RIDGEFIELD'S CONSCIOUS UNCOUPLING

Gwyneth Paltrow coined the phrase a "conscious uncoupling" to describe her divorce and, oddly, it appears we've had a "conscious uncoupling" here in Ridgefield. 

School Superintendent, Karen Baldwin, spoke a language that I never quite understood so a "conscious  uncoupling" seemed a fitting way to describe her termination agreement. 

Kudos to the Ridgefield Press for acquiring a copy of that agreement via FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) & publishing an article about it. Shame on BoE for making it come to that.

The article states that BoE "found no wrongdoing or misconduct in [Ms. Baldwin's] performance", that BoE had "not requested [her] resignation" nor had they "forced [her][...] resignation. In addition, BoE found no "deficiency, wrongdoing or misconduct with respect to Dr. Baldwin's performance or actions". 

Moreover the resignation did not "constitute an admission" by Ms. Baldwin that she did anything to warrant her termination and that -- according to the Press account -- Ms. Baldwin simply "suggested she would resign". 

Accordingly she would continue to receive her full salary until June 30th plus an annuity of $14,660 plus her un-used vacation days at $894 per day.

So from all accounts, it appears to me that Ms. Baldwin woke up one fine morning & just quit her $200,000 plus job because she simply felt like it. 

The problem is that after her self-serving resignation, she will continue to receive her full salary until June 30 and there is no mention of plagiarism. So what's the takeaway?

In my opinion, neither side has taken responsibility for anything in this matter. There is no "learning moment" for the 5,000 Ridgefield students from whom we demand more. Its' hypocritical and disgraceful. 

"First Selectman Rudy Marconi said he felt the arrangement [was] a “fair agreement for both sides.”

I give it an "F".

OPEN LETTER TO THE BOARD OF EDUCATION. [FROM RIDGEFIELD PRESS]

Here's how it works.

An issue is added to the agenda.

There is discussion & public commentary.

Naturally a consultant is contracted.

The issue is tabled.

The consultant reports out.

There is more discussion & public commentary.

But then:

Someone needs to make a motion on the issue.

Someone needs to second that motion.

The matter is then open for more discussion.

The matter is discussed even more.

Then the vote is called.

You vote.

You move on to another matter.

Well, that's not what we have in the current BoE. We have a diddling board that cannot, or will not, make important decisions.

For years -- despite a declining student population, two or three consultants, facts, figures, deadlines & commitments -- you, the Board of Education, failed to make a decision on closing a school. 

For years no one has gotten a handle on Special Education.

For years we were told there were no savings in power, busing & health care. That proved to be wrong.

Currently, despite consultants, discussions and more discussions we see more diddling on start times & now you've employed a familiar tactic: delay and more consultants.

But on a different note, after all the steps described above, plus singing, you, the BoE, finally decided to remove German from the curriculum but then promptly rescinded your vote and reinstated it.

I know everyone on the board is a volunteer. None of this commentary is meant to say that these decisions are easy or should be made in haste. But it is to say that it is the responsibility you signed up for.

Your first responsibility is to the students. Your second is to the community you serve. I realize that's a lot of responsibility, but that's the job. Please do it.

A strong supporter of great education.

Jan Rifkinson
New Road 

INVESTIGATIVE REPORT (:-) IN CASE YOU MISSED IT

The conversation about parking ebbs and flows. A few years back there was discussion of building a multi-level parking garage off Bailey Avenue. The current discussion has taken on a new dimension. 

On the one hand there is the danger of burying a stream near the Boys & Girls Club & creating "too much asphalt". 

On the other hand, there is an idea, voiced by the First Selectman, to create a pocket park frontage to hide more parking spaces on Catoonah -- a creative idea. 

However, I have a different take. I'm not sure there is a parking problem. I think there is a people problem. We chose Ridgefield to live in, not for parking convenience.

This is what I saw On Monday, July 17th at 1:00:40 pm.

Even though these are snaps of one sliver of one summer week day, it still raises the question (in my mind) whether we really do need more parking spaces. 

If it's for weekends or community events, maybe we should consider walking more. We know taking 10,000 steps daily is a healthy goal. 

I ask myself, if downtown is so crowded on Saturdays, why are so many businesses going out of business? Is everyone having coffee at Tazza?

And what about weekday parking? Here's something else I saw at 11:04:27 the same day.

A woman walked out of this Main Street establishment and erased the chalk parking mark from her right front tire.

While I'm sure she's not alone in this kind of activity, I submit that before we spend one additional taxpayer cent on more parking, we FIRST address the people problem. Otherwise  we risk transforming our quaint village into a parking lot to service the lazy and inconsiderate.

Jan Rifkinson

169 New Road

ANOTHER STEPPING STONE TO EXPANDING OUR SEWER SYSTEM

CLICK HERE

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT -- The Importance of the Town Meeting Form of Government

The New England Town Meeting was not intended to be a rubber stamp. 

It was started by New England Yankees as an antidote to fiats or what we now see in countries like Russia, China & (soon) Turkey wherein the people's "representatives" simply rubber stamp what is presented for approval. Never is there a negative vote. The "fix" is in before the meeting, the outcome a foregone conclusion. It only has propaganda value. It is simply for show.

Begun in 1633 "The informal, majority-rules forum became a foundation of early American democracy and they are still used throughout the country today." Source: smithsonianmag.com

"A town meeting is a form of direct democratic rule [one man, one vote], used primarily in portions of the United States - principally in New England - since the 17th century, in which most or all the members of a community come together to legislate policy and budgets for local government."
Source: 

 participedia.net

That's the historical background.

Otherwise what comes from the leader(s) of the Town Meeting becomes a "Dictat [...] This technique hopes to simplify the decision making process by using images and words to tell the audience exactly what actions to take, eliminating any other possible choices." Source: en.wikipedia.org

And that is exactly what happened at this year's Town Meeting.

Our Town Charter, Section 10-1 (c) stipulates:

The annual capital and operating budgets of the Board of Education and Board of Selectmen as recommended by the Board of Finance shall be brought to the Annual Town and Budget Meeting for discussion and then sent to referendum. The meeting shall have the power to decrease or delete any line item, but it may not increase or add to any line item or establish any additional line item. Source: Town of Ridgefield, CT Finance and Taxation 

But that didn't happen. It was "interpreted" by town counsel, and transmitted by the First Selectman, that the ONLY way a registered voter at the Town Meeting could offer a motion to reduce the $90 million school budget (which would require discussion and a vote) is by referring to a line item in that budget. 

But just look at the April 20th, 2017 issue of the Ridgefield Press budget presentation. You will note that there are line items for the town side of the budget but not for the education budget. The school budget is presented as a whole. 

State statutes do not permit anyone -- even BoS or BoF members -- to reduce any educational line item. The only people who can address line items in the school budget are members of the Board of Education which is appropriate. 

So when one member of the audience at this year's Town Meeting offered a motion to reduce the school budget as it was presented (i.e. as one of the seven line items of the entire budget) it was ruled out of order. Whether you agree with a reduction or not, the motion was never allowed discussion nor vote by the voters present at the Town Meeting. This is what is known as a catch-22 and undercuts the historic intent of the Town Meeting.

Does this make sense to you? It doesn't to me because it means the Town Meeting vote has been reduced to a diktat and has nugatory value and is a total waste of time. At this point it should be abolished and end the New England tradition that began in 1633. Is that what you want for Ridgefield? I don't.

What should happen is that the Charter should be amended to indicate that voters at a Town Meeting can offer reduction or deletion motions on any item presented for a vote. 

This, then, would obviate any interpretation which might become politically suspect and would maintain our long held tradition of direct democracy.

Jan Rifkinson

New Road

Sources for this article

http://participedia.net/en/methods/new-england-town-meetings 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_meeting 

http://time.com/4190233/town-hall-meeting-history/ 

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/history-town-hall-debate-180960705/ 

http://ecode360.com/14227676?highlight=10-1#14227676 

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT

"It’ll be hard, tough — “devastating,” a couple of school officials called it — but the state’s 2.5% cap on municipal spending increases is a limit officials at [the] tri-board meeting said Ridgefield should stay under. [...] That’ll help keep taxes down."

And now the State wants to shift a portion of the teacher's pension cost from the state to the towns. 

That's the way this year's budget process began. It was certainly an important wake up call.

While I appreciate the Board members who spend hours on budgeting, most years the bottom line is aided by pulling a rabbit out of a hat. This year “Revenues exceeded budget by $1,460,000, due largely to collection of back taxes,” [BoF Chairman] Ulmer said." 

But it is my opinion that going forward, we must develop zero based budgets without rabbits because, eventually, they will go the way of the dinosaur & taxes will definitely soar.

[BoE] Ms. Baldwin drew a line with three supervisors. Mr. Hendrikson purportedly put $120,000 in the wrong budget column &  Ms. Manners is “[...] offended every year by the [BoF] who feel that they have to cut us [...]" 

OK. So everyone played their role in this annual drama.

I have long argued that Ridgefield should develop budgets & subsequent mill rates that are not subsidized by transfers from the surplus fund. 

Otherwise there will come a day when we will lose some services we currently enjoy or taxes will rise to a level that will limit the real estate market only to the wealthier amongst us.

New Canaan, Darien & other Fairfield towns have fine school systems but many of you, young families, can't afford to live there which is why you chose Ridgefield. Our real estate prices and taxes remain affordable and we have a fine school system.

Please, let's keep it that way.

Published in the Ridgefield Press

May 4th, 2017

GOOD CHANGE SHOULD MAKE COMMON SENSE

An excellent Letter to the Editor was titled "Insufferable amount of time to replace Route 35 bridge"

And this is the outfit we want to "improve" our little Main Street?

What for?

If you are one who is annoyed with the inconvenience of waiting a few minutes on Main Street while on your way to the Post Office, I say "beware".

All you will get is less sidewalk and more traffic. And if you are one who is worried about lack of parking space, you will have less.

If you are one who wants to straighten the intersection from Prospect Street to the CVS parking lot, I ask why? You will lose even more parking space and will end up with a traffic lane adjacent to a Ballard Park entrance instead of having a buffer.

And will all this speed Route 35 traffic along Main Street? Maybe. By 10 seconds? 20 seconds? 30 seconds? An entire minute? And the trade-off is?

Well, if the bridge on 35 is any guide, downtown interruption will last for who-knows-how-many-months, there will be less sidewalk, fewer parking spaces, replacement trees, more traffic traveling faster.

While further down 35 how many vehicles do you see just missing each other at the intersection with 116 or darting out of South Street or across double yellows coming out of Starbucks or Adam Broderick or pedestrians dodging traffic crossing 35? How about all the cars with children and seniors gauging their chances driving into and out of the Recreation Center & Founder's Hall?

What we really need are improved pedestrian crosswalks from Main Street to Farmingville, re-marking 35 so there are turning lanes to the strip mall businesses and a traffic light on 35 at the Recreation Center intersection.

I'm all for change but it should make common sense.

Published in The Ridgefield Press, April 27, 2017

THE BOTTOM LINE: LEADERSHIP MATTERS

It’ll be hard, tough — “devastating,” a couple of school officials called it but...

“From my perspective as a superintendent,” Baldwin said, keeping three elementary supervisors is a “non-negotiable” need.

 

“It’s a totally different environment,” Baldwin said. “The bottom line: Leadership matters.”

I agree 100%, Ms. Baldwin. "Leadership matters."

But just so I understand this: you are saying three administrators supersede improved curriculum? This really makes you sound more like a bureaucrat than a school superintendent whose priority should be focused on learning.

Despite fewer students, the reason we had a 5.5% increase in last year's school budget was -- according to you -- because we had to solve IEP inequities.

Well, this year IEP is still the problem. In fact, it has been a problem for every one of the 19 years I've lived in Ridgefield. Time to come up with something else, I think.

Naturally parents fall for your edu-speak because they want the best for their child. That's totally understandable but does it make sense?

Well, I'm one resident who is willing to spend more of my money on education BUT NOT ON MORE BUREAUCRACY. So I will vote 'no' on this budget especially when other towns in our DRG have requested far less.

For parents who, like me, want more dollars spent in the classroom: here's a thought.

1,262 kids are issued Chromebooks costing $189,300. How about you BUY that $150 Chromebook for your child; not a big deal for a wealthy community, right?

It would be a tiny bit of tax relief for your neighbors or it could mean more dollars for the classroom if you can make it clear to your superintendent that you want your tax dollars spent in the classroom, not for more administrative bureaucracy.

PTA, BoE & all voters, remember "the bottom line, leadership matters".

Published in the Ridgefield Press April 20, 2017

LETTER TO THE EDITOR PUBLISHED 12/08/2016

Broadening Ridgefield's tax base, improving Main Street while maintaining Ridgefield's quaintish [sic] lifestyle should be the top priority for the Selectmen.

We have spent thousands of tax dollars on economic development consultants without any change. 

We know renting first-floor, Main Street storefronts for office space only subtracts from a quaint Main Street. You took months to contemplate a food truck ordinance but have not been able to decide on first-floor occupancy for years.

Currently, you are discussing hiring a Parking/Development person at $20,000 a year to wrestle the problem. Adding to government bureaucracy is not the answer. Policy is the answer and you  -- BoS -- are responsible for policy. Maybe after you have a policy, adding an administrative position might make sense. 

But if you must, make it a contract/freelance position at half the salary with a commission incentive, split between the town & property owners, for every new business lured to Ridgefield. 

Then the NIMBY problem -- Not In My Back Yard. There are some 'businesses' that have abandoned plans in town because of NIMBY. 

While I understand the NIMBY concerns, there has to be a balance between special interests and community development.

The state wants to widen Main Street, straighten cross streets, add turning lanes, sync traffic lights for crossing safety. Baloney; don't do it.

The state only wants to relieve Route 7 traffic at our expense. None of their goals will help Main Street. 

Find a charming solution: raise the crosswalks slightly, lay Belgian block for differentiation, maintain the pedestrians crosswalk signs on Main and 35 & enforce the traffic laws. 

Spending an extra two minutes in Main Street traffic isn't a detriment. It's part of Ridgefield living & may even provide a moment for people to glance into a store front window and decide to buy something.

$5 million too radical a one­ year change - Letter to the Editor 5/6/2016

I feel manipulated when it comes to our school financials.

First, ERG equality.

A few years ago, I spoke with Peter Prowda, state Board of Education, the man who developed the ERG system. Mr. Prowda explained ERGs were created so educators could compare pupil test

scores in the same ERG category; not the amounts spent on each student. So the ERG is no reason to approve a 4.99% increase in the Board of Education budget.

Second, more seniors are moving into Ridgefield.

Why? There are many advantages to this town — besides the schools — that make Ridgefield, Ridgefield. After all, Ridgefield was the #1 town in Connecticut for years before the $90,000,000 school

bundle was even considered or passed. So schools are not necessarily the reason for a 4.99% increase either.

Third and fourth: Recent history should have clarified the connection between property values and school budgets. They do not parallel each other. And school expenditures do not guarantee

academic excellence. The #1 town in Connecticut — known for its excellent school system — spends far less per student than we do. Again, no rationale for a 4.99% increase.

We pay pension/health benefits for non­certified Board of Education employees, currently set at $1,051,000. Board of Education wants to add another 19 to its payroll. Why do we need more

people for fewer students? An increase of 4.99% makes even less sense.

I still don’t understand what happened between 2015 and 2016 that requires an additional $5 million. That’s a radical change especially in view of a declining school population.

It feels like expenses are just spinning out of control again. How do we regain control? The only way we can — by voting.

Squeezing taxpayers is only one part of the budget formula, not the entire formula.

A proponent of excellent education,

Jan Rifkinson

5/6/2016 Letters

Copyright © 2016 Hersam Acorn

The Chameleon Language of Edu-speak - Letter to the Editor published in the Ridgefield Press April 14, 2016

Edu-speak is nothing if not a chameleon language that takes on definitions that aim to obfuscate rather than clarify. 

The argument that this BoE budget should be supported because it is Ms. Baldwin's first makes sense only if we are now throwing Deborah Lowe under the bus after praising her repeatedly. It begs credulity.

The Board of Finance volunteers worked hours to arrive at a financial formula that they believe is fair and equitable.

But I believe we are throwing millions at a school system without solving structural issues. 

The bulk of the problems surround the Special Needs community, a current mix of in-house programs, lavish outside contracts, settled lawsuits and exorbitant legal fees under no central authority that I can discern. Why are taxpayers just hearing about this via a doubled increase for 'education'.

I question why our technology is lacking, why we buy student laptops instead of having each child use their own. Why can't students plug in whatever tool they want to use to learn, be it laptop, tablet or phone?

I question why $93k is set aside for text books, not because we need them but because some teachers don't know how to access educational materials via the internet. We plan to pay for these teachers to learn to do that so I also question the $900k set aside for teaching teachers. Shouldn't teachers bear some responsibility here? Are principals doing their jobs? Are we hiring the right teachers? 

I am concerned that state shared education funds may be reduced $900k if the legislature has its way.

Despite the many hours put in by the Board of Finance, I question whether the upcoming budget passes muster. 

Written by a proponent for strong education.

Letter to the Editor - published in the Ridgefield Press on March 21, 2016

At their March 8th meeting, the Selectmen dodged their Charter responsibility by not making a recommendation on the requested 5.72% education budget increase. The Selectmen folded to political pressure from a special interest group representing 20% of our Ridgefield community. 

What ruffles my feathers is that we elect these people to make balanced decisions that affect the entire community. So did they?

Sort-of. By recommending that the mill rate not exceed 3.5%, they were saying that the BoE request was too high.

The question has now moved to the Board of Finance and they should have lots of pointed questions.

I re-read a letter-to-the-editor from 2004. The BoE and it's supporters made the same arguments then: state mandates, special ed, DRG, falling behind and real estate values. 

To begin: real estate values have fallen precipitously since 2004 despite steady increases to the BoE budget year after year -- mostly to support a larger school bureaucracy, more hires, a larger head count. Does this have a familiar ring to it?

About $800,000 of this year's school budget goes to training teachers. Are we hiring the right teachers? I don't understand why the teachers don't contribute to this training.

Nevertheless, over the years, nothing much has changed scholastically in special ed or standard ed. Yet this year the town has cut almost $1,000,000 in the highway department budget and will most likely be expected to cut planned fire fighters. These cuts will affect all of us in order to satisfy an insatiable 20% of the community. Is that a balanced approach?

The town's books are audited annually. Connecticut has an education auditing department. How about using it, Board of Ed? Let's make sure the kids are getting the benefits, not the bureaucracy.

From a strong proponent of great education.

Trickle Down Education - Ridgefield Press, February 25, 2016

Could someone explain to me what has changed in Ridgefield's educational Neverland except the replacement of one superintendent with another?

Specifically, with fewer students to teach, what is the supposed cause for the extraordinary increase now before us after years of reasonable increases? I just want the facts and figures. No educational mumbo jumbo, puleeeze!

Fewer students, possibly one less plant to support but we need more employees? Where's the rationale in that?

Have Ridgefield's children been educationally disadvantaged over the past years? Or is this a political move by our new superintendent, trying to make a statement and a 'name' for herself?

All I know is that beyond a certain point, more money does not equate with a better education -- here or nationally. In my opinion, administrators and teachers have been feathering their nests for far too long in the educational industrial complex. It's more top down economics; the kids get the least benefit.

We need an activist, democratically elected Board of Education, Board of Selectmen and Board of Finance to maintain a fair balance in this town -- as they have demonstrated in the past -- and put a lid on this ridiculous financial flim-flam before it gets out of hand again.

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.