By Thane Grauel

WESTPORT — After an extended discussion, two committees of the Representative Town Committee last Thursday endorsed spending $1.3 million of federal pandemic-relief money to replace the deteriorating timber groin at Burying Hill Beach.

The town is in the process of figuring out to spend $8.4 million in American Rescue Plan Act money. The Board of Selectmen’s office, under then-First Selectman James Marpe, began the process by devising a list of projects for the two-year grant. The Board of Finance has to sign off on the spending, and the RTM has final say.

The Board of Finance approved the groin repair funding Jan. 19.

The 400-foot structure, built in the 1950s, has outlasted expectations. It was intended to stop the littoral migration of sand from clogging a nearby creek, and being washed into Long Island Sound.

“It replaces an existing, deteriorated groin that is 20 years past its expiration date and is at risk of being washed away in a big storm,” Nancy Kail, District 9, said of the project.

“It’s permitted, it’s shovel ready, it’s out for bid,” she said. “It meets the ARPA funding requirements … it’s a simple design we know works because it has withstood the test of time.”

“I am really disappointed this was not submitted to the Environment Committee,” said Wendy Batteau, District 8. “Are we going to see fish kill-outs? Are we going to see kids swimming in the water, swimming in little chemical pools?”

Ratkiewich said the materials used would be marine-grade, pressure-treated lumber.

“It’s not going result in pools of chemicals, or anything like that that you’ve described,” he said.

Should COVID relief money be used for things like beach project?

Jessica Bram, District 6, said she thought it was a great project, but felt pandemic-relief money should not be used.

“I think the idea of using federal COVID funds for a beach renovation is misguided and inappropriate to the extent that it’s embarrassing,” she said. “We have real pandemic-related needs in this town.”

Lori Church, District 9, agreed with Bram.

“It is inappropriate to use the ARPA funds for this project,” she said. “I think we could do better for the ARPA funds.”

Matthew Mandell, District 1, said he thinks the project should be financed through town bonding, rather than funded with the federal money.

“Is it really ethical for us, a very wealthy community, to be doing these things rather than helping the people … we should be helping?” Batteau said. 

“As far as the optics go, I understand the concerns that are being made,” Peter Gold, District 5. “But we are not using this money to create a fancy new beach. We are not using this money to create a country club … we’re basically using the money to repair a leaky roof on a house.”

“There’s nothing wrong, optics-wise, with repairing and maintaining infrastructure in a state of good repair, which all we are doing here,” Gold said. 

In the end, the Finance Committee voted 4-1 in favor of the project with one abstention — Bram cast the dissenting vote, and Stephen Schackelford, District 8, abstained. The Public Works Committee voted 4-2 in favor — Mandell and Church were opposed; Chris Tait, District 1, abstained.