RTM Backs Out; Parkside Village Stays Put

In the end a new park in Branford Hills will remain a park and Parkside Village, an affordable housing complex on South Montowese Street, will expand at the site it has called home for decades. 

An RTM sub-committee’s decision late last month to abandon the idea of placing a newly constructed Parkside Village at a town-owned Branford Hills park across town in Branford Hills was met with strong applause from residents in each neighborhood. They attended the meeting in the community room at Fire Headquarters. Parkside Village, which is overseen by state law, is not a town entity or a town project.

It was also the wise legal move because the land issue didn’t belong before the Representative Town Meeting (RTM) at this juncture in the process, according to an Eagle examination of RTM ordinances. 

The uproar about the RTM subcommittee and its purpose came last month after RTM Moderator Dennis Flanagan (R‑5th) appointed Ray Ingraham (R‑5th), RTM Republican majority leader, as chair of the sub-committee. Both Ingraham and Flanagan represent the Fifth District where Parkside Village has been located since the 1970s. The 30-member RTM consists of 19 Republicans and 11 Democrats, representing seven districts. Ingraham is also the Republican RTM majority leader and chair of the town’s Republican Party. From the outset there were questions about the creation, the make-up, and the legality of the special RTM sub-committee. Click here to read the Eagle’s story.

“This particular body has never been empowered to do exactly what you are doing right now,” Kurt Schwanfelder (pictured), a former RTM and Board of Finance member, told the sub-committee at its meeting. ​“I wrote it, and it has never been done in the past.” Schwanfelder wrote the ordinance overseeing the RTM’s role in the transfer of town property in 1997. 

After the meeting Douglas Denes, the chair of the Housing Authority, told the Eagle, ​“We are pleased that we have clarity now, and we know the direction we need to proceed in. We were looking for clarity. And we got it. We have done our due diligence. We have looked at all the possible sites in town, and now we have clarity about where our options are. And our option is to stay where we are.” 

The Housing Authority will now turn its attention to trying to achieve a ​“small boundary adjustment with the town,” a small land exchange that ​“will give us a sliver of land to enable us to do some things that will mollify the fire marshal,” Denes said in an interview. It will also save some of the area’s oldest trees. (See top photo.The Housing Authority owns the green section and the town owns the yellow section.) Denes said the Housing Authority wants to trade the green section for the yellow section.

Agenda Outline

About 75 people showed up at the sub-committee’s first meeting on April 26, hoping to hear from the Housing Authority; its developer, Beacon Properties; and First Selectman Jamie Cosgrove, who had not taken on a position on location.

It was Rep. Bob Imperato (R‑4), one of three Republicans on the new sub-committee, who took the lead at the outset. He and Democrats Adam Hansen, who serves as the RTM clerk, and Maryann Amore, represent the Fourth District, where the Branford Hills park is located. Ingraham and Don Conklin, represent the Fifth District where Parkside is located. 

When he filed his agenda on April 17, Ingraham, chair of the new sub-committee, wrote that the committee’s purpose was ​“to consider and act on the following request for Branford Housing Authority to use the former Branford Hills school site for the building a replacement for Parkside I housing located on South Montowese Street.”

Ingraham’s published agenda also said the committee would discuss and set steps and information necessary for (us) to come to a conclusion on the matter. Adjust meeting schedule as necessary,” was also included.

None of it happened.

Within 20 minutes of opening the meeting, the five-member committee voted unanimously to take no action. This effectively removes the topic from the RTM Call. The decision not to act came after Imperato, who represents Branford Hills, raised a series of issues that he said necessitated further inquiry. The audience burst into applause.

Imperato, who made the motion to take the item off the call, observed that the town planner had to weigh in since this is the year the town addresses its Plan of Conservation and Development.

He also pointed out that a nearby piece of land (one belonging to St. Elizabeth’s Church) across the street from the current park might soon be up for sale and that would change the geography of the area. As it turned out the Archdiocese of Hartford announced this past weekend that among the scores of parish consolidations in three counties, St. Elizabeth’s (pictured) will be merged with St. Mary’s and St. Therese’s Church to form St. John Bosco Parish in Branford. 

Hansen said during the discussion that when the RTM agreed in May 2015 to tear down the former Branford Hills Elementary school, the understanding then was that the land would become a park. Cosgrove also said so at the 2015 meeting. Click here to read the story. 

“This land was supposed to be a park. The Fourth District is under-served when it comes to parks,” Hansen said referring to the neighborhood’s condo-filled area. Applause erupted.

Were the RTM’s Actions Legal?

It was lucky Imperato’s overview led the sub-committee to end its work because debating the agenda’s proposed transfer of Parkside Village to the Branford Hills park had not been approved by any other town board, i.e. the Board of Selectmen, which is required before the RTM votes on actions concerning town-owned property. 

Cosgrove, who chairs the Board of Selectman, did not ask the BOS to rule on a Branford Hills land transfer to Parkside. But he did advise the Housing Authority to consult the RTM, which Denes did via a letter. Cosgrove and RTM members discussed both sites at a meeting of the Housing Authority last month. Cosgrove did not return a phone call seeking comment on his role. 

While there are several ways to approach the RTM or its legislators about discussing public issues, Flanagan and Ingraham’s decision to set up a special RTM sub-committee carried weight because it set the stage for formal discussion and ultimately a full RTM vote.

That is why Ingraham observed at a full meeting of the RTM on April 12 that ​“when something comes to the RTM that we do have purview over, we do assign committees. This one is complicated. Having it go to a special committee makes sense,” he said. It turned out the RTM did not have purview over the Parkside project since no prior board or commission action had been taken. 

At the April 12 meeting, Amore pointed out that the RTM is not the town planning board. ​“This is what town planning is about. It appears we are taking up the role of planning. And land use. And we have a commission for that,” she declared. The Town has a Planning & Zoning Commission as well as a Public Building Commission. The Housing Authority owns the Parkside land; the town owns the Branford Hills school site.

Schwanfelder’s History Lesson

Schwanfelder apparently came to the sub-committee meeting to set the record straight. He told the sub-committee they had no business doing what they were doing, that is deciding where Parkside Village should be located. 

“You are here to either approve or reject a request from another board. Before you go any further with this you need to check the validity and everything else you are doing because if you try to make any decision here and you do that and push forward you will be in jeopardy. And one other thing, you are opening a precedent that goes against our charter. And unless the entire Board of Selectmen has subrogated their charge of that and handed it to you, this meeting shouldn’t even be happening,” he declared.

Schwanfelder told the audience he had been a member of the RTM for 23 years. He explained the history of town land transfers.

“Back in the mid-1990s, our Board of Selectmen felt it was necessary to have the powers to take town property to do with it as they felt. At that time it was the Queach property.” Schwanfelder said he was the one who wrote and passed legislation ​“that disallowed our Board of Selectman to have the ability on their sole discretion to do anything with real property that is town property. In doing so, the power still lies with the Board of Selectmen, the entire Board of Selectmen, all three members, to pick and choose what they wish to do with the town parcels. The RTM’s job is to ratify; it is to check and balance.” 

As far as Schwanfelder was concerned the meeting that night should not have made it to the agenda stage. 

Under section 73 – 3 of the town code, the section Schwanfelder is referring to, the RTM must approve all town-owned property transfers and sales after ​“the Board of Selectmen or a town agency or a town officer acts.” Only then may the RTM hear the issue and then decide one way or another by a majority vote on the actions of the first town agency. In this instance, no other board or commission voted before Flanagan and Ingraham formed the sub-committee. 

In addition, the requirements of the state statutes still apply to 73 – 3. ​“Nothing herein shall waive the requirements of Connecticut General Statutes, section 8 – 24, as amended from time to time,” section 73 – 3 says.

State statute 8 – 24 refers to municipal improvements and commissions and their requirement that the relevant commission issue a report regarding land and development issues before action is taken. Under a 2012 amendment to the 8 – 24 section, no municipal agency or legislative body ​“shall locate or extend any public housing, development, redevelopment or urban renewal project…until the proposal to take such action has been referred to the commission for a report.”

No report had been issued prior to the RTM sub-committee meeting. 
###