Editor’s note: following is an opinion submitted by Westporter Adam Glazer.
In a time when politics too often divides communities, Westport has a chance to choose unity over partisanship. That’s why I’m supporting David Rosenwaks for First Selectman — an Independent who puts people before politics.
David chose to run as an Independent because he believes that local leadership should rise above party lines. Town government isn’t about ideology — it’s about listening, problem-solving, and doing what’s best for residents. That’s exactly how David operates.
He understands that Westport’s greatest strength lies in its people — thoughtful, engaged, and deeply proud of our town. But too many residents today feel unheard. Important decisions are sometimes made before all perspectives are considered. David wants to change that. He believes leadership starts with listening — and that every voice in Westport deserves respect and consideration.
David brings both intellect and empathy to the table. He’s an accomplished professional with the analytical skills to tackle complex issues, but he’s also the kind of neighbor who takes time to hear your story. His campaign isn’t about slogans; it’s about solutions and restoring trust in how our town is governed.
An Independent First Selectman like David Rosenwaks can bring people together — bridging divides and ensuring Westport’s future remains as bright as its past. If you believe our town deserves leadership rooted in listening, civility, and common sense, then David Rosenwaks is the candidate who can make it happen.
Westport doesn’t need more politics. It needs a leader who answers only to one constituency: the people of Westport.
Adam Glazer
Old Road
Westport
Kevin Christie and Amy Wistreich have been engaged,
paying attention, and stepping up to to represent and lead with distinction. They have the right vision and roadmap to fix the leadership void in Westport.
For far too long, the GOP candidates created divisive policies and cause for unprecedented distrust in our elected leadership.
The independent candidate, who left the Democratic Party to pursue a personal ambition lacks any leadership track record.
Kevin and Amy are not afraid to stand up to national issues that have immense consequence on our freedoms and way of life locally.
Kevin and Amy’s track records are beyond reproach. They bring proven leadership, financial acumen, land use expertise and shared values that put Westport residents first among competing interests.
Let’s get this done, Westport. Vote for change now. Vote for Kevin and Amy.
Fact check:
David Rosenwaks chose to run as an independent only after seeking – and failing to earn- the Democratic Party nomination earlier this year. He fell short in that effort for a very simple reason: a total lack of relevant experience for the job, having only barely served 1 term on the RTM where (by the way) he never once bothered to speak at the podium on a single issue confronting the town. Not a word. Far from being some heroic effort to transcend politics, his candidacy smacks of pure opportunism, period full stop. It’s the last thing we need after 12 years of Republicans incompetence.
“David chose to run as an Independent because he believes that local leadership should rise above party lines.”
I won’t repeat the many facts that support my prior emphasis on Mr. Rosenwaks’ mundane 22 month RTM tenure, his lack of initiative there, his silence when it counted, his disappointing voting record on controversial issues (Parking Harding, increasing resident inclusion, environmental protection, etc.). Those can be found elsewhere.
However it has become apparent that the Rosenwaks strategy is to continue this propaganda campaign with the objective of converting as many of the uninitiated and uninformed as possible based upon empty rhetoric.
Instead I’ll reference other people’s words to illustrate this:
On September 16, 2025, longtime resident Attorney Evan Barr wrote:
“Let’s get down to specifics, not vague generalizations. David Rosenwaks has been on the RTM for precisely one year. Can you point to a single legislative accomplishment, a single time he has stood up at the podium, taken the mic, expressed an opinion, proposed a resolution? He’s unwilling or unable to step forward. Now he wants to lead the Town? Let’s get serious.”
The list of Rosenwaks’ evangelists have had AN ENTIRE MONTH to meaningfully address Attorney Barr’s request for specifics. Clearly they cannot because there aren’t any.
Instead, all that his proselytizers can do is make longwinded excuses for him, try to spin his proven lack of track record into somehow actually being positive qualities, and merely continue their propaganda drivel in the hope that repetition will have an impact on the uninitiated.
Then Mr. Peter Propp requested proof of Mr. Rosenwaks’ self-professed “professional expertise in managing large scale projects and municipal budgets”. He requested specific examples of those large-scale projects, municipal budgets, and where/when such experience was gained.
Crickets.
Mr. Propp also noted: “While Mr. Rosenwaks was generally well-regarded within the Democratic party for his pleasant demeanor, concerns about his limited experience and political maturity led many to view him as someone who could benefit from additional seasoning in a board position or continued RTM participation before seeking executive leadership. Westport deserves facts, not fabricated credentials. Leadership experience matters, but it must be real, verifiable, and relevant to the challenges our town faces.”
Again, crickets – except for Dr. Louis D’Onofrio (he is not a Dr.) telling Mr. Propp that requesting facts “misses the mark” and making up a story about how the RTM “actually works” in order to spin Mr. Rosenwaks’ lack of active participation and civil engagement into something nebulous and intangible but proof of leadership expertise. This has been the hallmark of their entire campaign.
Rather than a sudden epiphany, it appears that Mr. Rosenwaks’ decision to leave the Democrat party was directly related to not receiving the DTC’s endorsement for First Selectman . Had Mr. Rosenwaks received the DTC endorsement he desired, would he now running as an “Independent”? Please, get real.
What’s most concerning is instead of listening and heeding the cogent advice of his party (ie Mr. Rosenwaks IS new to Westport, IS politically immature, and WOULD definitely benefit from serving on various political boards or commissions or continued RTM participation), Mr. Rosenwaks knowingly and willingly decided to potentially subvert this election.
A relative newcomer, with no political acumen, an unremarkable brief RTM tenure, with zero political accomplishments or achievements, and a voting record that counters his claim of increasing resident inclusion, transparency and environmental protection, suddenly views himself as being the “Savior of Westport” – and wants Westport’s residents to entrust him with the power and responsibility of our highest executive office?! This is the actual definition of hubris.
Counter to his campaign’s assertions, I am not partisan. I vote for the candidate who I believe is the authentically experienced, prepared, has a track record that I can evaluate and agree with, and has a platform I endorse. Non-partisan.
So why do I take the time writing comments regarding Mr. Rosenwaks’ unworthy candidacy?
Because individual votes have consequences, and for so many reasons this election is critical for the future of Westport.
I want to see the next selectman chosen by the MAJORITY of our residents rather than decided “backdoor” by mathematics.
It appears that because he was deemed unready for the DTC endorsement, Mr. Rosenwaks has knowingly decided to force a mathematical decision to occur. Imagine, a candidate can now become Westport’s First Selectman having received only 34% of resident support!
Is THAT possibility what anyone wants, even Mr. Rosenwaks?
AND given Westport’s history of recent elections, if Mr. Rosenwaks receives only a handful of votes, Westport’s future will likely be in the hands of a “mathematical default” – Do not forget that Ms. Tooker won by ONLY 69 VOTES. I find that a default means of deciding our election contrary to Westport’s best interest.
Personally, I urge Mr. Rosenwaks to bow out of this election, work for his priorities (whatever they may be) from within our current system, and allow the residents to choose Westport’s next leader rather than leaving it up to mathematical chance. Even the Independent “Forward Party” that he is now associating himself with recognizes the “Spoiler Effect” that candidates like Mr. Rosenwaks creates in election outcomes, and urges supporters to work within the system supporting the political candidate whose platform they most agree with. Otherwise the spoiler effect might unintentionally elect candidates that they abhor.
If he remains a Westport resident, there will be ample opportunities for Mr. Rosenwaks to engage in political and community leadership roles.
I sense fear in the comments from the residents about all the so called negative traits about David Rosenwaks. Their fear is real because David Rosenwaks is going to win the election and become the next First Selectman.
Mr. Walshon,
I must admit, when I first encountered your repeated references to me in various posts, I was somewhat bewildered. At first, it was unclear why you had such a sustained interest in my activities or views. I had assumed that, like many in our town, you and I could disagree in the political arena without engaging in personal attacks. However, as time has passed and your rhetoric has intensified, I now find myself growing increasingly concerned—not merely by your frequent invocations of my name but by the palpable anger and personal animus that underpins your attacks.
It is evident to me that your discourse is no longer simply a matter of political disagreement; it has evolved into something more troubling. While some may take amusement in the notion that I seem to be occupying space “rent-free” in your thoughts, I do not find this situation trivial. In fact, it leads me to a deeper concern for your well-being. Anger of such magnitude, directed at an individual over a prolonged period, can be corrosive—not only to the object of the ire but also to the one harboring it. I worry that the intensity of your responses and the frequency with which you feel compelled to engage in personal disparagement may not merely reflect dissatisfaction with political positions but might indicate a deeper emotional unrest.
I do not take this lightly, and while some may view your behavior as mere political theater, I see it as a signal of something that might require attention. I will pray for your peace of mind, Mr. Walshon, and I offer a gesture of goodwill: If you are interested, I can connect you with clinician resources that might help alleviate some of the stress and frustration you appear to be experiencing. My phone number is, as you well know, readily accessible to you—please do not hesitate to reach out if you wish to speak further.
Now, regarding your comments on Mr. Rosenwaks, it is clear that you seek to diminish his candidacy by focusing on what you perceive as his lack of experience or achievements. However, I must respectfully disagree with the characterization that Mr. Rosenwaks is merely engaging in “empty rhetoric” or “propaganda.” His decision to run as an Independent was not an effort to “subvert the election” but rather to embody a leadership model that transcends partisan divisions, something which I believe our town desperately needs. The very nature of your argument—that his candidacy is a result of political opportunism—appears to disregard the nuance of political evolution, where individuals who do not initially align with established party lines often bring fresh perspectives that challenge entrenched ideologies.
You decry Mr. Rosenwaks for his lack of a long, publicly visible political track record, but in doing so, you ignore the value of integrity, the willingness to listen, and the ability to foster collaboration—qualities that Westport so desperately needs in a leader. Indeed, it is not uncommon for those who have yet to engage in the typical trappings of political maneuvering to offer the most candid and effective leadership. Your suggestion that his candidacy lacks substance overlooks the very real desire among many residents for someone who seeks to unify rather than divide, who puts Westport above party politics, and who listens before he acts.
Lastly, I must point out that the focus of your critique on my personal qualifications—as you have often sought to discredit my professional title and my support of Mr. Rosenwaks’ campaign—appears to be another attempt to deflect from substantive discourse. The credentials I hold are both legitimate and earned through years of dedication to the field of healthcare. My qualifications should be evaluated on their own merit, not used as a vehicle for personal disparagement. If you wish to engage in meaningful debate, I encourage you to focus on the issues at hand—on the future of Westport—rather than continuing this unfortunate trend of ad hominem attacks.
In conclusion, I do not see this exchange as one rooted in mere political differences but rather as an opportunity to reflect on the nature of public discourse in our town. The level of personal animosity in your comments is both unnecessary and, frankly, unproductive. Let us strive, for the sake of Westport, to return to a conversation based on facts, ideas, and a shared commitment to the community’s well-being. My offer of support remains open, should you wish to engage in a more constructive manner.
Sincerely,
Louis D’Onofrio
I don’t understand why people, and even David Rosenwaks consider it being “attacked” when residents like Dr. Jay Walshon, Mr. Evan Barr, Mr. Peter Propp, myself, and others are simply pointing out facts and asking simple questions.
Pointing out that Mr. Rosenwaks has done nothing on the RTM is far from an attack. It is a simple fact.
People questioning his “Independent Candidate” crusade when being knee deep in the Westport Democratic Town Committee 3 months before his grand announcement is not an attack. It is a point of fact for our electorate.
Folks, guess what? Once we are elected we all work for the “W” and that is Westport.
The “divide” and “politics” when it comes to our town, is simply a divide on how to solve a local issue by Westporters, not D’s or R’s.
Yes, our debates do require participation, taking a stand, and taking criticism.
Jimmy Izzo
RTM 3
While it’s fair and necessary in public discourse to question positions and examine records, it’s equally important to recognize the line between constructive criticism and personal attacks. As someone with your experience in public service, I would expect you to be capable of distinguishing between fact-based inquiry and commentary that becomes unnecessarily personal or disparaging in tone.
When concerns are raised about comments being perceived as attacks, it’s not simply a matter of disagreement—it’s often about how those comments are delivered. Dismissing these concerns as people being overly sensitive misses the opportunity for more respectful, issue-focused engagement.
We can challenge one another without being dismissive or inflammatory. That’s the standard our community deserves.