Editor’s note: following is an opinion submitted by Westport resident and Chairman, Westport Community Gardens, Lou Weinberg.
Mr. O’Day:
In an era of politics that gives life to “alternate” facts, misrepresentations, and downright false narratives, it is necessary to address several statements you have been repeating in your quest to become our First Selectman.
As you try to whitewash the events leading up to and including the destruction of the Westport Community Gardens and Long Lots Preserve, you continue to repeat falsehoods that have been promoted by Selectwoman Jennifer Tooker and the Building Committee on which you serve. You completely misrepresent a meeting on this issue that took place with First Selectwoman Tooker in October 2023. You have stated that at this meeting between you, Jay Keenan, Jennifer Tooker, Toni Simonetti and me, an offer was made to “move” the Westport Community Gardens, at the Town’s expense, to another location (Baron’s South) and that a gardening season would not be lost. You said that our response was “No way, we’re going to fight this to the end.” You said that you wish all the gardeners were better served because they would be gardening today and the controversy that we saw would not have happened. You said that “The gardeners lost, and the kids won.”
The Oct. 16, 2023 Meeting
- The truth is that there was no “offer” made. Jennifer Tooker told us she had called the meeting as a “courtesy” to inform us of her decision to build a community garden at Baron’s South. This marked the very first time that she and her building committee reached out to the Westport citizens who are members of the Community Gardens.
- To say that our response to the “offer” of Baron’s South was “No way. We will fight you to the end” is simply not true. We did not respond to her dictum at all. Our response at that meeting, Mr. O’Day, was no response. We merely listened in dismay. At a later date we were asked by the Building Committee (through a third party) which scenario the gardeners would prefer: To move to Baron’s South, or to have the garden rebuilt in its current location after the school construction was completed. The gardeners stated their preference to stay at Hyde Lane, even though it meant missing gardening seasons.
- To say that you wish “all of the gardeners” were better served shows your complete ignorance regarding the sentiments and concerns of the 120 families that made up the Westport Community Gardens. Reaching out and listening to them would have been an easy thing to do. As you well know, a garden membership meeting took place to discuss Baron’s South. The vast majority of garden members agreed that it was a terrible location for a new garden. It is shaded on the east, south and west side by large trees. It is on a slope, it has questionable soil, it is full of invasives and has inadequate parking.
- To say that a new community garden would be up and running and that there would not have been a gardening season lost, no matter where it would be located, is pure fantasy. The First Selectwoman does not wave a magic wand and place a garden anywhere, quickly, without the community losing a gardening season. Even if part of Baron’s South was flat, sunny, had water, parking, unquestionably healthy soil and adequate space, this is a property which has been discussed and fought over for decades. Absolutely nothing has happened with it. Land use changes, in particular, take a very long time to negotiate and implement. Myriad town bodies need to be involved and funding needs to be approved.
Divisiveness
- Mr. O’Day, your smug comment at your campaign events that the “The gardeners lost, and the kids won” is one of the most disappointing things I’ve ever heard in my 26 years of living here. This disgusting and self-serving political tactic has been used by you and by the First Selectwoman to leverage our children and use them in a battle that did not have to exist in the first place. It is not the gardeners against the children, Mr. O’Day. This type of calculated divisiveness is the last thing we need in the town leader.
- The truth is that you never reached out to the 120 families that created and maintained an incredible and unique recreational opportunity for town residents.
- You promoted the false narrative that our town gardeners were delaying the school rebuild.
- You promoted the vilification and demonization of town residents, some of whom are in their 70s, 80s and 90s. Some of whom have students at Long Lots Elementary School. Some of whom have significant volunteer roles in our community. They are our neighbors, Mr. O’Day, not the enemy.
- You promoted the fear that suddenly, after 20 years, our garden members were a security risk to our children.
- You continue to pursue a divisive political agenda that pits ball players, parents and gardeners against each other.
Putting a ball field over the 4 acres of rehabilitated and forested green open space was not part of the Board of Education’s specifications for building a new school. The Building Committee and First Selectwoman Jennifer Tooker set this in motion behind the backs of their constituents. “Oops, I guess they found out” is the style of government that you and First Selectwoman Tooker decided to employ. It didn’t have to be this way. Westport can do better.
We need a First Selectperson who builds bridges and brings people together instead of pitting residents against each other for political gain. We need a leader who is transparent, who listens to their constituents and who collaborates. These qualities have been severely lacking in our town’s leadership for the last four years. Westport would do much better to leave that type of politicking behind.
Louis Weinberg
Chairman, Westport Community Gardens
Post Road East
Westport
Ditto. Very well said. And FACTUAL!
Here was my take : https://open.substack.com/pub/tonisimonetti/p/i-was-there-don?r=1dhpe&utm_medium=ios
O’Day is still trying to sow dissension among ball players and gardeners.. most recently at the Oct. 16 debate. Guess what? The baseball community has reached out to gardeners to talk about how to get this done, no thanks to O’Day.
Lou, I do hope members of the Steering Committee have productive discussions with Westport baseball. Happy to help if I can.
I can appreciate that many in our community, especially those connected with the community gardens, feel disappointed about the gardens not remaining at the Long Lots site. It is natural to feel upset when something meaningful to residents is affected by a larger town project.
That said, the continuing efforts to question the integrity or motives of the volunteers and professionals on the Long Lots School Building Committee are disheartening. Every member of this committee stepped up because we care deeply about Westport and want to ensure the new school is built responsibly, balancing educational needs, safety, costs, and other priorities within the limits of a very constrained site.
This was never about malice, but about making difficult tradeoffs in the best interest of the town. I share this only to offer my perspective as one person who has spent countless hours trying to do what I believe is right for our students, taxpayers, and community.
I do not intend to rehash every discussion over the past three years, but I strongly disagree with the narrative that some in the garden community continue to share. They were part of the process, they were heard, but the outcome did not align with their wishes.
Mr. Puttagunta,
We will agree to disagree.
Well,( 1) such tradeoff should have been NO staging area for the contractor!
Another should still be absolutely no geothermal.
That you would waste our money on profligately expensive geothermal is insanity when for 20 cents on the dollar we can have a fantastic energy efficient conventional HVAC.
An appalling waste of our money with so many other projects on the horizon not least several more schools in almost as dire of need as long lots.
You can have anything but you cannot have everything.
That clearly did not apply to this school, but it will mean other schools getting short changed.
This school is having 40-50 million more than is necessary spent on it.
And like it or not that means shortchanging other schools also in dire need, due to 12 years of yup, you guessed right, kicking the can.
That is hardly fair.
While the kicking of the can down the road is far more attributable to Tooker, Moore and O’Day, you still sat on that committee and lied to the gardeners next level. You all did. My humble opinion of course.
The lies from the llsbc delayed breaking ground by 2 years. You all thought you could get away with it, but the lies led to many meetings which transparency from the start, not trying to pull the wool over people’s eyes, would have avoided.
I’m shocked any of the long lots parents would vote for O’Day and Moore over Rosenwaks. I cannot imagine why they would.
Makes absolutely no sense to me. He was a far bigger cheerleader, but we cannot accuse him of letting the school go to hell, or of overspending.
Westport can not afford nor should we have to tolerate 4 more years of this kind of carry on, causing infighting in our community.
I do not think Westport has ever seen as much divisiveness as this past 4 years.
And O’day Moore were cheerleaders for it all.
They love Tookers agendas. They plan on trying to ram them all through. Starting with the downtown parking stupidity, and the 7 million dollar lunacy replacing the shed they let become dilapidated on their watch.
Solution as usual- to just knock it and rebuild twice the size, and who cares if it’s priced at triple plus what it should cost.
No thanks.
I disagree that we were ever a part of the process.
Mr. Weinberg your bantering continues to get old. Did you not sign an agreement with the Town of Westport that when the time came, and the town needed the FREE property you were using for a new school, the gardens would leave?
Jimmy
What? Got land for free? Nobody got anything. The town and its citizens created a community garden, for its citizens. What are you talking about Jimmy? Your uninformed and unsubstantiated blathering continues.
Importantly, NO PART of the new school will be built on the community garden parcel—a parcel for which the garden was duly recognized by prior administrations and PZCs as a best and sustainable use, in keeping with the Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD) . A regulation size soccer pitch (er, multipurpose athletic field) was NOT part of the specifications for an ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.
And yes, “the town,” being the chief administrator, offered to move the gardens to a toxic, uneven, shady, invasive-laden parcel for which it had absolutely no authority to offer without approvals of many other town bodies.
What are you talking about?
Is this the same woman who used the phrase “all enemies, foreign and Republican?” How can anyone take her seriously?
Gallo
No I did not say that, but I did observe and notate the white nationalist, antisemitic, racist, misogynist, unlawful, greedy behaviors of the MAGA crew. How many did you check off? How can anyone believe someone like you?
Who takes my views seriously? You got your answer yesterday: Millions upon millions of Americans.
Oh please Phillip, you are as partisan as it comes.
O’Day Moore are a nightmare for this town ! An unmitigated catastrophe of epic proportions.
They both sat on various elected commissions over the past 10 plus years and on the RTM. Moore has also rubber stamped every single failed move and agenda during the past 4 years of this failed administration.
They were both directly involved in the kicking of the can down the road and letting the schools go to hell. The parking lots go to hell, the ball fields not get maintained, the shed at Longshore become dilapidated.
KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD IN ORDER TO NOT SPEND MONEY ON SCHOOL AND TOWN PROPERTY MAINTENANCE, and KEEP MILL RATES ARTIFICIALLY LOW.
This of course was to get re elected. AND it worked.
Don O’Day was put in charge of the coleytown committee which should have been given to the building commission so Marpe could control it.
He endorsed Marpe and that was his “reward” or “nod”.
None of us are dummies here.
The Republican Party chose to make him their candidate because they were hoping a few Dems might vote for him.
Let’s give our town, of bright and intelligent, accomplished individuals at least the benefit of knowing when they are being scammed.
I’m not blind and I bet I speak for more than 80% of this town.
No more Koolaid necessary.
He treated the gardeners like lepers. He has ZERO respect for merchants and their success or failure because of parking.
He stands by every single decision the selectman currently makes no matter how many residents are in direct opposition.
He stated he voted for the hamlet text amendment change because although he received many letters, calls and emails, he did what he thought was right.
ENOUGH !
He is an insufferable and authoritarian character in my opinion and electing him would be disastrous for this town.
As for Moore ! She has been in lockstep on every vote with Tooker ! A rubber stamp, enabling Tooker to push forward agendas the majority fought against tooth and nail.
I rest my case.
Another misappropriation… I’m guessing you find grabbing catchy political phrases and slapping them on people that have nothing to do with their origin amusing?
The manipulation of the official oath dates back to at least 2007 when, in a piece for the New York Times, political columnist Maureen Dowd wrote that President George W. Bush’s aides viewed Democrats as “the enemy” and had an “us vs. them” mentality. Dowd then referenced the oath, writing that the Bush administration had “twisted the oath… to read, ‘against all enemies, foreign and Democratic'”. The phrase was altered again in the early 2010s to “all enemies, foreign and Republican” and was popularized during the presidency of Barack Obama.
Hey Jimmy. You used the word bantering wrong. There’s no bantering in my open letter above.
As far as the agreement you are referring to, you are confused. A Memorandum of Understanding was signed between me and the Town regarding the Long Lots Preserve, surrounding the Westport Community Gardens. That agreement was signed after the Board Of Selectwoman unanimously approved moving forward with this highly successful suburban open space environmental rehabilitation project. It was also approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission. It was labeled as an “excellent example of community volunteerism” by Andrea Moore, our Second Selectwoman. It was enthusiastically supported by, and worked on, by the RTM moderator, Jeff Wieser.
And, good use of the capital letters in the word free. I’ve seen that technique used somewhere before. Isn’t all Town land free for use by the taxpayers? In this case, it was FREE for us to rehabilitate, at no cost to the town, and it would provide a great benefit to the town (particularly in an era where clear-utting seems to be the norm). I would venture to guess that, with the right leadership in place (and in the old Westport days), you would’ve supported something like this.
The Long Lots Preserve was a collaborative effort that I directed. In-kind services and donations were made by AJ Penna and Son, SIR Builders, Aspatuck Land Trust, Earthplace, Audubon, the Southwest Conservation District, the State of Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, Bartlett Tree Service, Bert’s tree service,Stop & Shop, Trader Joe’s, Aitoros, in the CT. State Forester.
Over 100 residents donated $40,000 to support this environmental initiative that, if not destroyed, would have been a phenomenal hands-on outdoor learning laboratory for our children. This was the type of open space project that would have benefited generations of Westporters.
Of course the Town had me sign a Memorandum of Understanding in case they needed the land for any reason in the future. Doesn’t the town sign these types of agreements with other entities that use Town land?
There was no indication that the Town would be coming for this land, particularly after the approvals to improve it. 200 yards from the school and no word that the Town had their sites on destroying the 4 acres of open space and converting it to ballfields. Not at the time Jimmy.
So, perhaps you will call me and apologize like you did a few times during this fiasco when you wrote negative things about me on social media. I know you mean well but you’re bantering has got to stop. 😉
Let’s do coffee. We are all in this together.
Really? Talk about tired old tropes. This accusation has been leveled and answered several times. The MOU (in 2022) was for the LL Preserve, which was entirely separate from the WCG. Either you truly are ignorant of the difference, or you just find it more politically expedient to keep leveling that charge. I’m not sure which is worse.
Jimmy, please don’t be a partisan hack. Also, I did ask in a comment why you were endorsing Don O’Yesterday when he behaved in ways that you criticized when they come from other candidates.Please clarify. Don’t just run for the hills when people call you on your nonsense.
Jimmy, this legalistic response is exactly what we have come to expect from you. You have turned into a knee-jerk defender of Tooker/Moores/O’Days actions, regardless of the issue. Many in town now call you Tooker/Moores attack dog. Now you are doing O’Days bidding.
Legally any P&R facility or offering can be moved, cancelled or modified. So why were the gardeners chosen to be the losers in the kids vs. schools vs fields vs gardener. It was a purely politically calculated moves. A divide and conquer strategy that looked to all of us disinterested parties as bullying. Pure and simple.
The bullying and autocratic leadership style of the past 4 years which you have so gleefully been a cheerleader for is not what we need in Westport. Your tough guy leadership style may work elsewhere, but we won’t accept it in Westport any longer.
Yet, instead of saying “leave” the town offered to move you correct?
Hey Jimmy. Good to see you participating on a platform that you have labeled, along with Dan‘s 06880 blog, as “progressive bullshit. “
Also, good of you to bring up the word “move.” As you said to me, when you visited the garden a couple of years ago, “You don’t move a garden.”
This is terrible to read. So sorry you and other gardners (as taxpayers) of this town were treated this way. Another ball field, is definitely not what we need. Awful.
I am not at all surprised that Mr. O’Day feels obliged to invent a narrative that absolves him of all responsibility, a practice that is not to be favored in a First Selectman.
I sat through several LLSBC meetings an watched him ignore, abuse and refuse to engage with the gardeners. He was arrogant, dismissive, divisive, and sometimes downright rude with no concern for due process whatsoever.
One can only hope that his days in public office are numbered in single digits.
Thank you, Lou, for this truthful letter. You and Toni Simonetti have documented all of these interactions carefully and always communicated in a respectful manner. Thank you again for all you continue to do to keep the truth alive in this very distorted situation.
It’s not what happened, it’s the way it happened…
from snide comments about chain saws and the oops memo to duplicitous backroom dealings, labeling citizens “obstructionists” and generally sowing divisiveness, the current administration and its primary actors have brought the us vs them of national politics to Westport.
The community garden controversy, downtown parking, the Hamnlet, the Cribari Bridge, the CTDOT garage’s clear cutting: all these show a dismissiveness of residents’ needs and concerns.
And we haven’t even heard about how the dredging of the Saugatuck River has been boggled.
Thank you Mr. Weinberg for exposing Mr. O’Day’s lies and mistreatment of fellow Westporters. And by the way, his inability to tell the truth extends well beyond the situation with the Gardens. More recently, he lied about his voting record on the RTM (he did NOT support the leaf blower ordinance as he claimed the other night) and the LLSBC did not go above and beyond what was required in terms of drainage. They did only what the DEEP recommended and what the State would have required anyway. In fact, the Committee’s own consultants admitted that the “only” real way to address the drainage issue would have been to use the front soccer field as an emergency water retention basin–something that the Committee was not willing to do given their [hidden] agenda.
Don, putting debate with the WCG aside, you’ve mislead everyone in town about the cost and schedule of the renovation. You’ve manipulated your projections to fit your desired goals. When it suited you, you chose to divide the Town and you did it with your signature smirk. As our First Selectman, would you serve us or would we be serving you?
I was at many of the LLBC meetings and can attest to the fact that we, the Community Garden members were treated with disdain at every meeting. We were an annoyance to them as they never had any intention of working with us to keep the gardens at Hyde Lane.
The gardeners always wanted the new school built, but with the gardens intact. This could have been worked out, but unfortunately, the committee would not work with us to achieve that.
Most distressing was their total lack of concern for the environment and surrounding areas that would be impacted by additional ground water issues.
Shame on them.
The gardeners and their supporters could have — should have — been fully involved in the Long Lots school planning process from the get-go. They, too, were important stakeholders,
Instead, as Lou Weinberg lays out, the gardeners were excluded and sometimes, even treated with contempt; vilified as wanting to undermine the building of the new school. I was shocked hearing some of these false accusations when I listened in on Zoom meetings.
Going forward, I hope we can elect Town leaders who won’t practice — or defend — the kind of toxic, secretive and unfair process this was.
Kissinger was right, the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake.
Mr. Gallo
When you come down from your perch way up there, think about this:
In the gardening world, we discern symptoms from disease. The black spot is not a disease, but the sign of one.but the sign of one. That’s what we have here. The issue may not be relevant to you, but it is a symptom with multiple possible morbidities: dishonesty, greed, self-aggrandizement, disrespect, and neglect of duty to citizens. Probably a few more.
That is a misattribution
The correct attribution is Sayre’s Law.
Thanks for setting the record straight, Lou. The voters deserve to know the actual facts of what has happened here, unsavory as the facts may be.
Happy Sunday All! John, great seeing you early today at the Beach and enjoyed our brief chat. We did great work with John Shuggs, Morley, and many others to save Barron South from a “give away” to a developer. We will always have issues and views in common, and other times we won’t.
Lou, yes, we will get a coffee when the election is done, and all invited. I don’t run to any hills or strong arm anyone. Anyone who knows me will tell you that. I gave you guys the opening go at it with me. Awesome, I embrace a great debate and opportunity for all sides to be heard.
When my friend Don O’day gets attacked, and singled out because he is running on the Republican ticket, and politics are in play to go after his character, as very little mention if any of any other candidates in this race who all have had an opportunity to opine since day one.
We do need athletic fields for our kids. In 99.9% of the time, these fields exist on our school properties. Long Lots is no different.
I make no apologies for supporting a new Longs Lots Elementary School, with fields for our kids, and Don O’Day and Andrea Moore for our First and Second Selectman of Westport.
Keep throwing the punches on line and I urge you all to attend the debates.
Have a great Sunday All.
Look forward to robust coffee chats…Chris Grimm you as well if you are up for it.
Jimmy Izzo
RTM 3
We already have more than twenty athletic fields, but now we no longer have our single community garden. It is about something resembling equitable resource use.
I want to add that while volunteers were contributing their time and resources (that Lou well noted) for creating the Preserve, members of the administration and the BOE had already been in discussion about appropriating the land. But they didn’t have the common courtesy to say, “maybe you should hold off on doing anything else there, until plans for the school build are finalized.”
Who can defend that? It is neither transparent nor neighborly.
Good job continuing to frame this as gardens against fields. That’s a solid continuation of the Tooker Administration’s playbook. Divisive.
Excellent reiteration of the Tooker administration‘s playbook. Divisive.
I believe everyone in this town supports safe, clean modern schools for all, as well as sports fields for same.
Nobody is saying that long lots did not need to be fixed, nobody is saying kids don’t need ball fields.
It is the untransparent, and shade filled sneaky, underhanded manner with which it was handled by tookers administration and her handpicked goons.
Gardens matter too.
Especially when those gardeners have to foot the tax bill which pays for this budget.
Again geothermal vs conventional high efficiency hvac, it saves 10 million to do conventional HVAC, which is what we the voters 99% have in our own homes.
Many of us park our cars on our driveways, so do we want the town over spending our money to park town vehicles in what amounts to extortionately overpriced sheds at our crown jewel longshore !
NO WE do NOT.
Merchants are the majority stakeholder in downtown parking yet have not been granted 1 SINGULAR meeting with the selectwoman.
And forget DPIC, it’s a joke.
A handpicked bunch of yes men, almost all of them including the latest token merchants finally put in there but of course best buddies of Moore !
It would be funny if it wasn’t so blatantly corrupt
So vote like your livelihoods, tax bills and peace of mind depend upon it.
That means O’Day Moore are a non starter and disaster.
It is a travesty with what happened to the community garden and long lots preserve and the way it was handled. Hopefully, the town can create a new permanent garden and preserve at the Burr farm location to help erase the embarrassment to Westport and help rebuild the town’s reputation to something which we can again be proud.
Adding my 2 cents… I hope others will see that we desperately need a 1st Selectperson who will lead the RTM (note: the R stands for Representative) and the town of Westport with collaboration, consensus, transparency and respect for all of our townspeople. Unfortunately, in my experience, having attended many many meetings regarding the Community Gardens and the Longs Lots School, Don O’Day displayed anything but those virtues. From the very beginning, when the Gardners learned that the gardens were slated for destruction, John and the rest of the Long Lots School committee were arrogant, condescending, dismissive and anything but collaborative or inclusive. He and his committee members went through the motions of letting us speak, but NEVER in a 2-way dialog – NEVER with a seat at the table concerning the topic of how to handle the gardens. If this is how he plans to run the town, I am afraid it will just be more of the same we saw from the current regime — pushing to put a parking lot on Jessup Green, building Shagri-La in Saugatuck, seeing dollar signs with offers from Pay-To-Play baseball organizations to build a state-of-the art baseball field over the gardens (identified through FOI searches), destruction of the native plant preserve around the Community Gardens, superficial offers to ‘move’ the gardens to a totally inappropriate location (steep incline, lack of sun, contaminated soil (another FOI discovery), suggesting that the Gardeners could be a danger to the children, etc. Westporters deserve better and we have excellent choices! Please consider this as you go to vote in a few weeks.
Lou- Thank you for your detailed recap and notes. A reminder of the many ways our peaceful gardening community was ignored, disrespected, and even vilified throughout this unfortunate process.
Kevin Christie and Amy Wistreich have included in their campaign platform a specific reference to rebuilding the gardens in a sunny, accessible and permanent site. They will include the gardens in the Town’s Plan of Conservation Development. We will be voting for Kevin & Amy.
Mr. Weinberg,
I hope that the town will get a new community gardens so that Westport residents can enjoy this activity.
I do fail to see how your open rant is advocating for this objective when you are attacking a candidate to the First Selectman’s position. What if Mr. O’Day wins the election? Or have you not thought that far, and your urge for revenge is stronger? And revenge for what may I ask? It was not 1 person who decided what is the priority for Westport, but many many people from both parties.
As I have said in the start, I do hope a community gardens finds a new home. More importantly, we should make sure that the town is in control of that community gardens so that we do not get a repeat of this sort of aggressive, harmful, and toxic behavior.
Joe
I believe the objective is to look past campaign slogans and to the actions of the candidates. In this case, Don O’Day’s actions speak loud and clear. He just doesn’t care. That’s enough of a stain to warrant this freedom of expression during an important election — what you refer to as a rant. So be it. Now is the time to remind voters who these people are.
If you have a candidate to support, then support that candidate.
Freedom of speech is not absolute and has limits.
But more importantly, as a resident of a small town, I would like to see a civil and respectful dialogue, and I have zero tolerance for manipulative or cheap attacks on ANY candidate, serving members, or volunteers in this town.
Firstly, Freedom of Expression is limited by libel and slander laws, and revealing state secrets.
Libel and slander have clear red lines, which have not been crossed — except in comments directed at me in some cases. The threshold for libel is higher for those considered public figures, which includes elected officials and candidates, something about reckless disregard of the truth (google it: NY Times v. Sullivan).
I could give a history lesson in political criticism, freedom of expression, freedom of the press, editorial cartoons, and more, but you get the point (I think?).
BTW, Why do YOUR rules for Freedom of Expression apply only to small towns? It is a universal right.
You really do not get it.
And I do support several candidates in this election; I’ve been very public about it. I also STRONGLY oppose certain candidates for good reason, and I am being very public about that too.
Welcome to America. If we can keep it.
Just to bring this conversation back to the heart of the article. So what you are trying to say by mentioning the freedom of speech is that you agree with Mr. Weinberg strategy and diplomacy as a chairman of the WCG, and the goal of establishing a new community gardens, correct? And this whole strategy hinges on a single outcome out of three? 33% chance I guess is not that bad?
Joe, so you recommend that if you want something from the 1st Selectman that you first have to kiss his butt. Lou could also have made a large campaign contribution to each candidate.
Is this how you really want our town to work? This might be how certain national politicians operate (maybe they all do,) but can’t we do better in Westport? Can’t we at least try to do better?
He neither needs to kiss anyone’s butt, nor burn any bridges. Perhaps you don’t realize this, but in order to get a community garden constructed in another location, the First Selectperson neeeds to submit an 8-24 application to the Planning & Zoning to get an approval for a municipal improvement. Obviously, the funding bodies will need to approve the appropriation as well. But the process starts with the FS submitting an 8-24.
So now let me ask you this question: If you were the chairman of the WCG, and you represent members from different political spectrum, and you need the town’s support to find and build a new home for the community gardens, what would your strategy be?
The fact that you talk about strategy( in this case brown nosing) is exactly and precisely why O’Day Moore should not be elected.
If Westport does not want another 4 years of divisive, vengeful, self interest, with of course “0” transparency, and the setting up of, and this is very important croney committees of loyalist members( loyal only to them), in order to further their more often than not majority opposed agendas, interviewed and vetted to insure absolute rubber stamping of their will, then at all costs we should avoid the O’Day Moore ticket at all costs.
As was the case in the Hamlet amendment vote, when the large ( massive) majority of your constituents tell you they want you to represent them by voting a certain way, and you decide you know better than them, ( the mind boggles), so you vote unapologetically, in direct opposition to the will of your voters, well, now we have a big problem.
Remember the last 4 years of divisive, purposefully non transparent and vengeful, mismanagement, when you vote in 3 weeks.
The LLS building committee has taken a very difficult task, and they have done a great job and under a lot of pressure. The main issue was not the administration or the members of the building committee, but the handful of people who did not want to accept what the consequences of building a new school right next to a functioning school meant. The volunteers that you keep accusing and bad mouthing have done nothing wrong. They did their job. As all the members of the boards and RTM who have voted on funding the new school.
It is clear from what you just wrote that this is all about vengeance, because you did not get your way.
I have respect for all candidates, and I will cast my vote based on who I think will serve Westport best.
The only vengeful folks in this town are Tooker, Moore O’Day and their croneys.
The Tooker Administration and her hand picked LLBC used deception and secrecy from the very start to keep the gardeners and adjacent neighbors (key stakeholders) in the dark over their end-goal of destroying the 20 year old WCG/Preserves (which was outside the Long Lots campus and the scope of the Building Committee assignment) for the 20 something ball field.
“Oops,I guess they found out” – exemplifies the cowardice and disrespect displayed by all involved as they hid their true intentions from the very beginning. Gaslighting (proposing at one meeting, out of thin air, a Garden on a hilly part of school campus “with lights”, the baseless offer of a Garden at toxic Barons South…) coupled with glibness (“I have a chainsaw”) continued throughout the farcical process at each Town Hall meeting where alternative solutions to serve everyone and grow together were offered and roundly ignored. (Robert Harrington, thank you for encouraging the LLBC and BOE to find a way!) The ‘ends justify the means’ mentality of the LLBC encouraged divisiveness as shown by some strident parents vilifying the gardeners as dangerous (comical!) and selfish (projection!).
To those happy with the outcome, perhaps someday you will be on the other side of the table in a Moore O’Day Administration and you may not like the scorched earth politics (literally) they carry out so casually. How can you trust these politicians with this track record? Perhaps you would prefer transparency and collaboration instead of being steamrolled. If we returned to the Golden Rule, to “Do to others as you would have them do to you”, issues in Westport could be amicably solved and the vitriol produced by the last administration could be replaced by goodwill.
The new Long Lots school project was unanimously approved by multiple town boards and the RTM. The board members and RTM would have rejected the LLSBC plans had there been any deception or some secret dealings. So let’s not explain what actually happened with theories that do not hold up to the facts.
There is no need to vilify people who are volunteering their time away from their families to do good things for this town. In my book, people resort to this type of hate when they don’t have a strong argument to make. And doesn’t vilifying others break the Golden Rule you mention?
And more importantly, the town will work on a new home for the community plots, and the residents will be able to participate in this activity and socialize again. I think this is an important objective to focus on, regardless of which administration is elected, wouldn’t you agree?
Joe – you have attacked the gardeners and the gardens at every turn. Now that you have the ball field you want on the way, you feign interest? Please, just go away.
The Gardeners suggested the Burr Farms field as an appropriate new site and you immediately criticized the proposal because of the existence of a sports field on its site.
If you are an honest person, you will admit that any site that is appropriate for a community garden (flat, sunny, good drainage) you will oppose because that would also be a good site for a ball field and all you care about are ball fields. The Burr Farms comment showed that even when there are more than twenty ball fields in Town, it is more important to you to have every single one of them than to have one single community garden. Spare us your disingenuous BS.
Don O’Day actively contributed to the destruction of the gardens. Now, for the first time, this week, he suddenly is suggesting that he maybe wants to see a new community garden. Don O’Day, who simply is worried about an election, is no more authentic in supporting a new community garden than are you.
The “important objective” (for the gardeners who prioritize a restoration of a community garden) is to support candidates who are genuine in their support for the gardeners, not support people who say things in moments of political expedience.
I think your comments are an example of why we had this long and painful battle. It was not Tooker or fill-in-the-blank who caused the divisiveness in this community. It was the misrepresentation of the facts all along. It started with “they” are destroying the community gardens to put a Babe Ruth stadium in its place.
We are clearly an ocean apart regarding the facts.
In my point of view, the community gardens did not make it in the final plans. This community gardens was built on the newly purchased property at Long Lots BECAUSE the school did not need that space, and BECAUSE there was no need for more fields at that time.
Let’s say the building committee decided to rebuild the new school in the same place as the existing school (a scenario that would have been impossible logistically and financially since it requires displacement of over 700 people). If the building committee came back with plans to destroy the community gardens, then this would have been a completely absurd and hard to justify.
The new school building instead is going to be built on a different part of the lot, and that means the land use of the rest of the area needs to be reconsidered, and the new terrain challenges taken into account. The athletic fields took precedence.
Unfortunately, the only community gardens was lost as part of building a new school.
So instead of blaming others and vilifying people, take some time to understand what are the drivers and root causes. And channel the effort towards establishing a new community gardens in Westport. It may be that there is more trust in one candidate than others to help with this ask. Yet I do not see why cutting ties with the other candidates will help in anyway.
And I don’t have any issues if the future gardens is located at Burr Farms as long as the process is followed. You can’t demand a location on the 11th hour when it was clear that the P&Z were going to approve the Long Lots 8-24 application without a community gardens.
Joe, please recall the words you shared with readers of a local blog.
“I don’t understand how the steering committee is asking for the Buff Farms multipurpose fields to be replaced with community gardens. These fields are in use, and they are not abandoned.
Also, the article says “removing the Westport Community Gardens completely from the property to make way for a multi-use Parks & Recreation field, post-construction”. That is an inaccurate sequence of events. The construction of the new school building in a different spot, and the higher requirement for drainage on this site, result in a new landscape that is not the same as pre-construction. The community gardens and the athletic fields will no longer exist once the construction starts. It is then a matter of what can be put back on that property. Athletic fields have been there long before the community gardens were added. And it is the norm to have athletic fields next to schools. There were no additional fields added that were not there before.”
Joe Nader, May 22, 2025
Chris,
This does not prove that I oppose community gardens at Burr Farms.
In that comment you shared, I pointed out that these fields are in use and wanted to make sure that the steering committee is aware of that.
And the town various boards have unanimously approved what the priorities are.
We need to look forward, and find a new home for the community gardens. Or is endless debating the objective?
Joe – I simply think you are being completely disingenuous, while campaigning for Don O’Day.
Oh, the smell of mendacity.
Chris, no need to go resort to cheap personal and character attacks because you don’t have any argument to make. And you did answer my question. You are more interested in endless and pointless debates than what actually matters.
Comments on this article are now closed.
Doug Weber
Publisher
Westport Journal