No grant for Simpson Court in Wallingford

As published online at MyRecordJournal.com Thursday, July 11, 2013 11:07 pm

By Andrew Ragali       
Record-Journal staff        
aragali@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224       
Twitter:@AndyRagz

WALLINGFORD — Gov. Dannel P. Malloy announced Thursday that 14 municipalities across the state were awarded a share of the $5 million Main Street Investment Fund. Wallingford, seeking $500,000 from the fund to renovate the Simpson Court parking lot near the intersection of Center and North Main streets, was left off the list.

“We knew it was a competitive grant,” Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr. said after learning the town will not receive the money. “Everyone was not guaranteed money, and I guess quite a few towns did apply. That’s the nature of the process.”

In all, 64 towns submitted projects worth a total of $26 million to the program, but the state only authorized spending $5 million. Not making the cut is “disappointing,” Dickinson said, “but certainly our concerns about the downtown and the needs for improvement here as well as the other facets and locations in town will continue.”

Dimple Desai, community development coordinator for the state’s Office of Policy and Management, said it was “the nature of the application” sent in by Wallingford that prompted the denial. Desai said the application was for maintenance and upkeep of the parking lot. But according to state statute, Desai said, any renovations that are solely the result of a lack of ordinary maintenance can’t be funded by the Main Street Investment Fund.

“It has to be maintained,” Desai said. “This should have been part of ordinary maintenance.”

Desai said a letter penned by three town councilors discrediting the town’s application for the grant had nothing to do with the denial.

“No, those letters were submitted after the application deadline,” Desai said. “Any documentation after the deadline will not be considered.

“To be fair to all, once the deadline was done, that was it,” he said.

Republican Councilor Craig Fishbein joined Democrats Jason Zandri and Nicholas Economopoulos in sending the Nov. 1 letter to the OPM. The town applied for the grant in late September.

“Components of the application do not appear to comply with the grant specifications and should be taken into consideration when reviewing the town’s application,” Fishbein wrote.

After learning why the state denied the town’s application, Zandri said, “That was a lot of the argument we made originally in the letter. ... Craig indicated that.”

Fishbein, in his letter, argued that elements of the Simpson Court project, such as repaving, restriping and new drainage, amount to normal maintenance and should be excluded.

A plan to renovate the parking lot backed by Dickinson, a Republican, and others was defeated in a 2011 referendum. That plan was similar to the one stalled by Thursday’s announcement from the state, but would have been funded through money the municipal Electric Division transfers to the town for capital projects, rather than from a state grant.

In past months, councilors have indicated their concern over the letter sent by Zandri, Fishbein and Economopoulos. In early June, Democrat John Sullivan said, regarding the letter, “I can’t help but feel it’s damaging” to the town’s chances of receiving grant money for the project. In January, Republican Councilor John LeTourneau, a supporter of the grant application, said the councilors are entitled to their opinions but felt the letter was misleading. Councilors found out about the letter in late January. Fishbein said he never intended for the letter, written in October, to be kept private and believed fellow councilors were aware of it when it was sent. But most councilors said they weren’t aware of the letter until the end of January.

“You have to assume it’s not helpful if there’s controversy over a project,” Dickinson said Thursday.

“I stand by my decision to sign that letter,” said Zandri, who is opposing Dickinson in the upcoming mayoral race.

“I had a good feeling about it, but I had no special reason to feel that way,” Town Council Chairman Bob Parisi, a Republican, said of the town’s chances of getting the grant. “The project was needed, well thought-out and well planned. I couldn’t see any reason why we wouldn’t be selected.”

In regard to what happens with the parking lot next, Parisi said, “I think we need to have a chat with the mayor.”

“I’m very disappointed,” LeTourneau said. “If it’s something we should be maintaining, they’re telling us we didn’t maintain it properly. That’s really not good, to lose a grant because we didn’t do what we were supposed to be doing.”

“It’s unfortunate,” Fishbein said, “but certainly I wouldn’t be pointing at the letter. I think the people have spoken through referendum.”

The future of the property may now come down to litigation, in LeTourneau’s opinion.

“It’s not going to go down a good road,” he said. “It’s all going to end up in litigation. That’s the long and short of it.”

“Could it end up in litigation?” Zandri asked. “Absolutely.”

Through a contractual agreement with business owners, upkeep of the lot was the town’s responsibility, Zandri said. “And it’s questionable if that work was done.”

“I don’t know,” said Dickinson when asked if litigation was possible. “Clearly the private property owners there have options that they can pursue.”

From here on out, Dickinson said, the town will have to wait and see what the next step is for the parking lot.

“If everybody can’t sit down and can’t negotiate some peaceful means of repairing the parking lot,” LeTourneau said, “well, then a judge is going to decide.”

Complaint accuses councilors of ties to Holy Trinity School

As published in the Record Journal Friday September 28, 2012

By Laurie Rich Salerno
Record-Journal staff
lsalerno@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2235
Twitter:@LaurieSalernoRJ 

WALLINGFORD — The resident leading the opposition to the town’s plans to repair the Simpson Court parking lot has filed an ethics complaint against two town councilors, saying they should not have discussed issues related to a retaining wall on Holy Trinity School property because of their affiliations with the school.

The retaining wall would be fixed as part of the town’s plan to repair and upgrade the Simpson Court parking lot, if it receives a grant the council approved applying for Tuesday night.

On Sept. 17, Robert Gross filed an ethics complaint with the town’s Board of Ethics and town attorney against Republican Town Councilors Tom Laffin and John LeTourneau. Both dispute Gross’ claims. A Board of Ethics meeting on the issue will be held on Tuesday at 6:30 p.m. in Room 315 at Town Hall.

Gross could not be reached Thursday. LeTourneau said he’d prefer to discuss the matter in detail after the ethics panel meeting, but Laffin spoke freely, saying he felt the complaint was an ill-conceived and poorly researched political play by Gross, a Democrat.

The complaint says Laffin and LeTourneau should not have participated in conversations at two Town Council meetings, one on June 26 and another on Sept. 11, because of their connections to Holy Trinity School.

LeTourneau’s grandchildren attend the school. Though the complaint says that Laffin’s children also do, his 6-year-old son, Jack, only attends first grade Catholic education classes at Holy Trinity School, Laffin said. The classes are provided through Holy Trinity Church, not the school, and take up about an hour a week.

Laffin said he was frustrated that Gross appeared to have made a serious allegation against him without researching it.

“You’re calling into question my ability to serve? You did it based on a misunderstanding? You didn’t confirm (that my son goes to the school)?” Laffin said, adding that that Gross could have called the school or asked around to confirm his son’s involvement. “How am I going to take anything he says in the future seriously?”

The complaint cites the town’s Code of Ethics regarding conflict of interest and disclosure, which says: “No officer or employee shall have any interest, financial or otherwise, direct or indirect, which is in conflict with the proper discharge of his or her official duties or employment. Interest shall be as defined by the Code of Ethics or other ordinances, as may be applicable to an individual case.” The code also requires that officers or employees who believe they have an interest to tell, in writing, “their affiliation to the chairman or agency, commission or board of which he or she is a member.”

In a letter to the Rev. Dean Warburton, chairman of the Board of Ethics, Laffin disputed the charge.“I will in no way, personally and/or exclusively benefit from any decision made by the town on the Holy Trinity wall. I will not receive monetary compensation or elevated status of any sort, should the town be involved in the wall’s repair,” said Laffin’s letter.

“Had I believed even in the slightest that my relationships … have any impact on my decision any more than my decision is impacted by the fact that I am a patron of all of the downtown restaurants and shops, I would have sought the opinion of the Board of Ethics in advance of any discussion or vote involving the wall.

At the June 26 meeting, councilors voted to have the town attorney’s office look into ownership of the wall to see if the town had any liability for it, after building the parking lot above in 1961. Corporation Counsel Janis Small said at the Sept. 11 meeting, that after researching the issue, she had determined the town is not responsible for the wall. The councilors discussed the Simpson Court project, which would include repairs to the wall, at the Sept. 11 meeting for the first time.

LeTourneau and Laffin, along with other councilors, disclosed their relationships with the church and school at the June 26 meeting, with the exception of Laffin’s son’s Catholic education class, because he was not yet enrolled. Laffin said he is a parishioner and had attended Holy Trinity School, LeTourneau said that he is not a parishioner, but his grandchildren attend the school and his daughter is going to be taking a seat on Holy Trinity’s school board.

Republican Councilors Robert Parisi, Rosemary Rascati and Craig Fishbein each declared that they are members of Holy Trinity Church, and others Thursday said that they’ve supported church fundraisers or had connections in the past, including Councilor Nick Economopoulos, a Democrat, whose wife worked as a teacher at the school more than 20 years ago.

Councilors defended their colleagues, many saying that the two have no conflict because they have no direct financial ties to the school, since it’s LeTourneau’s grandchildren, and Laffin’s child’s program is run through the church, not the school. Sister Kathleen Kelly, the school’s principal, confirmed that the Catholic education classes are run by the church, and just the school facility is used.

“He’s not the legal guardian; he did not direct them to go to the school,” said Councilor Vincent Cervoni, a Republican, of LeTourneau and his grandchildren. “I think the allegations are a real stretch, and that there’s an ulterior motive to me.”

Economopoulos, an opponent of the Simpson Court upgrade plan, says he doesn’t have an opinion on the ethics complaint, but he called the complaint more evidence that the parking lot project will pull the town apart.

Wallingford will seek state grant for Simpson Court parking lot

As published in the Record Journal Wednesday September 26, 2012

By Laurie Rich Salerno
Record-Journal staff
lsalerno@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2235
Twitter:@LaurieSalernoRJ 

WALLINGFORD — After lengthy and often contentious periods of public comments at a regular meeting Tuesday, town councilors gave the green light for the town to seek a $500,000 state grant for upgrades to the Simpson Court parking lot.

“I’ve never seen so much energy expelled trying to kill a good project for … Wallingford,” Councilor John Le-Tourneau, a Republican, said of statements by opponents of the plan. “This is the front yard of our town, we have to fix it up. If we do nothing, we will have nothing.”

The council voted 6-2 to allow the town to apply for the grant and again for a separate resolution supporting improvements to the lot, with councilors Nicholas Economopoulos and Jason Zandri, both Democrats, casting the “no” votes. Republican Craig Fishbein, another opponent of the project, was absent. The grant would come from the newly created Main Street Investment Fund that’s administered by the Office of Policy and Management. Friday marks the deadline to submit the grant application. There is no guarantee the town would receive the grant. Projected upgrades include new lighting, a new retaining wall, drainage work, paving and other improvements.

Councilors said they’ve considered the proposal carefully since it was first presented at a Sept. 11 council meeting, with some saying they’ve taken time off from work to research the topic.

The vote followed a lengthy public comment period with both supporters and opponents of the project, and the specter of another referendum loomed large.

Last November, residents rejected a plan approved by the Town Council to use $500,000 in town funds to repair and up-grade the same lot, which is owned by Simpson Court property owners but was built by the town and has been leased year by year by the town since 1961 for public parking.

This year’s plan is similar in scope but differs in funding. Money would come from the state grant, and there would be a $25,000 contribution from each of the four Simpson Court property owners and $10,000 from Holy Trinity School. The Simpson Court owners would receive reimbursement for half the cost, but Holy Trinity would not. If the grant is approved by OPM, the lot would be leased by the town for 30 years.

Despite the difference in funding sources, some say the public still opposes the project.

Resident Robert Gross, who, along with Geno Zandri, led the petition drive to call a referendum last year, asked Town Attorney Gerald Farrell Sr. at the meeting to have paperwork for another referendum ready for residents who “are upset by this and want a referendum.” Last year Gross and Zandri collected more than 2,500 signatures from registered Wallingford voters to force the referendum.

Zandri said the community made its message on the project clear last year, and councilors should reject the new plan.

“Think about who you’re representing in this town — this referendum, the parking lot thing, was definitely overturned overwhelmingly. If you do, you’ll vote this thing down,” Zandri said.

Representatives of business development groups such as Wallingford Center Inc. and the town’s Economic Development Commission overwhelmingly supported the plan, along with several residents.

“This is a community resource, it is not a parking lot,” said EDC Chairman Joe Mirra. “When you take into consideration the amount of world headquarters this town has, Choate right down the block … that parking lot is giving a statement every day.”

Resident Shauna Simon-Glidden said that if the town does not try for the money, it will just go to another area.

“The money’s going to go somewhere. This is going to invest in our town,” Simon-Glidden said. “I think it’s really important to look at some of the surrounding areas where people have to pay for parking — which would be a detriment for Wallingford.”

Resident Richard Caplan said he thinks the town should apply for the grant, but use the funds for the town-owned lots — most notably the lots behind businesses farther down Center Street, where there are more business vacancies, rather than North Main Street properties that he said are doing well.

“This is a matter of priorities. The mayor has found those who need it the least to give the most to,” Caplan said, alleging cronyism among councilors and the mayor. “These are million-dollar properties … we’re going to spend half a million dollars when the town’s parking lots are in such crappy shape.”

“I kind of resent some of the statements that you made, Mr. Caplan,” said Council Chairman Robert Parisi, saying the councilors would vote their consciences — not because of any backroom deals or friendships.

Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr. said that because the town had already done the planning, design and other preparatory work for the Simpson Court site, it was the only project far enough along to be submitted, considering the grant’s time constraints. Town officials say they heard about the grant in late June, but didn’t have details until an early August workshop held by the state.

“We have something that is already designed and there is no way we can put together our grant applications for other sites (in time),” Dickinson said. Upgrading the other parking lots farther down the hill on Center Street would also likely call for public-private partnerships, as the public lots are small and separated by private lots. “Otherwise we’ll be doing little small areas within private areas.”

Other residents asked what would occur if the town received the grants but had hidden costs, or wasn’t given the full amount. Dickinson said the project would not begin if there was not enough money for it — that he wouldn’t supplement with town funds.

Don Roe, of the town’s Program Planning staff, said he believed there was a contingency fund within the cost estimate.

In other business, the council approved a one-year agreement with Local 1183, representing 135 town clerical staff and employees in the Sewer, Engineering, and Public Works departments. The contract comes with a 1.75 percent pay increase, according to Personnel Director Terence Sullivan.

Councilors also approved a transfer that would allocate $100,000 to the town’s Workers’ Compensation reserve account from excess funds from the last fiscal year’s insurance funds for the town and the Board of Education.

Will there be another referendum over a Wallingford parking lot?

As published in the Record Journal Thursday September 27, 2012

By Laurie Rich Salerno
Record-Journal staff
lsalerno@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2235
Twitter:@LaurieSalernoRJ 

WALLINGFORD – The Simpson Court parking lot could be the subject of another referendum, after the Town Council gave town staff the go ahead to apply for a state grant that could provide $500,000 for repairs and upgrades to the site.

Several residents vocally opposed the town’s plans for the lot at Tuesday night’s meeting, and resident Robert Gross requested during public comment that Town Attorney Gerald Farrell Sr. provide him the paperwork to start the referendum procedures.

Gross, along with Geno Zandri, led last year’s fight against the town’s plan to make $500,000 in repairs, using town money, to the privately owned but publicly used Simpson Court lot. The two led a group that gathered more than 2,500 signatures of registered voters on a petition to force a November 2011 referendum. Residents voted down the plan, 4,120-2,768.

In this year’s plan, the repairs would be the same, but the funding source would differ. In a 6-2 vote Tuesday night, the council gave the town the green light to apply for a grant from the state’s Main Street Improvement Fund, administered by the Office of Policy and Management. The town built the lot in 1961 on the land of Simpson Court property owners and has since been leasing it year to year for public parking.

Each of the four Simpson Court property owners would contribute $25,000 toward repairs under the current proposal, with half of that to be reimbursed by money from the grant. Holy Trinity School — which would as part of the project get repairs to a retaining wall on its property — would put in $10,000, without any reimbursement. If improvements are made, the owners would grant the town a 30 year lease.

Gross could not be reached for comment Wednesday, but Geno Zandri said that the group was discussing whether to petition for a referendum now, or wait to see if the town received the money or not. The public would have another chance to oppose the lot improvements if the money came in and the council made a resolution to accept it for use on the lot, Farrell said Tuesday night.

“There’s no doubt in my mind that if they get the grant, there will be a referendum,” Geno Zandri said. “As far as I’m concerned, it’s identical to what we had before. It’s taxpayers’ money no matter where it comes from.”

If residents decide to petition for a referendum on the resolution, they will have 30 days from Wednesday to obtain about 2,460 signatures, or 10 percent of those registered to vote, according to Town Clerk Barbara Thompson.

From there, the names need to be authenticated by the clerk’s office, Corporation Counsel Janis Small said. Then, councilors would have another meeting in which they would be given the opportunity to repeal their vote. If they choose not to, an election must be held within 60 days, Small said.

The last referendum cost the town about $30,000 to pay for ballots, installation of phones, poll workers, costs of renting special trucks for deliveries and other costs, Republican Registrar of Voters Chet Miller said.

It would be “a couple of months at least,” before a vote would be held, according to Small.

At the meeting, some councilors said they felt some residents who signed last year’s petition and some who voted had been provided misinformation or partial information by people working to overturn the decision.

John Sullivan, a Democrat, said Wednesday that he had seen this first hand at last year’s Celebrate Wallingford.

“What I have a problem with is when people don’t tell residents, voters, the facts. I’m sure that the greater majority of those soliciting told the truth and answered questions honestly,” Sullivan said. “However, I witnessed several instances where the solicitor was not telling the truth.”

He said he heard a solicitor embellish the plan in speaking to residents, saying there were connections between councilors and the mayor and the business owners at the site, and that he shouldn’t trust Sullivan when he came up to talk to him.

Geno Zandri denied Sullivan’s claim. “We were above board on everything we did,” he said. Zandri did say some voters may have been confused when voting because people had to vote yes to say that they didn’t want the project.

Though confusing to some, the wording was done by statute, Small said. Residents were voting to repeal a resolution, not voting in favor of something, she said. So residents were voting “Yes” to repeal the council’s decision to repair the lot, not “yes” for repairs on the lot.

Town Councilor Jason Zandri, a Democrat, who was one of two “no” votes on the mayor’s proposal on Tuesday, said he thinks it would be logical for those interested in holding a referendum to wait to see if the town receives the money or not. Jason Zandri is Geno Zandri’s son, and was heavily involved in the last referendum, before he was elected a town councilor.

Jason Zandri said he figured the Tuesday vote would go as it did. “I think everybody up there voted their conscience,” Zandri said.

He said he thinks the approval sets a bad precedent for future public-private parking lot repair projects.

Tom Laffin, a Republican, said it all comes down to the perception of the Simpson Court parking lot, saying these projects should not be portrayed as spending public money on private land.

“We’re going to lease it — in a sense we legally own it for 30 years,” Laffin said. “You can’t make the argument that it’s private property.”

The town clerk’s office and the Law Department each said no one had been by to pick up the paperwork for a petition as of late afternoon Wednesday.

Wallingford – Editorial Cartoon for Sunday / Editorial - Of lot and wall

Regarding the decaying retaining wall delineating Wallingford’s Simpson Court parking lot from Holy Trinity School playground, a fundamental question emerges: Who built it?

Perhaps, as Jeff Danziger’s editorial cartoon below avers, “We the People built it.”

This much-ballyhooed wall — technically determined to be on school owned property — was built by people who, at the time, took ownership for its raison d’être and subsequent construction. Then, as now, people are responsible for maintaining its structural integrity — defining anew its integral role in assuring safety and stability.

There is much riding on this behemoth of a wall other than sheer mass of density related to that which it retains. Children play here. Simpson Court parking lot’s physical stability is upheld. It’s a location with hybrid purpose — private/ commercial, with added benefit of municipal parking.

It can either become a protracted thorny-thicket topic (depending on one’s political/philosophical stripes) or, as columnist Steven Knight suggests in his “From Wallingford” commentary on this page, a let’s-make-hay-while-the-sun- shines opportunity for resolution.

Wedding a much-needed rehab of the parking lot to its abutting wall described above manifestly makes sense. In our news story of September 13, we noted that Wallingford built this lot and has leased it from businesses for public parking since 1961 for a nominal fee. A plan to upgrade the lot using $500,000 of town money last year was denied implementation by voters in a November referendum. Under the new plan, state funds would cover most costs — Simpson Court commercial property owners would pay $20,000 for the project and be reimbursed half, while Holy Trinity School, which abuts the lot westerly, would pay $10,000, receiving no reimbursement.

Sunlight for municipal hay, in this case, is afforded by what may indeed prove a providential state grant whose purpose and mission dovetail propitiously with town needs. It’s title — Main Street Investment Fund — is quintessentially appropriate for this off-Main project. It’s money intended for projects which improve local commercial centers: stimulating new businesses while keeping centers attractive to shoppers.

By all means, both private and public, keep Simpson Court’s vicinity attractive . . . and safe.

Town Council and civic debate over a multi-pronged proposition involving private, commercial, town and church entities seeking proper conclusion to a mutually- shared problem is, quite naturally, expected. At the end of the day (and before Knight’s cows come home), taking full advantage of a loan with limited shelf life is compelling — especially since safety and security are elements amplifying the percussive tick of Wallingford’s agenda clock.

We urge that reasonable accommodation and prudence guide this project (without rancor) to satisfactory conclusion while that sun shines, but before municipal cows come home.

Simpson lot owners have ‘skin in the game’

As published in the Record Journal Friday September 14, 2012

By Laurie Rich Salerno
Record-Journal staff
lsalerno@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2235
Twitter:@LaurieSalernoRJ

WALLINGFORD - Some Simpson Court property owners are looking to dispel negative notions about their long-term agreement with the town to provide public parking in their back lots.

This week, some town councilors said the property owners would get a cushy deal if the town pursued a state grant for $500,000 for maintenance and upgrades, including lighting, to the parking lot behind Simpson Court.

In the plan, the owners would also put in $20,000 each for the work and be reimbursed $10,000. The grant allows for this type of public-private partnership. The project would also expand the public parking area from the current 60 or so feet at the back of the lot to encompass more of the until- now privately used part of the lot, and upgrade the whole area. The council is expected to vote Sept. 25 on whether to allow town staff to submit a grant application. “They get their property completely refurbished. Every other business in this town collects their rent, puts some of this aside for maintenance and upkeep — these businesses don’t have to,” Town Councilor Jason Zandri, a Democrat, said at Tuesday night’s council meeting.

But some Simpson Court property owners say the project is a way for the town to make up for the years it has neglected the lot.

“The lot is really too far gone to do regular maintenance,” said Mary Pimentel, part owner of North Main Street Realty, which has owned buildings at 36-40 N. Main St. since 1985.

The town built the parking lot on Simpson Court property in 1961. Since then, it has leased the lot from property owners on a year-to-year basis for $1, and in the agreements has said it would provide maintenance on the lot.

But aside from yearly snowplowing, Pimentel hasn’t seen any repairs done on the lot since she purchased the property, she said.

While several councilors have been talking about making sure owners have “skin in the game” by putting more money into the upgrades, Pimentel said the owners already have made a major investment.

“Our stance is we do have ‘skin in the game;’ our skin is the property,” Pimentel said. “We own that property, we pay taxes on the property, we don’t get any money at all. Their payment is that they will maintain the property.”

The five properties have four owners: North Main Street Realty, F&M Bank Wallingford LLC, Masonic Temple Corp., and Fred Ulbrich Jr.

Ron Hansen, president of Masonic Compass Lodge No. 9, which owns 48 N. Main St., said that if the application for the grant is rejected by the council, he may talk with other property owners about filing a lawsuit. Despite property owners’ paying taxes on the property since 1961, the town hasn’t held up its end of the bargain, he said.

“The town never maintained the property. Now it’s in disrepair all these years later,” Hansen said. He said he and other Masons constantly pick up trash and pluck sumac trees that take root in the lot. But he said that in the past few months, the town’s Public Works Department has come in and filled some holes and made other repairs that stanched the growth. Hansen said that work is the only time he’s seen the town do anything on the parking lot.

The owners of F&M and Ulbrich could not be reached Thursday for comment.

Both Hansen and Pimentel said the town had been talking with property owners about making major repairs and upgrades to the lot since 1999, and plans had been in place a long time, until they were knocked down in a November 2011 referendum that some believe was stoked by partisan politics in an election year.

After the referendum, Jack McGuire, owner of two of the four properties, pulled out of the longstanding lease agreement and made his portion of the lot private.

Dickinson said he hopes the outcome is different this time. “This has been public parking since 1961. To have it not be public parking — I’m concerned that it will have a negative effect,” Dickinson said. “We’re actually losing parking, that is a concern to me.”

He rejects the idea that the town has not maintained the lot, saying that much of the lot that is in poor condition is the private portion.

“Look at all the lumps and bumps: A lot of that isn’t the town’s,” Dickinson said. “It’s another of the complexities of this, with all the variables that can certainly affect a person’s perceptions.”

Councilor Craig Fishbein, a Republican, said Thursday that he would likely be in favor of having the town resurface the lot, but he’s not in favor of the major upgrades such as lighting and the reconstruction of a retaining wall on the lot. For those types of improvements, he said, the town should ask for $50,000 from each property owner and $100,000 from Holy Trinity School for the retaining wall determined to be on the school’s property.

“What I have said from the very beginning of this — their contribution should be the same as the town’s. If they don’t have the money, we put liens on the property that are payable over 30 years,” Fishbein said. He said he could see another referendum vote coming the town’s way if it submits the grant and receives the funding.

WALLINGFORD - Simpson lot plan: ‘Deja vu,’ some say

As published in the Record Journal Wednesday September 12, 2012

By Laurie Rich Salerno
Record-Journal staff
lsalerno@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2235
Twitter:@LaurieSalernoRJ

WALLINGFORD - Town councilors argued with town staff Tuesday night about a proposal to apply for a state grant to repair the Simpson Court parking lot, with councilors calling the conversation “deja vu.”

“It’s actually a slap in the face to our taxpayers, who resoundingly defeated the last plan,” said Councilor Craig Fishbein, a Republican, referring to a previous Simpson Court lot upgrade proposal using solely town funds that was overturned in a referendum last November.

Councilors are expected to vote on whether to apply for the grant at their next meeting, on Sept. 25. There is no assurance that the town, if it applies, will get the grant.

Tuesday night, the mayor and town staff presented two items related to the Simpson Court lot: Corporation Counsel Janis Small’s opinion that the town is not liable for repairing a deteriorating retaining wall for the lot that abuts Holy Trinity School, and a plan to repair the wall and make other improvements to the lot by applying for a $500,000 state grant.

Town Engineer John Thompson and Small explained why they believe the retaining wall was not built by the town. They said that architectural plans for a 1961 Parking Authority project that created the Simpson Court lot — or rather, extended an existing lot — mention an existing concrete retaining wall. Holy Trinity school officials and others had speculated that the town had built the wall during the construction of the lot.

“Based on examination of these documents, it’s very clear to me that the wall existed in 1960-1961,” Thompson said.

After reading the bid documents from the 1961 project provided by the town and a letter from land surveyor Rosalind Page — commissioned by the school to look at the documents — that said the town built the wall, Councilor John LeTourneau, a Republican, disagreed with that conclusion.

“I think there’s a lot of work that still needs to be done to this,” LeTourneau said, explaining that a number of questions still need answers.

The discussion moved on to the repair project.

Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr. presented his plan to have town staff apply for a $500,000 grant from the Main Street Investment Fund grant program, through the state Office of Policy and Management. The grant would pay for repairs to the retaining wall and other improvements to the lot, which is owned by abutting business owners but has been leased to the town annually for public parking since the 1960s.

Sept. 28 is the deadline to apply for the grant. Abutting property owners would be expected to pay $20,000 for repairs to the lot and would be reimbursed $10,000 through the grant money. Holy Trinity School would be asked to pay $10,000 and would not be reimbursed.

“It really means an improvement of the area, making it safer, providing lights, amenities, really an extension of the streetscape program on Center and Main Street,” Dickinson said.

Three councilors — Democrats Jason Zandri and Nick Economopoulos and Fishbein — opposed applying for the grant, saying the new plan was a rehash of the town’s proposal of a year ago.

Fishbein asked Dickinson why the town would choose to use the grant funding for just the Simpson Court property and no other lots, mentioning a March letter from Wallingford Center Inc. that said repairing town-owned parking lots is one of the town’s top priorities for downtown businesses.

Dickinson said that surveys and plans for the Simpson lot were already in place, and that the town would not be able to do the same preliminary work in time to meet the deadline on other parking lots.

“We will not qualify for it trying to suddenly do some work on other areas that have not been surveyed,” Dickinson said. “It takes six months or more to put together a project plan.” Dickinson said the town became aware of the grant in August. Zandri said the town should ask for more money from abutting businesses.

“They get their property completely refurbished. Every other business in this town collects their rent, puts some of this aside for maintenance and upkeep — these businesses don’t have to,” Zandri said.

Councilor Tom Laffin said the council should discuss appropriate fees for the business owners, but said he felt it was important for the town to retain and upgrade the lot.

“It needs to be easier to go out — downtown needs to be easier,” Laffin said.

Ron Hansen, president of the local Masonic Temple, which is one of the surrounding property owners, asked the council whether each business’ property used by the town since 1961 was taxed by the town. Dickinson said it was, but that he did not know at what rate.

Then, Hansen said, “Was it really in fact a free lease?” Hanson supported the town’s bid for a grant.

In other business, the council approved the Board of Education’s contract with its school nurses 6-1 with Economopoulos opposed. The contract runs from July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2015, and gives the nurses a 1.5 percent-plus-increment wage increase the first year, and a 1 percent-plus increment increase for each of the second and third years of the contract.

Little time to apply, so councilors suspicious

As published in the Record Journal Thursday September 13, 2012

By Laurie Rich Salerno
Record-Journal staff
lsalerno@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2235
Twitter:@LaurieSalernoRJ

WALLINGFORD - At the center of the Town Council’s current debate on rehabbing the parking lot behind Simpson Court is a state grant — town officials said they acted on it quickly once they learned of its availability, but some councilors believe it could have been looked into earlier.

Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr. sent a letter to the Town Council last week asking it to allow the town to apply for a $500,000 state grant to repair and upgrade the privately owned parking lot behind businesses on Simpson Court. The application is due Sept. 28, and councilors are slated to vote on pursuing the grant at their Sept. 25 meeting.

The town built the lot and has leased it from the businesses for public parking since 1961 for a nominal fee. A plan to upgrade the lot using $500,000 of town money last year was shot down by voters in a November referendum. Under the new plan, the state funds would cover most of the cost, and Simpson Court commercial property owners would pay $20,000 for the project and be reimbursed half, while Holy Trinity School, which abuts the lot to the west, would pay $10,000 and receive no reimbursement.

The grant in question is part of a newly established Main Street Investment Fund. The fund was created as part of a state legislative business incentive package called the Act Promoting Economic Growth and Job Creation in the State, and was signed into law in late 2011. The fund is expected to provide $5 million in municipal and private business grants in fiscal year 2012-13 and another $5 million in 2013-14. The top amount a grantee can receive is $500,000.

The money is intended to go toward town projects that help improve local commercial centers to attract new businesses and keep the centers attractive to shoppers. Examples of projects include streetscapes, decorative lighting, landscaping and cosmetic and structural building improvements, according to a fact sheet for the program.

“It’s to promote business in town commercial centers — if there are sidewalks that are falling apart or if you have a green that is unmaintained, that is not attractive for businesses to come in and expand,” said Dimple Desai, community development director for the Office of Policy and Management. Desai administers the fund.

This month is the fund’s first deadline for grant applications, Desai said. She said she did not know how many organizations would apply, or whether there would be more than one opportunity to apply in this fiscal year.

Some Wallingford councilors criticized the mayor Tuesday night for mentioning the grant with less than a month to apply, saying the town was purposely creating an urgent deadline situation to push through a pet project.

When asked Tuesday why they chose Simpson Court, town staff said that having little time to apply meant the town could only seek funds for already well-planned and surveyed downtown projects — Simpson Court, they said, was the only parking lot that had all the preliminary work completed.

Councilor Nick Economopoulos, a Democrat, said Wednesday by phone he felt the mayor neglected other possible projects and purposely shortened the deadline with the mindset of, “How can I do this instead to get what I really want done?” He also said that he was rebuffed when he asked the town for proof of when it received information on the grant.

The town’s program planner, Don Roe, who is in charge of writing and obtaining grants for the town, said the first he’d seen of the grant was a press release that came out in June, but he and other municipal officials got details of the grant in one of five workshops OPM held in late July and early August.

Desai and OPM literature both corroborate the time of the initial press release and the grant workshops.

“We waited for the workshops; there was that recognition this was a new initiative from them, that a lot of questions were getting asked, from staff people in communities near and far,” Roe said. He attended an Aug. 3 workshop, he said, and brought the information back to the town, heartened that the grant addressed partnerships between municipalities and private businesses. “I think there’s a clear recognition that downtowns take a collaborative effort — it’s not something that’s exclusively government, and not something that’s exclusively private,” Roe said. The grant application requires that town government leaders officially approve the project prior to submission. And one portion says it has to have local and regional support.

Economopoulos said the project doesn’t have public support, evidenced by voters quashing the initial project in referendum.

Desai said local and regional support means the town has already allocated funds to the project or other phases of the project, or planning and zoning has approved it.

When asked whether having a contentious project such as Wallingford’s with a previous referendum vote against it would hurt the town’s chances, Desai said she couldn’t comment on specific cases.

“We’ll review everything, make sure that everybody complies with what is required with the statutes,” Desai said.

Either way, Roe said he would mention the referendum in the grant proposal, if town staff end up getting the OK from the council to submit it. “I think the interest has been to put together a proposal that is quantitatively different than the past one, but still looks to address what are critical issues for downtown and downtown’s vitality,” Roe said.

As for the town’s chances to get the grant if they apply? Dickinson said he felt they were good.

“The support for a number of different elements are good, it’s a commercial area, it’s also got a school, I think that makes it a bit interesting,” Dickinson said.

Lot of contention over lot repair plans

Wallingford council likely to discuss new idea tonight

As published in the Record Journal Tuesday September 11, 2012

By Laurie Rich Salerno
Record-Journal staff
lsalerno@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2235
Twitter:@LaurieSalernoRJ

WALLINGFORD - Nearly a year after voters knocked down a plan for the town to repair the parking lot behind Simpson Court, town officials are pitching another idea: using state funding. But some town councilors feel it’s just last year’s plan repackaged.

During tonight’s meeting, the Town Council is expected to discuss Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr.’s proposal to apply for a $500,000 state grant to repair the privately owned but publicly used lot behind the buildings along Simpson Court with access from Center Street.

Voters overwhelmingly rejected a plan last November that would have allowed the town to make $500,000 worth of repairs to the lot, which the town has leased for public parking from surrounding business owners since 1961. The town has hoped to make the investment and maintain the lot in exchange for a 30year lease.

“This has already been brought forward to the residents. The council pushed it through and the residents pushed back. Now all this is doing is coming back. It’s under the guise of a state grant,” said Councilor Jason Zandri, a Democrat, Monday. Zandri has written two columns adamantly opposing public funding for the lot in his blog over the last week.

But Dickinson said the proposal differs from last year’s bid.

“It’s not the same project. It’s financed differently,” Dickinson said. Instead of having all repairs paid by the town, if Wallingford gets the grant, the repairs would be paid for both by the state and by owners of abutting properties. The state money would come through the Main Street Investment Fund grant program, administered by the Office of Policy and Management. The deadline to apply for the grant is Sept. 28.

According to the proposal, property owners would be asked to contribute $20,000 to the project and receive $10,000 in reimbursement from the state funding. Owners include F&M Bank Wallingford LLC, Masonic Temple Corp., Fred Ulbrich Jr., Gail DeBaise, Barbara Farrell, Mary Lee Pimental and North Main Street Realty. Holy Trinity School would be asked to pay just $10,000, and wouldn’t receive any reimbursement.

The money would go to what some say are much needed repairs. This includes fixing a concrete retaining wall on the property of Holy Trinity School, which administrators say is falling apart. The school came to the council on June 26 to ask if they would help fund repairs to the wall since Holy Trinity administrators believe the town built the wall and lot, though no documentation to that effect has been found.

After being assigned by the council in June to look into the issue, Town Attorney Janis Small said in a letter provided to the council last week that the town has no liability for the wall.

Zandri wants to see a case study done on the lot to see how many people actually use it and if they would be just as well served using the free parking at Town Hall, or some of the other sites throughout town. He said he counted more than 600 open spaces in the downtown area over the weekend.

“There are plenty of spaces. There’s demand 12 times a year,” Zandri said, noting town center concerts and other special events. “Any other time, the Town Hall parking lot is wide open.”

Zandri said he’d like to see the money go to the lots the town owns outright.

Town Councilor John Le-Tourneau, a Republican, disagreed, saying that he’d driven downtown one night this weekend and every lot was packed, with cars even parked on the Wooding-Caplan property which has not yet been paved.

Dickinson said he believes keeping the Simpson lot open is vital to downtown.

“Without the public parking, the businesses don’t get clientele and the businesses start closing. It’s not a good situation for the entire community,” Dickinson said.

LeTourneau said he hasn’t made a decision on the proposal, and would wait until the council discusses it tonight.

Vinny Cervoni, a Republican councilor, said he thinks the town’s new plan is good — with business owners putting in for costs this time around. And it’s necessary, he said, since the town’s lease agreements with the businesses to use the lot say the business owners have to maintain it.

“It puts skin in the game for them,” Cervoni said. “I think it’s an attempt to solve the problem and reduce the direct exposure to the town taxpayers.”

Councilor Craig Fishbein, also a Republican, opposes the plan, saying the money is still coming from taxpayers, and that the town should focus its energies on the Wooding-Caplan property, where the town plans to create a 100-space temporary lot this fall.

Cervoni said the state money comes from Wallingford residents, but that he has no jurisdiction over those taxes.

“Sitting on the Town Council, I have no control over state or federal taxation of us. If there is money out there that will provide benefit to the town without directly impacting the taxpayers — I think we have an obligation to look at that money,” he said.

Photo courtesy of Dave Zajac / Record-Journal

Children play near a deteriorating retaining wall in the parking lot at Holy Trinity School Monday. Wallingford’s Town Council is expected to discuss a new proposal for fixing up the lot. Unlike one voters rejected last November, this one calls for the use of state grant money.

Holy Trinity School officials seek plan to repair retaining wall

As published in the Record Journal Saturday June 23, 2012

By Russell Blair
Record-Journal staff
rblair@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2225

WALLINGFORD - Holy Trinity School officials will go before the Town Council Tuesday, asking to work with the town to repair a wall that borders the school’s playground.

The wall was constructed in the early 1960s, when a parking lot was built behind the businesses on Simpson Court. The town leased the lot for 40 years on the condition that the town would maintain the property and that it would be kept open for municipal parking.

The council voted last summer to spend up to $500,000 to improve the parking lot, including the reconstruction of the wall, but the deal was rejected by voters at a town-wide referendum in November.

One property owner backed out of the original lease agreements after the vote, but the town still leases the remainder of the lot. Some school officials believe that the town has been negligent in its maintenance of the wall during the time of the leases.

Sister Kathleen Kelly, principal of Holy Trinity School, said the meeting was called so town officials could “see the importance of taking responsibility of the maintenance” of the wall.

“The integrity of the wall was not maintained during the time it was leased,” she said.

Kelly said that there were no safety issues “at this time,” but she wanted to safeguard against any potential issues.

Town Engineer John Thompson said that he could find no reference to maintaining the wall in the original 1961lease agreements between the town and the property owners on Simpson Court, and that repairs included in the project proposed last summer were a safeguard because of the work being done to the parking lot above.

“We were investing several hundred thousand dollars,” he said. “My recommendation was that with that kind of money, we should make certain that the investment was properly supported.”

Thompson said that engineers assessed the wall and found “visible deterioration” in a number of locations, but that the wall, as a whole, “was not structurally deficient.”

“There are no imminent safety issues,” he said.

In a letter to Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr., the Rev. Thomas J. Walsh, pastor at Holy Trinity Church, said the wall was inspected six years ago and determined to be “in need of some repair.”

“We note that the wall is aging,”he wrote. “There are cracks showing, and periodically, portions of the wall break off and fall in the school playground. The fence that is embedded in the top of the wall is contributing to its deterioration. Water is getting into the wall and causing damage.”

Corporation Counsel Janis Small said the wall is on church property, but since it borders the town-leased parking lot “the issue appears to be complicated.”

“We’ll start a new dialogue and see where it goes,” she said. “If it’s somebody else’s wall, I believe the owner has some responsibility. We have to sort it all out and hopefully we can be on the same page.”

Walsh wrote that the wall is not necessary for Holy Trinity, and that it only serves to support the parking lot.

“We believe that the town, the adjacent property owners and Most Holy Trinity should come to an agreement setting forth the rights and responsibilities of each in regard to the wall before there is a need for emergency repairs or before there is further damage.”

Town Council Chairman Robert Parisi, a Republican,said he placed the Holy Trinity item on the agenda after he received the same letter addressed to Dickinson.

“We don’t turn very many people away,” he said.

Dickinson said that he hadn’t yet formed an opinion as to what the town’s responsibility was in maintaining the wall.

“I’ll hear what they have to say, and if they have questions or concerns, we’ll look to obtain answers,” he said. “I don’t want to form too many opinions before I hear their concerns.”

Photos by Dave Zajac / Courtesy of the Record-Journal

Views from a distance and up close Friday of the wall in disrepair between the Simpson Court parking lot and Holy Trinity School in Wallingford.

McGuire’s letter to Holy Trinity

As published in the Record Journal on Saturday January 28, 2012

Editor’s note: This is the text of a letter sent by Ferguson & McGuire to Holy Trinity School:

January 4, 2012 We regret to advise you that as of this date, we will no longer be able to allow your parishioners, faculty and parents to use our parking lot located behind TD Bank at 6-28 North Main Street.

Because of the town referendum, this property is considered private and no longer a municipal parking lot. Accordingly, our insurance company does not want us to assume liability for any accidents that may occur on the parking lot property. When the lot was considered public, the Town of Wallingford assumed all responsibility for accidents and agreed to hold Ferguson & McGuire harmless for accidents that happened on it. This is not the case at this time.

When the lot was considered municipal, it worked well for all of us, and we were in favor of it remaining that way and being expanded by the town. Unfortunately, that cannot happen at this time. Also, the Town was supposed to maintain the lot, and as you know, other than plowing it, they have not done so.

We hope that you will advise the Mayor and Town Council about your need for parking in the Simpson Court area and request that they reinstate our lot as a municipal facility.

Yours very truly, Ferguson & McGuire, Inc.

Jack McGuire, Chairman John McGuire, President Christopher McGuire, Vice-President

No parking, McGuire tells Holy Trinity

As published in the Record Journal on Saturday January 28, 2012

By Russell Blair
Record-Journal staff
rblair@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2225

WALLINGFORD — In a letter to Holy Trinity School officials earlier this month, Jack McGuire wrote that he would no longer let the church use the portion of his parking lot behind the businesses on Simpson Court. “We regret to advise you that as of this date, we will no longer be able to allow your parishioners, faculty and parents to use our parking lot located behind TD Bank at 6-28 North Main Street,” McGuire wrote in the Jan. 4 letter.

McGuire, who is in Florida, did not respond to a request for comment.

A November referendum overturned the Town Council’s decision to spend up to $500,000 to improve the parking lot behind the businesses on Simpson Court in exchange for keeping the lot public.

When the new lease agreement with owners of the four properties abutting the lot was reversed in the town-wide vote, the town and the property owners reverted to a year-to-year agreement already in place that offered public parking in exchange for plowing and other maintenance by the town.

McGuire, CEO of local insurance company Ferguson & McGuire, owns two of the four properties on Simpson Court through a limited liability company, one at 2 N. Main St. and another at 26 N. Main St. He filed his notice to quit the year-to-year agreement in 2009. Shortly after that, he withdrew his notice orally, but not in writing.

“Because of the town’s referendum, this property is considered private and no longer a municipal parking lot,” McGuire wrote. “Accordingly, our insurance company does not want us to assume liability for any accidents that may occur on the parking lot property.”

Christine Mansfield, chairwoman of the Holy Trinity School board, said the loss of parking has had an impact on the school.

“I think the effect has been tragic and disappointing,” said Mansfield, also a member of the Board of Education. “A winter scenario can only exasperate the problem. Until a solution is in place, we’re putting the kids at risk.”

An article in the Record-Journal last week said that McGuire had closed his lot to municipal parking. But John Le-Tourneau, a Republican town councilor who owns Wallingford Lamp & Shade on Center Street, has said he’s still seen people parked there when the businesses are closed. “I expect people to continue to park there because they have for years,” LeTourneau said. “It’s posted, but the lot is not shut down.”

McGuire wrote that he was in favor of the new lease agreement, and wanted to see the parking lot improvements go through.

“When the lot was considered municipal, it worked well for all of us, and we were in favor of it remaining that way and being expanded by the town,” McGuire wrote. “Unfortunately, that cannot happen at this time. Also, the town was supposed to maintain the lot, and as you know, other than plowing it, they have not done so.” McGuire said school officials should “advise the mayor and Town Council about your need for parking in the Simpson Court area and request that they reinstate our lot as a municipal facility.” Mansfield said that the church has been adjusting by having members park farther down in the public portion of the lot, or by trying to find parking on the street. But on-street parking is limited to two hours, she said.

A line has been drawn in the lot by the town and signs have been moved to demarcate the lot, but some people Friday were continuing to park in McGuire’s portion of the lot — behind TD Bank and the Body and Soul Day Spa. There is no physical barrier to keep parkers from using McGuire’s lot.

McGuire has said before he would consider restrictions on his portion of the parking area. “My response would be to treat my property as private property and restrict it to people who use my buildings, period,” McGuire said in August, when asked of his plans if the parking lot deal fell through. “Why should I be maintaining the property for other people? If the town is not going to come in and maintain it as a public parking lot, then I’m going to treat it as a private parking lot.”

The remainder of the municipal parking lot is behind Gaetano’s Tavern, the Masonic Temple building and the old library building at 60 N. Main St. Corporation Counsel Janis Small said no other property owners have filed the required one-year notice to quit the year-to-year agreement.

Insurance company closes its portion of Simpson Court parking lot to public

By Russell Blair
Record-Journal staff
rblair@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2225

WALLINGFORD — Two months after a referendum overturned the Town Council’s decision to spend up to $500,000 to improve the parking lot behind the businesses on Simpson Court in exchange for keeping the lot public, one property owner has made good on his promise to close his portion of the lot to municipal parking.

When the new lease agreement with owners of the four properties abutting the lot was reversed, the town and the property owners reverted to a year-to-year agreement already in place that offered public parking in exchange for plowing and other maintenance by the town.

Jack McGuire, CEO of local insurance company Ferguson and McGuire, owns two of the four properties through a limited liability company, one at 2 N. Main St. and another at 26 N. Main St. He filed his notice to quit the year-to-year agreement in 2009. Shortly after that, he withdrew his notice orally, but not in writing.

“My response would be to treat my property as private property and restrict it to people who use my buildings, period,” McGuire said in August, when asked of his plans if the parking lot deal fell through. “Why should I be maintaining the property for other people? If the town is not going to come in and maintain it as a public parking lot, then I’m going to treat it as a private parking lot.”

McGuire was in Florida on Thursday and could not be reached for comment. But lines drawn on the asphalt at Simpson Court and new parking signs make it clear that the lot has been divided between private and public.

At the point where McGuire’s property ends is painted a white line, with “town” written on one side, and “private” written on the other. Public parking signs which used to sit alongside Center Street near the entrance of the parking lot have been moved to the property line, with arrows designating that public parking begins on the portion of the lot behind Gaetano’s Tavern on Main, 40 N. Main St.

Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr. said that McGuire contacted the town and requested that the Police Department move the signs last week.

“The signs were moved so it was clear that it was private,” he said. “He’s absolutely free to do that, he canceled the lease.”

It’s unclear what, if any, enforcement action McGuire will take against stray parkers, but Dickinson noted that, on private property, “the owner can have those cars towed.”

If any of the other businesses were to consider charging or limiting access to the lot, they would have to give the town a one-year notice.

Closing off the parking lot could also jeopardize a right of way that has existed between Center and Church streets, traveling through the lot and behind the buildings.

Dickinson said that McGuire has “expressed his consideration of closing that off.”

In a tough economy, Dickinson said losing any municipal parking “hurts the downtown area.”

“There’s no question it’s not a good direction,” he said. “Any change that can be potentially a discouragement to frequent an area is a natural subject of concern.”

Dickinson said that after Monday night’s snowstorm, the town did not plow McGuire’s lot.

Robert Gross, a resident who has run unsuccessfully for the council, started a petition drive a day after the council’s decision, raising the 2,491 signatures needed to force the referendum. Gross declined to comment Thursday on McGuire’s decision.

Nicholas Economopoulos, a Democratic councilor who worked with Gross on the petition, said Thursday he had no comment on McGuire’s decision beyond the fact that it “showed his character.”

“It makes me feel good that we didn’t go into a partnership with him,” he said.

Dickinson said that the full impact of the referendum vote hasn’t likely been seen.

“The potential for a more dramatic shutoff (of the lot) hasn’t been realized,” he said.

POLL RESULTS - How much should the town be responsible for regarding Wallingford Center Parking?

Sixty votes in total. This is the sentiment of just those 60 respondents for whatever it is worth.

The majority of the respondents in this poll felt that if Wallingford is going to make any type of investment it should be as close to equal as the property owners

Obviously this is not a full representation of the wishes of the voters.

The referendum, just six days after the municipal election, drew 6,888 voters, with 2,768 in favor of the lease and 4,120 against.

There is no way to say just what the nearly 6,900 voters would want unless you could poll them all.

I do expect this issue to come up again so with that I will be trying to solicit the input of the voters and I will be reaching out to try to do that.

For those that would be willing to proactively reach out to me I can be reached at Jason@Zandri.net or by phone at 860 614 6069

Last day for the poll - How much should the town be responsible for regarding Wallingford Center Parking?

Cast your vote at http://wallingfordpolitico.blogspot.com/

100 percent of the cost
75 percent / 25 percent should come from the property owner
50 percent / 50 percent should come from the property owner
25 percent / 75 percent should come from the property owner
zero; all of the costs should come from the property owner. It is their property

Fishbein broke from party line

As published in the Record Journal Monday November 21, 2011

By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD — One of the most high-profile opponents of a Republican-backed parking lot lease agreement was a Republican town councilor, Craig Fishbein.

Fishbein campaigned against the agreement despite the possibility of upsetting his fellow Republicans. He found himself on the winning side last Monday when residents rejected the deal in decisive fashion.

Elected to his second term on the council this month, Fishbein aspires to higher office.

Asked if he was considering a run for state representative next fall, Fishbein did not rule it out. He lives in the 85th House District and would be running for a seat Democrat Mary M. Mushinsky has held since 1980.

“At some point in my life, if the stars are aligned, I would have to say yes,” he said. “At this exact point, I have my role, as frustrating as it is to act it and stay in, I have my role. Six months from now is when I’ll start to actively think about it; that district is very tough.”

Mushinsky, 60, is a lifelong Wallingford resident who, like Fishbein, voted to repeal the controversial parking agreement.

“I was changing my mind even as I was walking up the driveway to the voting place,” she said. “I think it’s critical to have a lively downtown, and that was weighing in my mind, but so was the apparently one-sided nature of the deal.”

The 30-year arrangement between the town and commercial property owners on North Main Street stipulated that up to half a million dollars from an Electric Division fund for nonrecurring projects would be used to upgrade the privately owned lot with assurances that it would remain available for free public use for the life of the lease.

Fishbein and other lease opponents said it is inappropriate for the town to spend public money on private property. The one-issue referendum drew 28 percent of eligible voters to the polls. In comparison, 39.8 percent of voters turned out for the municipal election just a week earlier.

“I think we need to look at a differently structured deal, and find another way to make the parking happen that’s more acceptable to taxpayers and keep these downtown merchants satisfied,” Mushinsky said. “It would be really tragic if they started charging for parking.”

---

Bob Stern / Record-Journal
Craig Fishbein, carrying a sign opposing the parking lot lease agreement last Monday, talks with with voter Carole Koty outside the polling place at Lyman Hall High School. Fishbein is a Town Council Republican, but he broke with his party on the lease issue.

She said she had heard that Fishbein might run against her next year.

“No matter; I put my record out and I run on my record,” she said.

Fishbein and Democratic Town Councilor Nicholas Economopoulos voted against the agreement when it came before the council. Economopoulos announced at a Democratic Town Committee meeting last week that he plans to run for mayor in two years.

Fishbein said his position on the issue was not politically motivated. “I just thought it was the right thing to do,” he said.

“People have to understand that I am not a politician. That’s not my base,” he said. “I don’t usually do things with ulterior motives.

I usually tackle issues as they come to me. I wasn’t even on the Republican Town Committee when I was elected in 2009.”

Fishbein, 46, has been a lawyer since 2001, following in his father’s footsteps after a stint working in retail after college, he said. He became involved in politics in 2007 when he saw what he called the downward spiral of the U.S. economy. But he met resistance from his party at first, he said.

“I found myself yelling at the TV and I knew I had to stop doing that, so I started attending meetings,” he said. “I did have some very high up Republicans tell me I should not run because I had not done enough for the party. I had not been a good soldier.”

Republican Town Chairman Robert Prentice said he was not happy with Fishbein’s campaigning against the agreement. Fishbein handed out flyers and talked to voters outside polling places.

“I think he went a little too far, but that’s not the opinion of the party, it’s my opinion,” he said. “He took it a little too far with some of the things he did. But he’s still a Republican and still on the council, and hopefully he’ll make the right decision next time.”

Fishbein registered as a Republican in June 2003, a switch from his previous registration as a Democrat, according to Samuel Carmody, the Democratic registrar of voters.

Letter to the Editor of the Record Journal by Christopher Rourke

The following is a letter to the editor, published on Thursday November 17, 2011 as written by Christopher Rourke

Editor: In the referendum this past Monday, I could not help but notice in the days and weeks preceding it a huge temporary sign in front of what used to be the library saying “Vote No.”

My understanding is that the building is now owned by one of the people who would profit from the referendum being turned down by voters.

It was allowed to stand, even though a very similar sign was erected in the same spot a few years ago in reference to the Wooding-Caplan property referendum.

This sign was ordered torn down by Mayor Dickinson (citing town ordinance).

Is it just coincidence that the sign ordered torn down and the one allowed to stand is based on whether Mayor Dickinson agrees with what is on it, or not? I think so. Cronyism and the “good old boys” need to end in Wallingford!

Letter to the Editor of the Record Journal by Michael Gagne

The following is a letter to the editor, published on Thursday November 17, 2011 as written by Michael Gagne

Editor: In my travels in Wallingford the other day, I noticed a huge sign in front of the former library building currently owned by Fred Ulbrich. This sign urged voters to vote “no” on overturning the parking deal — a deal which I believe would financially benefit Ulbrich. The last time there was a referendum in town, it concerned the Wooding-Caplan deal. At that time there was also a sign posted on that site.

The sign was opposed to the mayor’s position on the deal. At that time, public works employees were sent there to take down that sign as it was erected on town property.

This time, Ulbrich’s sign was untouched and unquestioned. The only difference this time was that the sign was in support of the mayor’s position. It seems that there is a different set of standards, and you can ignore the town ordinances if you agree with the powers that be.

Original parking pact still in place - Any changes will require notice

As published in the Record Journal, Thursday November 17, 2011

By Russell Blair
Record-Journal staff
rblair@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2225

WALLINGFORD — The future of a parking lot off Center Street remains unclear after voters overturned the town’s decision to enter into a 30-year lease agreement with property owners to upgrade the lot in exchange for continued free public parking.

Town Attorney Janis Small said a year-to-year lease agreement to keep the lot behind the buildings on Simpson Court public in exchange for plowing and other maintenance from the town remains in place, and that only one property owner, John McGuire, has given the required one-year notice to quit the arrangement. For any of the other property owners to consider charging or limiting access, they would have to file similar notice.

McGuire , who owns two of the four buildings involved, filed his notice to quit in 2009. Shortly after that, he withdrew his notice orally, but not in writing. He has said he would consider restricting access to his lots and possibly charging for parking if the 30-year agreement fell through. He was not available for comment Wednesday.

But Ernest Frattini , treasurer of the Masonic Temple Corp. and one of three principal owners of the building that houses the Half Moon Cafe, said he doesn’t think charging for parking is feasible.

“You’d have to pay someone to work there, and it would hurt the businesses in the area,” he said.

Councilor John LeTourneau, a Republican who owns Wallingford Lamp and Shade on Center Street and supported the lease agreement, said that it’s possible a new lease could be negotiated.

“There are always alternatives,” he said. “It can be renegotiated, the term of the lease, the amount of the improvements.”

LeTourneau said that despite the outcome of the referendum Monday, he wasn’t afraid to re-enter negotiations with the property owners.

Craig Fishbein, a Republican councilor who opposed the lease agreement, said that future negotiations would require “all parties to come to the table.” Fishbein said he didn’t think it was fair for the town to foot the entire bill for repairs.

“I’d like to see fair, open and frank discussions,” he said.

Fishbein said there was still some anger over the referendum, and that he would “wait for the smoke to clear” before bringing up any alternatives for the lot.

Frattini, however, said he believes opponents of the council’s earlier decision would be against any spending by the town on the lot.

“No matter what we do, it’s still tax dollars being spent on private property,” he said. “How can we negotiate?”

But Robert Gross, the local resident who started the petition drive that forced Monday’s referendum, said he didn’t want to comment about any future lease agreements for the parking lot.

“It’s tough to speculate when it’s not on paper,” Gross said.

Gross said that any future lease agreements were something that the town and the property owners would have to work on.

The referendum, Gross said, simply puts the situation “back at square one.”

“That’s all it does,” he said.

Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr. said he felt the council’s lease agreement “had the best prospect of success.” The agreement overturned by the referendum was negotiated for nearly 10 years, he said.

While opponents of the lease agreement said the money could be spent to improve the Wooding-Caplan property and make a parking lot there, Dickinson said that does nothing to help the Simpson Court area.

“I don’t see Caplan-Wooding as replacing Simpson Court,” he said. “I don’t think one lot is adequate or convenient enough to be a solution for the loss of any parking.”

Townwide vote overturns Wallingford parking deal

Mayor sees ‘negative effect,’ with parking ‘not replaceable’

As originally published in the Record Journal, Tuesday November 15, 2011
By Robert Cyr
Record-Journal staff
rcyr@record-journal.com
(203) 317-2224

WALLINGFORD — Voters turned out in near-record numbers Monday night and overturned the Town Council’s controversial decision to enter into a 30-year lease with downtown property owners to upgrade their common parking lot behind Simpson Court in return for free parking.

The referendum, just six days after the municipal election, drew 6,888 voters, with 2,768 in favor of the lease and 4,120 against. To make the process binding, 20 percent, or 4,956 people, needed to vote. More than half that number had already voted by 1 p.m., with polls closing at 8 p.m.

The referendum drew almost 28 percent of the 24,780 registered voters in town; the Nov. 8 election drew 39.8 percent.

Supporters of the lease, including Mayor William W. Dickinson Jr. and the owners of four buildings along North Main Street, fronting Simpson Court, considered the defeat a loss for Wallingford.

Dickinson said it was a major setback for economic development and he didn’t know what would be next for the parking lot or the continuation of free parking at the lot, which the public has used since 1961.

That year, the town entered into a year-to-year lease with the owners of the properties that stipulated that the town would maintain the lot. Five years ago, when owners said the town was not holding up its end of the agreement, the town began working on contract language that went into the current lease agreement: The town would spend up to $500,000 in set aside Electric Department revenues to repave and install lighting and landscaping at the lot between Church and Center streets, in return for continued free parking.

“There will be a decided negative effect and it will be difficult to move in any direction,” Dickinson said. “I know people have lots of other suggestions for use of the money, but if we should lose those parking places, that’s not replaceable by anything else.”

But lease opponents, including two members of the Town Council, said it was inappropriate to invest town money in private property. Robert Gross, a resident who has run unsuccessfully for the council, started a petition drive a day after the council’s decision, raising the 2,491 signatures needed to force a referendum.

Lease opponents have also said that the money should be used to repair the Wooding-Caplan property, a town-owned lot sitting vacant behind the Police Department and St. Paul’s Episcopal Church on North Main Street, close to the shops on Simpson Court. The parcel has been a proposed site of a new police station.

At least one property owner threatened to pull out of the year-to-year lease if the 30year agreement were to be overturned. John McGuire, who owns two of the four buildings involved, has said he’d consider restricting access to his lots and possibly charging for parking. He was not available for comment Monday.

The opposing camps set up large gatherings on opposite sides of town Monday night to await the final count. Christopher Diorio, vice chairman of the Republican Town Committee and head of the political action committee supporting the lease, reserved the lounge of Michael’s Trattoria on Center Street.

Diorio was joined by several town councilors, including Jerry Farrell Jr. and John Le-Tourneau, who owns Wallingford Lamp and Shade, down the street from the restaurant. LeTourneau said he knew voter turnout had been high early in the day.

“I guess it was steady all day,” LeTourneau said.

Diorio said he was disappointed by the results but glad so many had shown up for the vote. He has spent the past several weeks trying to garner support for the leases and getting people to the polls, he said.

“The other side definitely got their vote out and the townspeople spoke,” he said. “Life’s going to go on, and the town of Wallingford will move forward. This will go on to the town government and property owners, and we’ll see what happens.”

Inside the bar and lounge of the Italian restaurant, local business owners — including some who were part of the lease agreement — talked of a vague future.

Fred Ulbrich is chairman of the board of Ulbrich Steel and owner of the former library building at 60 N. Main St., one of the four buildings with a lease agreement. He said he did not know what he would do with the 22 parking spaces allotted him in the nullified lease but said he would consider charging for parking. The leases outlined 130 parking spaces with 90 passes for the buildings’ owners to give to businesses and employees.

“If I have to charge, yes,” he said.

The town has had an easement through the parking lot to connect Church and Center streets since 1961, and that may have to change now, he said.

“There’s going to be a real push to take away that right-of-way. It served its purpose,” he said.

Across town, at the Gross residence on Long Hill Road, the street was packed with cars and a party was in full swing to celebrate the win. It isn’t the first time Gross has teamed up with Geno Zandri, owner of the Zandri’s Stillwood Inn, on a referendum.

The pair successfully petitioned and forced a referendum on the Wooding-Caplan property five years ago. And although they lost their push to have a local developer build in the lot, more than 7,000 people went to the polls, Gross said.

“I had anxiety going into today — you never know how the voter’s going to vote,” he said.

Zandri, chairman of the PAC that fought the leases, said he was glad the referendum was over.

“We put a lot of hard work into this, and we’re happy with the results,” he said.