Granby Residents Weigh in on Referendum at Town Meeting

Residents were divided at the Town Meeting at School Tuesday evening concerning the $11.4 million capital improvements referendum that is scheduled to take place on Jan. 17.

After an initial presentation by town officials, 19 people either asked questions or provided comments concerning the 11 projects that, if passed, will cost the town an aggregate of $8.4 million after federal and state reimbursements, as well as preexisting funds that are set aside, are factored into the equation.

(A list of the projects as well frequently asked questions, including the tax consequences on residents, concerning the projects can be found here and here.)

Several people voiced their concerns over the two most expensive projects, a $3 million potential acquisition of Evonsion Farm and the $3.2 million athletics fields upgrade.

Among the reasons given by town officials as to acquiring Evonsion Farm is to preserve open space, prevent the development of farm into housing, as well as to have the land in the event that the town needs to expand services, something that at least one resident disagreed with.

“I want to caution you that just because rates are low, we want to borrow money, that’s what got us in trouble to begin with,” said CG Chendur, adding that he did not see the need to acquire the 124-acre farm. “I’m sure [our children and grandchildren] can manage their land at a later day.”

Terry Wright added that low interest rates was not a valid reason to borrow money right now, particularly to buy Evonsion Farm.

“You can get zero interest rates on a new Cadillac right now, but I’m not going to buy one,” Wright said. “It looks like the town wants to buy some new Cadillacs.”

Wright repeated that Evonsion Farm was valued for tax purposes at $565,000, markedly lower than the $3 million that the town was proposing to pay to acquire the land.

“It seems the figures are way off here,” he said.

First Selectman John Adams said that the assessment was due to a public policy that encourages the preservation of open space as well as the use of land for farming.

“The assessed value …  does not represent the market value of [Evonsion Farm],” he said. “I think it’s a mistaken view.”

Another resident disagreed with grouping all of the projects together into one referendum vote.

“I dislike bundling the projects together,” Nelson Toussaint said. “It’s an old political trick to get what you want. … It’s not fair and we didn’t have to do that.”

Adams said that there were numerous public meetings at which the projects, and how they would be voted on, were discussed and that the elected officials in Granby decided to bring them forward as one package.

Skip Alleman, of 231 Salmon Brook St, objected to what he called the sidewalk project’s lack of formal notice, as well as the resulting inconveniences on affected residents.

Alleman said that residents, some of whom are elderly, would have to maintain the new sidewalks, pursuant to a town ordinance, that included the removal of snow within eight hours of a storm or face a $250 fine.

“Snow plows are constantly running up and down Salmon Brook Street; to constantly have to remove snow is a burden,” said Alleman, who added that no other project on the list included an additional financial obligation on residents.

Adams said that the town would phase-in the maintenance of the sidewalks by clearing them for at least the first five years post construction. In addition, Adams said that the enforcement of the ordinance would be reasonable.

“If a plow comes by and puts snow back on your property, I’m not sure we’re going to fine you $250,” Adams said. “We’re trying to be reasonable but at the same time, we do have a substantial pedestrian safety issue.”

There were an equal number of people who spoke out in favor of the projects.

Ed Perron, a member of the Board of Education who was the chairman of the Granby Athletic Field Long Range Advisory Committee, said that he supported the referendum because the projects were evaluated in “a very thoughtful and public manner;” the cost of borrowing money is low; the labor market is competitive; and “our future budgets are well-positioned to absorbed the 20-year portion of the bond.”

Perron said that the town needed to improve the high school’s athletic fields as well as to acquire land in the event that new fields are needed.

“Our schools are landlocked, with little to no room to expand,” Perron said. “This is also true of our core recreational facility, Salmon Brook Park. Who would have thought 20 years ago that we would have a dog park, a football team, lacrosse teams and the playground we have at Salmon Brook Park? Today, over 4,000 outside sporting events occur annually on the town’s school district fields. These needs will continue to expand and change, requiring land to support.”

Peg Lareau said that purchasing Evonsion Farm would be a good move by the town.

“We should be thinking two generations down the road,” she said. “They don’t make more land. I’m more concerned with putting restrictions on the town for its uses...but that’s not a basis to reject it.”

Planning and Zoning Commission member Linda C. Spevacek said that while some of the projects are good ideas, others, like the Silver Street Bridge replacement and the DPW Wash-Bay and Storage Bay, are essential. All of the projects make good planning sense, she said, which is why the Planning and Zoning Commission supports the referendum.

The meeting was adjourned to next Tuesday’s referendum, which will take place at the high school from 12 to 8 p.m. Absentee ballots are available at the Town Clerk’s office until the polls open on Tuesday, although residents are reminded that Monday is a holiday and that town offices will be closed.

Correction: the location of the referendum was changed to the high school. Also the article originally stated that the farm was assessed at $565,000 for tax purposes. It is valued at $565,000 and assessed for 75 percent of that value. The Granbys Patch regrets the errors.