To the editor:
I am not a resident of Westport, but a resident of Fairfield and user of the Nextdoor app reading about community concerns.
On Oct. 18, a resident made a post about a new vape shop that set up business in Westport. The concern by the author was the seemingly huge sign advertising their location and bright purple LED lights.
One of the commenters was Claudia Shaum, RTM District 5 in Westport. She responded by saying, “… It’s awful. Only thing that can be done is to boycott. If it’s not successful it will close.”
This is an anti-business response hoping that a new business will close down on account of it’s signage. In my opinion it also goes against the business owner’s First Amendment right for freedom of expression. Is this her stance on all businesses that if it doesn’t look a specific way that it should be shut down?
People elected to government are held to a higher standard when they speak in the open. They cannot speak as a “resident” in one form and as an “elected official” in another. Anything said is a reflection on how they act when working with the community in an official capacity.
She could have stayed silent on the matter without posting, or she could have stated that she understood the concerns of the community and would look into the situation for any violations or potential for compromise.
Voters need to know who they are voting for come November. If someone in my town was up for election and said this, I wouldn’t fill in the bubble by their name.
Douglas Baron
Fairfield
Mr. Baron,
I do not know if you are an aficionado of so called “smoke shops” or simply being a protector of businesses in general.
However if a comment by Claudia Shaum got your knickers in such a twist, you’d better sit down when reading this.
At the last P&Z meeting their director was requested to explore banning smoke shops from Westport in a fashion similar to other communities. Whether or not this will come to pass is debatable. However, in the meantime I suggest you encourage all of Westport’s businesses to adhere to current regulations (including their signage regulations) as well as adherence with the law. Those are not first amendment rights.
I believe that these might be the issues that garnered attention in the first place.
Hi Jay. Thank you for your comment.
No, I’m not an “aficionado” of smoke shops, but I did not agree with or think her response was appropriate as an elected gov’t official.
Is the business violating anything? If so, the Town needs to enforce their ordinances that are in violation and talk directly with the business to resolve. If they aren’t in violation, then the business should be left alone.
If the sign and lights were to be on another business such as a clothing store or pastry shop, would it still be an issue?
Bottom line, elected politicians need to understand the impacts of what they say and who they’re representing when they say it.
Douglas, yes signage regulations apply equally as does the law.
Hi Jay,
So are you saying that calling for a boycott of a business as the appropriate remedy instead of legal action for enforcement by the Town?