-30g housing issue and how that resulted in the purchase of the Schlumberger property and the beginnings of the 8-30g alley that will eventually extend from the route 116 to the corner of Gilbert and Main.

The authors have done their best to document all known events via public records, documents and statements. If there is an error, it is UN-intended.

However, we do have a point of view and it is that had there been more foresight, strategic thinking and better management of this issue, Ridgefield would not be facing it's current situation of being saddled with an $11-$12,000,000 investment for a troubled piece of property under the guise of 'controlling our destiny' while having our hands tied over a concentration of 8-30g housing that will most certainly line part of Main Street within the next few years.

How could this have been avoided? By applying for and successfully attaining a four year moratorium on 8-30g high density building which would have given town planners and administrators time to develop an overall strategy that might have resulted in a better integration of 8-30g housing into our community, including on the Schlumberger property.

To begin with, it needs to be understood that it is the Board of Selectmen who must initiate a study and fund an 8-30g housing moratorium. They have now done that, four and a half years after it was first mentioned.

2007

August 27, 2007

Memorandum: The Town of Ridgefield was shown on the “2006 Affordable Housing Appeals Procedure List” (posted on-line by the CT Department of Economic and Community Development) as having 8,877 dwelling units (based on the 2000 Census) of which 160 units qualify as “affordable” under the criteria listed in §8-30g of the Connecticut General Statutes. This means that 1.8% of Ridgefield’s housing stock are counted by the State as “affordable.”

This was at the height of the Eureka litigation which 'sort of' resolved in February of 2008. During that period it was determined that mixing the ongoing litigation with the pursuit of an 8-30g moratorium might not be in the town's best interests.

There was no activity in regards to the high density 8-30g housing issue for the next two and a half years.

2010

December

An 8-30g application for 9 units located at 613 Main Street is approved.

2011

June-July

Ridgefield Press article by Macklin Reid:

"Planning and Zoning Commission Chairwoman Rebecca Mucchetti told the selectmen last week. "What we've seen in the last year is a real focus on Main Street."

Under 8-30g, projects in which at least 30% of units meet the state's affordability guidelines are exempt from most zoning rules, and towns can only turn them down on "health and safety" grounds.

"Our concern is, we can't consider the impact on the town. We can't consider the impact on neighborhoods," Ms. Mucchetti said.

Last Wednesday Ms. Mucchetti and Town Planner Betty Brosius told the selectmen they thought the town could qualify for a four-year moratorium on new applications under the state law.

A municipality may apply to the state for the moratorium if 2% of its housing qualifies as "affordable" under state rules.

In Ridgefield, that 2% means 188 of the 9,420 housing units counted in the 2010 census, Ms. Brosius said.

"I believe we're over 2%," she told the board.

From the same article:

"Our great concern is what's happening on Main Street," Ms. Mucchetti told the selectmen. "...We are aware of two or three more possibly in the pipeline."

July 5, 2011 A follow up Letter to Mr Marconi from the Town Planner confirms Ms. Murchetti's statements about being “over 2%” which makes it practical to pursue a four year moratorium on 8-30g (high density) housing construction.

There was no legislative follow up to this information.

Meantime, another 8-30g application for 14 units at 7-9 North Salem Road is received by Planning & Zoning.

September

September 7, 2011 BOS meeting - Mr. Marconi introduces a resolution to purchase 30 acres of the Schlumberger property, with an unnamed developer purchasing the balance of the property.

When Selectmen Bodner suggests that the Town buy the entire property, R. Marconi responded that the Town of Ridgefield is not in the real estate business. We should not be dividing up the property.

We received complaints about this with regard to Bennett’s Farm. We do want to continue to retire our debt service.

September 20, 2011 Water Pollution Control Authority Minutes – The Chairman, ”Mr. Caldwell stated that he had discussed with Mr. Marconi potential sewer use units for the Schlumberger property.”

October

October 5, 2011 Minutes: R. Marconi introduced and read the following resolution:

RESOLVED: That the resolution entitled “Resolution Appropriating $7,000,000 For The Acquisition Of 45 Acres Of Land From Schlumberger Technology Corporation On Old Quarry Road In The Town Of Ridgefield And Authorizing The Issuance Of $7,000,000 Bonds Of The Town To Meet Said Appropriation And Pending The Issuance Thereof The Making Of Temporary Borrowings For Such Purpose”, a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved and recommended for adoption by the legal voters of the Town at a referendum to be held pursuant to Section 3-10 of the Town Charter on December 6, 2011 between the hours of 6:00 o’clock A.M. and 8:00 o’clock P.M.(E.S.T.).

Ms. Manners indicates that controlling the property neutralizes the threat of high density, i.e. 8-30g development.

The BoS approves taking a resolution authorizing the issuance of $7 million in bonds for the purchase of the Schlumberger property.

October 19, 2011 At a public meeting concerning Schlumberger, the town's consulting engineer presents a site plan indicating that 290 units is the maximum number that can be built on the property.

“B. Manners stated how 290 affordable housing units could result in 290 units x up to 5 stories”

Mr. Marconi states “The Town of Ridgefield plans to spin off ten acres (Sunset Lane parcel) for development in order to get some income from the property as soon as possible with perhaps 17 – 18 single family units and 2 apartment buildings”

In response to a question “R. Marconi responded that the hope is to offer for development the ten acres within 6 months to 3 years”

November

November 7, 2011 Special Town Meeting minutes, In response to a question from the floor “Controller Kevin Redmond responded that the service on $7 million is about $465,000 a year. Mr. Marconi added that $60,000-$80,000 a year for minimal

maintenance pushing the annual carrying cost over $500,000.”

"Mr. Marconi informed the audience that as for future municipal uses, the Town might keep some land to preserve this potential, but the Selectmen have no near-term plans for

anything."

November 16, 2011 WPCA Minutes - Chairman Caldwell states that “The sewer use allocation for this property is 59 use units. Mr. Caldwell (chairman) requested that the Town of Ridgefield inform the WPCA of their specific future needs to be implemented into our Facilities Plan.”

There is no further detail about what this means in terms of sewer usage. Is there currently enough capacity or will the system need to be expanded to accommodate the contemplated uses for the property.

Coincidentally, the commission will soon begin a lengthy process to upgrade the South Street plant. This is mandated by the state every 20 years.

November 26, 2011 Morning and afternoon public tours conducted at the Schlumberger Property by the First Selectman and board members.

December

December 3, 2011 Two more public tours are held at the Schlumberger Property. A visual inspection of Phillip Johnson Building by one of the authors of this document, a real estate professional, indicates significant water damage. It appears a new roof and skylights will be required. No capital budget provided for voter’s review.

Mr. Marconi indicates that a private art collector has approached the Town about using the Phillip Johnson Building to store his private art collection and uses this as an example of the interest that preserving the building could offer.

December 6, 2011 The Town voters approve the issuance of $7 million in bonds to purchase the Schlumberger property.

From the Ridgefield Press: “The selectmen must vote again at the end of the due diligence period on whether to go through with deal, and only after a second positive vote by the Board of Selectmen will the negotiated agreement for the purchase become final.”

At First Selectman’s direction, $7 million in funds drawn through BAN notes before the final contract between Schlumberger and the town has

been completed and before due diligence has been completed.

Under 8-30g, a new high-density building application is submitted for 16 units to be built on a small lot located at 593 Main Street.

2012

January

The sales contract with Schlumberger is amended to permit an extended due diligence period and designates the Sunset Lane Parcel for “Form III” status requiring further remediation than originally assumed. This process could take up to eight years and would preclude selling the Sunset Lane parcel, and hope for any quick return on investment.

January 06, 2012 Ridgefield Press article including direct quotes from Selectman Bodner:

“The rationale for buying the Schlumberger property was to control our destiny as it related to the risk of high density housing in the middle of town,” he said in an email following the vote.

“Potential numbers as high as 500 units were suggested at public hearings. I now believe that the realistic number is quite a bit less.”
He also felt the growing number affordable housing projects proposed on smaller sites around Main Street and in village changed the context.
“I believe that as many apartments as the market will bear are likely to be built,” he said, “and frankly, if I was given the choice of locating them at Schlumberger versus on Main Street, Schlumberger would have won, hands down.”
“Part of the justification for the purchase was the expectation that a substantial portion of the investment would be recouped quickly through the sale of a 10-acre parcel, which it now appears that the regulatory process could delay for as long as eight years,” he said.
First Selectman Marconi said under the new agreement — as under the original — the selectmen would still have an the opportunity to decide not to go through with the purchase. “

January 13, 2012 Ridgefield Press article: This week Ms. Mucchetti expressed frustration that the selectmen hadn't taken up the moratorium initiative sooner. She and commission Vice Chairman Patrick Walsh had taken the idea to Mr. Marconi on June 24, she said, when the commission was starting the hearing process for the North Salem Road project.

"We told him we knew, as we reviewed this one affordable housing project in front of us, that others were waiting and watching," she said.

"We had the records, and we gave it to him and encouraged him to follow up...

"He indicated to us he wanted to go forward and pursue it. That was in June," Ms. Mucchetti said, "and then we didn't hear anything."

Asked about it this week, Mr. Marconi confirmed that he'd talked to the zoning officials about it in the summer.

"We had a meeting on it, but there wasn't any urgency," he said.

Due diligence continues, results only available in executive session. No records, recordings or minutes are kept as is customary in executive sessions.

January 17, 2012 Board of Finance meeting, “The BOF is unable to determine which account held the Schlumberger BAN money and the $4.3 million refund from CL&P. Mr.

Ulmer said he would talk with the Treasurer and find out.”

Terms of the amended contract now require Schlumberger to provide Ridgefield a copy of the Form III Remediation of the 'A' Parcel of 30 acres. This document is to be filed with State of Connecticut DEEP (Department of Energy and Environmental Protection) outlining existing conditions and the cleanup plan. No copy is made public and as of this date, the authors have not verified that this has been completed.

February

Board of Selectmen approves the hiring of outside legal counsel to prepare an 8-30g moratorium application (first discussed in 2007, again in 2008 and June of 2011).

February 7, 2012 Schlumberger due diligence period expires and town requests an extension until February 8^th so the entire Board can cast their final votes on whether to proceed with the purchase or walk away from the Schlumberger deal.

As per the updated contract, Ridgefield is to provide $3 million at closing with an additional $3 million to be held in escrow until a licensed environmental professional hired by Schlumberger certifies the cleanup is complete. Schlumberger is entitled to interest earned on this escrow.

Addendum and opinions

The Board of Selectmen's original goal in purchasing the property was to prevent UN-desirable over development, represented by 8-30g housing, which was grossly exaggerated at the time.

Moreover, the entire property is problematic, requires complete environmental remediation and state regulatory sign-offs before it can be sold for residential use, at which time Ridgefield might recoup some of its investment.

This process could take up to eight years during which Ridgefield is saddled with an additional $11-12 million dollar debt that includes in excess of $500,000 annual carrying costs. Which budget will be impacted by this additional burden?

For all these reasons we believe the sale should not go through.

Instead the Town should try to negotiate a contract for the 'right of first refusal' in 8-10 years after the property is fully cleaned by the seller and vetted by the required state agencies and is ready for sale.

Meanwhile, the Town is no further along in developing an overall strategic plan for managing growth in Ridgefield, and mitigating the impacts of the 8-30g housing blitz which gains momentum, even as you read this.

And who knows, in 8-10 years, with some careful planning, Ridgefield may be able to prove 10% of our housing qualifies as 8-30g which will then exempt us from any further such construction.

Or the 8-30g law may be modified in some way.