By Kerri Williams
WESTPORT – The chairman of the Long Lots Building Committee told members of two Representative Town Meeting committees Wednesday evening that the only time issue for the project to build a new $98-million elementary school involves a 14-day waiting period called for under the town’s charter.
What he didn’t tell them was that the state apparently changed the game for Westport suddenly on May 16.
The flurry of at least 10 town meetings in the next two weeks concerning the school project “has nothing to do with the state changing things,” Long Lots Building Committee Chairman Jay Keenan told RTM members at a joint meeting of the finance and education committees over a Zoom meeting.
However, both Finance Director Gary Conrad and Assistant Town Attorney Eileen Lavigne Flug told Westport Journal just the opposite earlier on Wednesday, saying that a “realignment” of state departments that control grant funding resulted in the town’s deadline for submitting requests to change. The new deadline of June 30 was some four months earlier than the original one of October, catching town officials off guard.
In addition, a town charter regulation requires a two-week break period to allow for the opportunity to file for a public referendum. That means that the RTM, which is the ultimate deciding town body on financial matters, must approve the project’s appropriation request by June 16 before it can be submitted to the state, Flug said.
If the town fails to meet the June 30 deadline, the grant funding would not be in the 2026-’27 state budget, and the opening of the new school, scheduled for 2027, would be delayed again unless the town made up for the gap in state funding.
Even as an RTM member, Keenan said he had not been aware of the charter provision that calls for a two-week waiting period on any appropriation over $500,000, which allows time for the public to request a referendum.
Contradictory information shared with RTM members
Seth Braunstein, chairman of the RTM’s finance committee, on Wednesday evening reiterated Keenan’s statement that the state changes were not an issue in the timing. “The only real difference is two weeks from what we originally anticipated,” he said.
Lauren Karpf, chair of the RTM’s education committee, addressed those at the meeting on the issue of timing, acknowledging that it “isn’t ideal.” However, she reminded members that they have been getting periodic updates about the project and should be staying “up to speed.”
“If we met in a month, nothing would be drastically different,” she said.
During the meeting, Keenan presented architectural drawings and details of the $98 million project, adding that an updated cost estimate will be coming at the end of this week. He said the committee will be asking the state to reimburse about 20 percent of the total cost. Conrad told Westport Journal the requested reimbursement will be between 13 percent and 22 percent of the total cost.
When asked by Braunstein if the project cost could change, Keenan said that “nothing is guaranteed,” but that the committee has been getting independent estimates to be sure the figures are accurate.
“You never know until you go out to bid,” Keenan said. He added that “a lot of schools are being built right now,” which could factor into the cost, as well as the talk of tariffs that is constantly changing. “A lot of things play into this,” he said.
Kerri Williams is a freelance writer who has worked in journalism for years, including as a reporter for the Norwalk Hour and managing editor of the Norwalk Citizen-News.
Westport Journal Executive Editor John Palmer contributed to this report.
Arrogant, uninformed and closed minded. About par for the course for the RTM.
A check with the Office of Grants Administration could help with the fog of disinformation…
The June 30th deadline for applications is for Priority List grant applications. Non-Priority grant applications can be applied for from the 1st through the 10th of each month. Regarding the number of years the statute has been in place, please refer to the statute for the specific history on the legislation which begins in 1949.
Conn. Gen. Stat. § Sec. 10-283. Applications for grants for school building projects.
https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_173.htm#sec_10-283
The LLSBC gave updates to BOF and RTM Education committee back in April, and Jay mentioned that they will be coming back at the end of May/beginning of June for full funding. These meetings are recorded and available on the town’s website. There is no way that the letter of May 16 was the reason for changing the timeline since this was the plan. Also waiting till October to get the funding does not make sense since they would miss on school summer recess to start some of the work.
– Board of Finance: April 2
– RTM Education: April 29
Mr. Nader
I actually agree with your new stance as articulated in a public letter to PZC: Bifurcate the land use questions, strictly school versus Parks and Rec uses.
The 8-24 pending application already has the athletic field next to the schools, and the P&Z will be voting on that soon. We don’t need to debate this forever. The community gardens needs to find a new place in town. Please refocus your energy and effort toward that purpose. At the moment, your focus as well as the Westport Community Gardens steering committee seems to be solely on how to derail the Long Lots new school with a false hope of saving the community gardens. I still wish you the best of luck in finding a new home for the community gardens because I do think we should have one in Westport. I just don’t agree with how you and others are trying to do that at the expense of the school.
Joe – a Community Garden committee proposed a new site just a couple of weeks ago, but you opposed it because your concern was ball fields, not the school.
It is the soccer dads like you, who have hijacked the school building process with their hobby, who are putting a timely rebuild of LLS in jeopardy.
If the LLS rebuild is delayed, you’ll have nobody but you and yours to blame.
So did something change at the state level or did someone at the town missed the boat? I’d appreciate if the town or our state legislators or our Secretary of State could clarify the change which causes the “rush’. I personally would like to see in black and white what caused this emergency. The current explanation of merging of departments makes no sense.
Let’s get this done as quickly as possible and right the first time. Is this a real emergency or a made up one to further stymy input?
The town attorney and LLSBC have not got their stories straight, further evidence that there is some manufactured emergency afoot.
On Wednesday May 28, the chair of the Long Lots Committee said as plain as day that he, nor anyone else involved, knew there is a 14-day period for public referendum on any RTM approved town expenditure over $500K.
This is Town Charter Section C5-9. To summarize, it calls for a 14-day period after RTM funding approval to allow for a petition for referendum vote on the appropriation. If no petition for a referendum is received during that time, the appropriation is deemed effective. If a petition for referendum is received, the application will be effective only if and when approved through a citizen vote.
While we’re talking Charter, here’s more on that in case you were thinking of exercising your right to referendum:
In order for a referendum petition on appropriations to be filed successfully, at least 10% of the 18,572 registered voters must sign the petition. That is 1,858 voters.
The Town Clerk must prepare/provide the petition forms. Therefore, if the RTM votes to appropriate $98M on June 12 as expected, you can pick up your petition forms from the town clerk on June 13, and you have another 13 days to get it filed at the Board of Selectmen with the requisite number of certified elector signatures.
The petition wording would be something like this: “Shall the following action of a Representative Town Meeting held on [June 12, 2025] be approved? ‘An appropriation in the amount of $93,000,000 along with bond and note authorization to the Educational Facility Improvement Fund Account 32506650-500397-10133 for the construction of the new Long Lots Elementary School.’”
The referendum possibly could also seek voter approval of a lesser amount.
Back to the longstanding June 30 state deadline for priority consideration of a grant. ALL approvals for the project must be secured and effective before the project can be considered for priority consideration, including land use.
The LLSBC Chair is glib in stating that the land use approval is not necessary for a town funding appropriation. But it is necessary for the state grant. The town does not have its land use questions resolved or approved.
The town recently filed a new and different 8-24 municipal improvement application which has yet to be heard by the P&Z. They have also filed for a site plan/special permit which has yet to be heard.
The current standing 8-24 for 23 Hyde Lane as recommended by the P&Z was heard in January 2024. The LLSBC Committee/Town delayed coming before the P&Z for any collaboration until the 11th hour (April 2025), at which time they were clearly admonished for disregarding the recommendation of the P&Z’s January 2024 decision and recommendations.
(Keep in mind the January 2024 decision was SUPPOSED to happen in October 2023 but was delayed by the First Selectman until after a new P&Z Commission was elected and seated).
I have attended or watched post-facto all of the P&Z Commission meetings since then. There was NO COMMUNICATION with P&Z again until the April 10, 2025 pre-application work session, a full 15 months of NO UPDATES OR COLLABORATION WHATSOEVER.
Now the town is in so much of a rush that they requested the new 8-24 AND site plan/special permit be deliberated and approved in one hearing (scheduled for June 9, 2025). In addition, one proponent of the new 8-24 has now called for the P&Z to bifurcate school versus other land uses at 13 Hyde Lane, which I could advocate.
Further to the land use question, the regulatory Flood and Erosion Control Board and Conservation Commission have yet to have a look at the project. The land site is chock full of flooding, wetlands, inland waterways, abutting residential housing, difficult terrain and contaminated soil. The chair of FECB resigned abruptly last month, with one or two more expected to follow. Yet these two regulatory bodies are now asked to review and approve plans for the Long Lots School and unrelated ball fields on June 4, simultaneously in a JOINT meeting.
All of this to the dismay of the kids who suffer in an old collapsing school that many parents say is unhealthy and unsafe.
Who delayed? Who is now rushing? And why? Can it all be attributed to ineptitude, or is there some underlying gamesmanship here to circumvent honest and honorable project management and town decision-making?
Check your Signal app. Maybe there is more to know.