Board of Finance expected to hold special meeting for Road Renewal Plan vote

Though they had differences in opinion, the Bethel residents that attended Tuesday night's Board of Finance meeting did not get what they expected: a vote.

After nearly two hours of listening to several public comments, debate and discussion, the board tabled the Road Renewal Plan vote to its next meeting. The main reason for the decision was to wait for the presence of the entire board, as two members,  James Roden and John Dietter, were not at last night's meeting due to personal reasons. 

Though the next monthly Board of Finance meeting isn't scheduled until Tuesday, Nov. 9, the board is looking to have a special meeting within the next two weeks. If approved, the plan in turn would be voted on by the general public. If passed, the plan that would reconstruct 31 miles of Bethel's most damaged roads, which would start as early as April 2011, after the winter weather.

More than 25 members of the Bethel community attended Tuesday's meeting, with several taking advantage of the public comment portion. Many residents were responding to suggestions made during the previous meeting to taking dead end or less trafficked roads out of the plan.

"I think some of the comments at the last meeting were unfortunate…to suggest that people on dead end roads should not have their roads paved; that's ridiculous," Nancy Ryan of Walnut Hill Road said. 

Several women from Aunt Patty's Lane said while it doesn't seem to get a lot of traffic, their dead end road shouldn't be over looked as there were concerns about children's safety and damage to motor vehicles.

Bethel resident Billy Michael said he opposed the road renewal plan entirely due to the current state of the economy. "People are having the hardest time getting the money to pay their existing taxes," Michael said. "Bethel's roads are not a crisis. Everybody has a road they drive on that they are mad about. It's exactly not the right time."

Tom O'Leary, member of the Board of Assessment Appeals (also a previous Board of Finance member), said while he appreciated all the officials' service to Bethel, they needed to think of "the voters and taxpayers, who are the ultimate 'board of finance.'"

"Gentlemen, you have the cost of the project, you have the finance plan, you've known of this proposal since June when it was presented to you in an informational setting," O'Leary said to the board. "Please pass this proposal tonight and send it to the people who will decide if they want to pay for it."

As a whole, the Board of Finance members in attendance said they supported fixing the roads, but are hesitant over some aspects in the plan. There were many suggestions of bonding less money and talks to finish the potential project in less time than the suggested four years. 

Board Member Timothy Draper said the town has no choice but to fix the roads, but is concerned with the $8.5 million bond amount that was proposed. William Slifkin, also a board member, said he agreed with Draper, but his main concerns were inflation and rising costs of materials.

"At this point, I would support the $8.5 million bond issue," Slifkin said, "I would address the possible underfunding simply by ranking the roads in terms of what needs to be repaired and going down the list until we either run out of money or have extra. If we can't do all 31 miles, so be it, but at least we get it off the ground."

First Selectman Matthew Knickerbocker said he was "disappointed" that the Road Renewal Plan was not voted on, but hopes that vote will come soon so that it can be moved to public vote.

In response to the board's issues with the plan, Knickerbocker said many aspects of it can be altered as per the board's liking, especially concerning the bonding strategy. "In every [bondning] scenario that we presented, the debt load goes down. Therefore, the town's ability to borrow money and it's credit rating is protected throughout that process, and the budget gets relief as the debt load goes down," he said.

Finance Board Member Phillp J. Gallagher said with the bad economy he would be hesitant to bonding $8.5 million toward any issue. Gallagher said, "What I would be prepared to support, in lieu of an $8.5 million bonding, is perhaps a series of short-term bonding, where you fund a portion of the project at a time, but you would still take advantage over the low interest rates."

As he closed his general response, Knickerbocker said, "I think it's a shame that we are in a position where we need to borrow money to get the roads caught up, but I don't frankly see any other way to do it. Because if we don't do it now, when does it ever get done?"