New Haven Independent

The final touches on a proposed ten-year development plan came in discussions between the P&Z and its outside planners at a 6 p.m.meeting Wednesday. It is still considered a work in final progress and was described as such when it was unveiled before the Representative Town Meeting a few hours later. The RTM’s meeting centered on two key issues: the P&Z ten-year plan for planning and conservation and election redistricting plans for the upcoming November election. The meeting was lengthy; the agenda long.

First came the proposed ten-year plan, which town planners have been working on for more than a year. “We are almost there. This is the version we will put before the Board of Selectmen,” Shirley Rasmussen, the town planner, told the RTM. The Board of Selectman (BoS) will have 65 days to study the plan and may decide to hold public hearings before its Oct. 23 deadline.

The major change centered on proposed commercial development at Exit 56 and Route 1 near Guilford on acres of property owned by Wayne Cooke of Hilltop Orchards.

In its prior version, the ten-year plan strongly recommended that “Branford should also continue to limit large scale retail development near Exit 56 and Leetes Island Road in an effort to guide retailers to other locations.”

Branford Attorney David Gibson, who represents Rhode Island developer Churchill & Banks, pointed out that such wording precluding retail development in only one section of town. But “what is worse, it is highly prejudicial and discriminatory to those people who own property in that area. They are really restricted at this point.”

From these statements, made at an earlier public hearing, he made it clear that in legal terms he found the proposed language and message offensive. He didn’t have to state the obvious next steps.

Meanwhile Cooke went on a mission, engaging in a broad campaign to change the Commission’s mind. He telephoned officials. He wrote letters. He purpose was to press for “more flexible zoning at Exit 56.” So far the zoning remains light industrial. To the degree that the Commission retreated to more neutral language, Cooke’s campaign succeeded.

But he still faces other stiff hurdles that could effectively end the project. The Inland Wetlands Commission has rejected the developer’s plan. Without this permit the shopping center plan, which could include department stores like Target, cannot go forward. And the P& Z has no formal application before it.

Jayson Vincent, of Planimetrics, one of the town’s outside planners, told the RTM that the ten-year plan recommends formation of an implementation Committee to make sure the plan actually takes effect.

The RTM members had some questions. Lonnie Reed, who is running for the state’s General Assembly, wanted to know which group would create the implementation committee, the P& Z or the RTM or the BoS, or some combination. Her question was not immediately answered.

Redistricting Discussed

The election redistricting plan drew the most passion. The RTM Rules and Ordinance Committee held three meetings in recent weeks and voted unanimously on various issues. It kept District 3 at Orchard House, after the Registrar of Voters sought to send voters elsewhere without first inspecting the place to see if another room would do. It turned out another room would do. The Registrar’s proposed move from Orchard Hill created an uproar among residents in Short Beach.

It moved the voting place for all of District 4—5,800 voters— to the Mary Murphy School, citing access issues for handicap and senior voters. Parking was also an issue.

But the RTM was hardly unanimous on the District 4 move, voting 14 to 9 to implement it. All but one of the Republicans and two Democrats opposed the move because it was too radical a plan to undertake before a major presidential election and because new state redistricting plans slated for the next year or two might have voters moving again.

Republican RTM member John Prete said, “I’ve been voting here since 1991, and there has never been a problem. I think this has been shoved at us. It’s moving too fast.”

His colleague, RTM member Pam Fowler, said: “I’m not sure it’s a good idea since we will have to do it again in the next year or so.”

This statement provoked Democrat RTM member Alice Lambert to retort: “Is the community of Branford so stupid they can’t figure out where to go?”

But the redistricting issue that went down to defeat centered on a tiny group of voters in the 5th District. Its change had been pushed by the registrars of voters, Dan Hally and Marion Burkhard . And the Rules & Ordinance (R& O) Committee had unanimously agreed. But shifting where the 113 voters actually vote came unglued when new information was disclosed.

For some reason when the state drew lines for its Assembly districts, it put two streets in the middle of the 5th district into the 98th Assembly District, not the 102nd which covers the rest of Branford. This requires separate voting machines and staff. In an effort to make the voting lines less confusing, the Registrars wanted to move the 113 voters to another district.

R & O held three meetings over a course of a month and approved the change. But at the RTM meeting Wednesday, Attorney Alinor Sterling, its chair, said the committee had now received “new information.” The information apparently was not immediately disclosed by the Registrars, that if the 5th District lost only 13 voters, let alone 113, voters it could well lose an RTM seat.

“Our committee was not aware of this possibility,” she said, asking the RTM to “re-refer” it back to committee for further analysis. Town Clerk Marianne Kelly said there would be no change to RTM members. Attorney Peter Black, a Republican RTM member and member of R&O, said he approved shifting the 113 voters.

Hally, the Democratic Registrar, said the move was “a top priority. There is a bottleneck in the Fifth and we expect a huge turnout,” adding state officials were predicting that voter turnout “might be as high as 80 percent.”

A Branford wide redistricting plan that might well add two more districts and change the way the 30 RTM members are allocated is expected to take place within the next two years. RTM members, who serve two year terms, stand for re-election in 2009. Indeed the Registrars initially sought a quick election redistricting plan town wide when it set out to make changes but speed buried the idea this time around.

In the end, there was a sense of too little information too late. Dennis Flanagan, a long time Republican RTM member from the 5th District and the RTM clerk, told the group he was deeply concerned that an RTM member from his own district could be lost in this shuffle. For the R&O to be kept virtually in the dark on an issue that concerned the RTM as a group would not fly.

Hally rose to speak about the need for the change but gave no explanation as to why this new information had not been fully vetted.

The vote was taken and sent back to the R&O committee, ending the proposed journey of 113 voters in this election year. The “splinter” group remains in the 5th where they live.

###