Sidewalks Shenanigan

[SyZyGy]

Attention: Legal Beagles, Plebeians, and Patricians!

Found in Manager's report of 4/28/2006:

* Sidewalks for Two Rod Hwy. & Mapleside: A public informational meeting on the sidewalk installation for Two Rod Highway and Mapleside was held on Thursday 4/27. About 25 homeowners attended the meeting, many of whom expressed their opposition to the installation of the sidewalks. I am investigating the legality of not installing the sidewalks, and using the money instead for road improvements. I am waiting to hear from Bond Counsel, and hope to have an answer for you by Monday.

Referendum? What referendum?

What's your 2¢?

[Dr.Ken Sokolowski]

From the archives of the Town's Website:
Minutes of Town Council
Special Meeting
August 30, 2004

"...Councilor Czernicki moved for the adoption of the following bond ordinance:

ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING $2,920,000 FOR ROAD AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUE OF $2,920,000 BONDS AND NOTES TO FINANCE THE APPROPRIATION

BE IT ORDAINED,

• That the Town of Wethersfield appropriate TWO MILLION NINE HUNDRED TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,920,000) for design and construction of improvements to various Town roads and sidewalks. The project will include milling and repaving of roads and replacement of catch basin tops and curbing where necessary on such Town roads as shall be determined by the Town Manager upon the recommendation of the Director of Public Works/Town Engineer; and installation of concrete sidewalks where needed on the west side of Mapleside Drive from Wells Road to Dale Road, the east side parking lot of Emerson Williams School, the west side of Willow Street, and both sides of Two Rod Highway from Old Reservoir Road to Highland Street. The appropriation may be spent for design and construction costs, equipment, materials, land and easement acquisition, site improvements, engineering fees, legal fees, net interest on borrowings and other financing costs, and other expenses related to the project. The Town Council is authorized to determine the scope and particulars of the project. The Town Council may reduce or modify the scope of the project, and the entire appropriation may be spent on the project as so reduced or modified.
  
  
• That the Town issue bonds or notes, in an amount not to exceed TWO MILLION NINE HUNDRED TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,920,000) to finance the appropriation for the project. The bonds or notes shall be issued pursuant to Section 7-369 of the General Statutes of Connecticut, Revision of 1958, as amended, and any other enabling acts. The bonds or notes shall be general obligations of the Town secured by the irrevocable pledge of the full faith and credit of the Town.
  
  
• That the Town issue and renew its temporary notes from time to time in anticipation of the receipt of the proceeds from the sale of the bonds or notes for the project. The amount of the notes outstanding at any time shall not exceed TWO MILLION NINE HUNDRED TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,920,000). The notes shall be issued pursuant to Section 7-378 of the General Statutes of Connecticut, Revision of 1958, as amended. The notes shall be general obligations of the Town and shall be secured by the irrevocable pledge of the full faith and credit of the Town. The Town shall comply with the provisions of Section 7-378a of the General Statutes if the notes do not mature within the time permitted by said Section 7-378.
  
  
• The Town Manager and the Treasurer of the Town shall sign the bonds or notes by their manual or facsimile signatures. The law firm of Day, Berry & Howard LLP is designated as bond counsel to approve the legality of the bonds or notes. The Town Manager and the Treasurer are authorized to determine the amounts, dates, interest rates, maturities, redemption provisions, form and other details of the bonds or notes; to designate one or more banks or trust companies to be certifying bank, registrar, transfer agent and paying agent for the bonds or notes; to provide for the keeping of a record of the bonds or notes; to designate a financial advisor to the Town in connection with the sale of the bonds or notes; to sell the bonds or notes at public or private sale; to deliver the bonds or notes; and to perform all other acts which are necessary or appropriate to issue the bonds or notes.
  
  
• That the Town hereby declares its official intent under Federal Income Tax Regulation Section 1.150-2 that project costs may be paid from temporary advances of available funds and that the Town reasonably expects to reimburse any such advances from the proceeds of borrowings in an aggregate principal amount not in excess of the amount of borrowing authorized above for the project. The Town Manager and the Treasurer are authorized to amend such declaration of official intent as they deem necessary or advisable and to bind the Town pursuant to such representations and covenants as they deem necessary or advisable in order to maintain the continued exemption from federal income taxation of interest on the bonds or notes authorized by this resolution, if issued on a tax-exempt basis, including covenants to pay rebates of investment earnings to the United States in future years.
  
  
• That the Town Manager and the Treasurer are authorized to make representations and enter into written agreements for the benefit of holders of the bonds or notes to provide secondary market disclosure information, which agreements may include such terms as they deem advisable or appropriate in order to comply with applicable laws or rules pertaining to the sale or purchase of such bonds or notes.
  
  
• That the Town Manager, the Treasurer and other proper officers of the Town are authorized to take all other action which is necessary or desirable to complete the project and to issue bonds or notes to finance the aforesaid appropriation.
  
• That this ordinance shall become effective after publication and approval by the electors at referendum as provided in the Town Charter.

The motion was seconded by Councilor Adil.

Councilor Adil asked the Town Manager to confirm the choice of road repairs to be made. Town Manager Bonnie Therrien said that the longer list chosen from the road repair software program better utilizes the funds available.

Councilor Adil confirmed that one or possibly two bus routes will be addressed when doing sidewalks. Town Manager Bonnie Therrien said that this is correct. Councilor Adil said that he feels more should be spent on roads and sidewalks; however there is only enough manpower to handle $1 million of work per year. He supports the ordinance as it is a good start.

Councilor Montinieri said that the installation of concrete sidewalks will be on the west side of Mapleside Drive from Wells Road to Dale Road, the east side parking lot of Emerson Williams School, the west side of Willow Street, and both sides of Two Rod Highway from Old Reservoir Road to Highland Street will be included in the bonding.

Councilor Cascio stated that notice will be provided to individuals regarding their 50% responsibility for the cost of sidewalk installation. He also said that sidewalk repairs, per current ordinances, are the responsibility of the residents to report to the Town....."

[Jubashero]

All the news that fit to print…

Yes, I also notice the manager’s remark regarding sidewalks. My opinion is the referendum is out the window since they changed from 50 to 100 percent town funding. I say we leave the poor people on Mapleside Drive alone; they don’t want sidewalks even if the town pays for them. And, as we see at Hamner School, the sidewalks are not going to solve the problem. They should move the cross-walk up a street to get the children away from the cars or make Mapleside Drive one-way during certain times. We need a staff that can make sound decisions despite pressure from the town council to determine the outcome.

[JudgeSmaels]

Here's a good sidewalk shenanigan for downtown Griswoldville.

It seems our town has come up with a doozy! They are going to install a galvanized guardrail from the firehouse south to the next house and from the chapel north to the next house. This will be like the same guardrail that is on the highways.

I guess the town has nothing better to do with $12,000! I wasn't aware that we have had a problem with people leaving the sidewalk and crashing on the turf below.

[oldetowne]

Well, here's the language that should give the Council the ability to eliminate the sidewalks: "The Town Council is authorized to determine the scope and particulars of the project. The Town Council may reduce or modify the scope of the project, and the entire appropriation may be spent on the project as so reduced or modified."

This will permit them to defraud the voters without breaking the strict language of the bond ordinance. It's the same kind of language that allowed the police station to be built at a cost of nearly 4MM more than originally estimated, leaving the town hall in worse shape than when the project started, and requiring both grant money and a second bond referendum to get the job done. Correction - I meant a second bond referendum to provide enough money to finish the lousy job, since the town hall will not be renovated to the extent we were told and it's getting close to a year behind schedule.

[Dr.Ken Sokolowski]

in re: "The Town Council may reduce or modify the scope of the project" where "the project" included BOTH road repairs AND sidewalks.

oldetowne wrote; Reply #4 on Today at 6:52am

This will permit them to defraud the voters without breaking the strict language of the bond ordinance. It's the same kind of language that allowed the police station to be built at a cost of nearly 4MM more than originally estimated, leaving the town hall in worse shape than when the project started, and requiring both grant money and a second bond referendum to get the job done. Correction - I meant a second bond referendum to provide enough money to finish the lousy job, since the town hall will not be renovated to the extent we were told and it's getting close to a year behind schedule.

"Defraud?" Seems like powerful language to me.

Information was not withheld from the public.

If this teaches the concerned, overseers of Government in Wethersfield anything, it's read the fine print, ask questions, postulate scenarios, and attempt to hold someone accountable.

Do you believe that the quoted, two sentences of interest were merely boilerplate, or, were they inserted with flexibility, escape, or political prophylaxis in mind?

[oldetowne]

It is boilerplate language. The exact same phrase was in the resolution for the $790K grant for library renovations and in the resolution for the Phase II town hall library bonding. It is designed to allow the Council to have some flexibility in how the project is scoped and completed in case there are unforeseen problems. I don't believe that the intention of the language is to permit a wholesale "bait and switch" - e.g., convince the town at large vote for road and sidewalk improvements for the safety of our children but never intend to go forward with the sidewalks because their political supporters on Two Rod Highway would get mad.

[oldetowne]

From Bonnie's weekly management report - 6/15/06 - "Two Rod Highway Sidewalks: Town crews spent all of Monday in the field staking the location of the new sidewalks, so that Public Works Director Mike Turner could meet with residents and explain the locations proposed. This was a request of the affected residents at our last public information session. However, on Tuesday morning, we found all the stakes removed and in a pile by the Town truck in the Town Hall parking lot. I have asked the Police Chief to investigate this incident, and if we find out who did this we will press charges. We will not repeat this work, and will go ahead with the bid process for the project."

There also was an article in this morning's Courant about it.

[SyZyGy]

oldetowne said:

From Bonnie's weekly management report - 6/15/06 - ... we found all the stakes removed and in a pile by the Town truck in the Town Hall parking lot. I have asked the Police Chief to investigate this incident, and if we find out who did this we will press charges.

Stakes K-O'd
Manager P-O'd!

WPD don't know.
("Kids" done it,
You know!)

Project only stalled but
Walks will get installed.

Remember,
in November!

[Dr.Ken Sokolowski]

Wethersfield is far from done dealing with this issue; so it is pertinent here, again.

courant.com
A Sidewalk Crusader
www.courant.com/business/hc-ctreal0118.artjan18,0,6463956.story CT REAL ESTATE: In Person

A Sidewalk Crusader

Proponent Says Walks Unify Neighborhoods In Growing Towns

By CHERYL CRABB
The Hartford Courant
January 18 2007

"Please keep off the grass."

The sign posted in a homeowner's front yard near Philip R. Smith Elementary School creates a dilemma for pedestrians such as Carolyn Egan when they try to walk along Avery Street in South Windsor.

Pedestrians can obey the sign [probably illegal sign at that, considering the Town/State's 'right of way']and walk head-on into traffic streaming along the hilly two-lane road with little to no shoulder. Or they can tread on soggy turf against the homeowner's wishes.

Egan, a 45-year-old educator and free-lance writer who serves on the South Windsor school board, did a little bit of both - dodging in and out of traffic - to demonstrate why she thinks sidewalks are needed along Avery Street, which in recent years has become a heavily traveled gateway to the Buckland Hills mall area.

"This town is emblematic of a place that was once a rural farm town that is now a full- fledged contemporary suburb. That's a hard transition for a lot of people," said Egan.

As someone who had always lived in places that were "very walkable," Egan said she suddenly felt isolated when she moved to South Windsor in the late '90s and had to use her car to get anywhere outside her condominium off Ellington Road.

Town officials originally proposed sidewalks along Avery Street from Kelly Road to Evans Crossing as part of an application for road improvement funding due this week. But a majority of homeowners along the relatively short stretch of Avery Street rejected adding sidewalks [sound familiar?] as part of the project, which is designed to make the road safer by improving alignment and uniformity, said Town Engineer Jeff Doolittle.

It's a problem that towns are grappling with throughout the Hartford area as towns try to make once-rural areas more pedestrian-friendly without losing their rustic character.

Homeowners who recently attended a public hearing about road improvements along Avery Street, which carries 8,500 cars a day at an average speed of 38 mph, said they didn't think sidewalks fit in their neighborhood. They said they don't want to sacrifice their front yards for sidewalks or take on the responsibilities associated with them.

Because the $2.5 million Avery Street project would be primarily federally funded, homeowners would not be assessed for 25 percent of the cost of the sidewalks as they typically would if town money were being used.

"We would like to be able to put in sidewalks, but residents pretty much need to agree because they would be responsible for maintaining them," Doolittle said. "They perceive them as a liability." [Ditto!]

... For Egan, the homeowners' response to sidewalks along Avery Street represents the "not in my yard" mentality that comes up any time sidewalks are proposed along existing roadways.

"When a community develops into a suburb without sidewalks, people become isolated and think of themselves as isolated from the larger community," Egan said. "It becomes a matter of what is the town giving me rather than what am I giving the community? "

Although South Windsor requires developers to put sidewalks in new developments, the town [No surprise!] - faced with public opposition - has yet to add any sidewalks to existing roadways, Doolittle said.

"People don't complain where we already have them, and if they go in people use them," Doolittle said. "[At a public hearing you hear] all the reasons people say they don't want sidewalks. But they allow you to connect the neighborhood and make it a place for kids to walk and play. Nobody talks about those very much."

South Windsor is now at a point in its development where it needs to address pedestrian issues, Egan said. She wants the town council to rethink its decision not to pursue sidewalks as part of proposed road improvements on Avery Street .

Egan is working with town planners to form a sidewalk committee that would devise a town-wide sidewalk plan.[Do it!]

As a school board member, Egan said she'd like walking to school or to a friend's house to be an option for school children who live in the neighborhoods off Avery Street, where several new subdivisions have sidewalks that extend to Avery, but don't connect to a broader network. Incrementally adding sidewalks along streets like Avery, and linking to sidewalks in developments that already have them, like Evans Crossing, are opportunities the town can't afford to miss, she said.

But area homeowners have a different view. Even frequent walkers like Bob Houlihan, who lives at Evans Crossing, said sidewalks on Avery Street would be "overkill" even though he considers the street dangerous for pedestrians.

"I never walk on Avery Street," Houlihan said after crossing the street with the help of the short sidewalk that extends onto Avery Street from his subdivision. "It's very dangerous. Traffic has increased 10-fold." Houlihan said Avery Street doesn't have enough foot traffic to warrant the expense, he said.

In the meantime, pedestrians are left to hug the curb as they maneuver the busy roadways, some carrying shopping bags. [No, they COULD walk on the public, street's right of way - even if that is contiguous and continuous with a residential lawn!]

"Do we want to wait for a pedestrian to get hit before we make a change?" Egan asked. "Is that what we're waiting for to act?" [Yep, that usually is enough to get the Town and the Politicians to do the right thing - put in the sidewalks at no direct installation cost to the involved residents!]

Copyright 2007, Hartford Courant

[standish]

Ken,

We usually agree, but, not on this one. People choose to own in a given neighborhood, often for the very level of development found therein. If rural, that's what they prefer. If suburban, that's the choice. If urban, so be it. However, when government intrudes by "takings" or usurpation, things change and the value to the owner of one's property is altered.

Futhermore, issues of liability, maintenance, repair and other costs are never borne by the municipality or the one-time Federal grant. Thus, there is much more at stake than simply the installation cost.

My libertarian bent tends toward letting those most directly affected by "improvements" have the loudest voice. If the residents want to tie their neighborhood together, let them. If they prefer isolation, let it be. If you want to jog or walk in their neighborhood, do so at your risk. There may be more optimal locations for your exercise.

[Dr.Ken Sokolowski]

Wethersfield! We are not in the boonies. We are not in the sticks. We do not have an agricultural society. We are not even rural.

We are not living in the 17th, 18th or 19th centuries. It is unlikely that a pedestrian hugging the edge of a road, or crossing one, will be harmed by a horse or a horse-drawn carriage or steam-powered wagon.

Wethersfield has a significant population of youngsters. We have a very significant number of elderly (who comprise a wide range of abilities and disabilities). These are populations which require pre-emptive accommodations - at the least - unless you want to ascribe to a Darwinian approach to population control.

Our population is disserved and encumbered by our incomplete sidewalk system.

Our middle population (harried and harassing) contributes to the pandemic of vehicular speeding on our streets. Sidewalks along all streets would provide a ribbon of safety for the pedestrians. Bicycle lanes would help lessen the automotive risks of the cyclists. In the long-run, completing a system of sidewalks in town would be a savings over a doubling and tripling of the number of sworn officers (currently paid and then retired with benefits) needed to patrol and curb errant drivers .

If your argument is to be accepted, Wethersfield should allow a certain portion of roads (culs-de-sac perhaps) in town to degenerate into a prehistoric state of disintegration - just for those people who might be looking for such a rustic micro-locale when seeking a home-cave to crawl into. However, these, I suggest, inconsiderate, would-be isolationists, whether they like it or not, are part of a larger society. Our Wethersfield society elects representatives to not only lead but to (at least partially) be tempered by the wills of the People.

I urge a completion of our sidewalk system in business and residential zones in town for the our societal health and commonweal. The Town should bear the costs of both installation and infrastructural maintenance. The citizens should accept clearing of their sidewalks as one responsibility in a multitude to be born by a home owner, just as a business owner must.

Wethersfield is predominately a periürban, bedroom community of the 21st century. A complete system of sidewalks belongs in Wethersfield.

[standish]

"If your argument is to be accepted, Wethersfield should allow a certain portion of roads (culs-de-sac perhaps) in town to degenerate into a prehistoric state of disintegration"
I would ask that you re-read my "argument", which posits that the town should preserve neighborhood status, if that's what the neighbors want. Your comments are misplaced, unsuited, inappropriate and border on being a diatribe.

[Dr.Ken Sokolowski]

standish said:

...People choose to own in a given neighborhood, often for the very level of development found therein. If rural, that's what they prefer. If suburban, that's the choice. If urban, so be it. However, when government intrudes by "takings" or usurpation, things change and the value to the owner of one's property is altered....My libertarian bent tends toward letting those most directly affected by "improvements" have the loudest voice. If the residents want to tie their neighborhood together, let them. If they prefer isolation, let it be. If you want to jog or walk in their neighborhood, do so at your risk. There may be more optimal locations for your exercise.

Leigh,
I would disabuse you of the ideas that

• (1) our neighborhoods should control the larger town-wide society in deciding what is best for the Town, that
• (2) people select a town for its characteristics before they seek a neighborhood thereof or therein, that
• (3) Wethersfield is comprised of sufficiently disparate enclaves that a global policy of sidewalks is inappropriate, that
• (4) the Town installing sidewalks in its own right of way amounts to "ururpation," that
• (5) any Wethersfield resident should have to accept unnecessary risk in using the Town's right of way, be it on the road, the snow-shelf or the sidewalk in the pursuit of health or happiness, and that
• (6) my comments "bordered on being a diatribe."

I am tempted to suggest that yours almost bordered on the anachronistic - but I won't.

Apparently you still see Wethersfield as comprised of a dozen or so duchies, domains or divisions which should remain unencumbered by the policies of municipal and higher levels of government. I see Wethersield as a single "neighborhood." Something like, "we are all in it together; now let's work this out for the good of all."

Apparently you are also galled that the warp and woof of society has changed and that the evolving garment no longer has as comfortable a feel or fit. For whatever it is worth, at times, I feel chafed too.

Perhaps we should take this forum's "god's" advise to Syzygy: "Lighten up, Francis".......

[god]

Thanks for the plug, Doc!!!