Groton Open Space Association

Council Hears Differing Accounts of Phone Calls About A Town Land

GROTON–Two town councilors differed at the council meeting Nov. 1, 2005, on the content of discussions between the town and state over a possible use of the 35-acre Merritt Property near Fitch High School.

Town Councilor Paulann Sheets had reported to the council Sept. 20, 2005, that David Stygar, of the state Department of Environmental Protection, told her by phone of an approach by an engineer or architect representing the town. She said Mr. Stygar remarked that the representative inquired as to whether a building could be constructed on the Merritt Property. She quoted Mr. Stygar as discouraging the idea because it would represent a conversion of the property from its intended use–25 acres as passive open space and 10 acres as athletic fields.

The land was acquired in part with state money and also with funds raised by a bond issue approved by Groton voters in 1988 for open space, conservation and recreation.

Mr. Stygar told Councilor Sheets that the original call was followed by a second call, from another town representative, who then asked about the feasibility of putting a temporary parking lot on the property during scheduled construction at the high school, she said.

Town Councilor Natalie Burfoot-Billing told the Nov. 1, 2005, council meeting that she had called Mr. Stygar to dig more deeply into the matter. Ms. Burfoot-Billing said she asked him, “Has anyone from Groton ever called you to discuss plans to put a building on the Merritt property?” She said that he replied, “No.”

On Nov. 2, Ms. Sheets released a statement from Mr. Stygar that said in part:

“I have been informed that…[Councilor Sheets told the town council] that someone, probably an engineer, contacted me regarding the use of the Merritt Property. The exact time I cannot account for. I regarded this inquiry as a preliminary step in the design of the school. As with any project protected by an open space agreement, I discouraged the placement of any structural building on the property. It would be a conversion, a long process, and the Town would be responsible for replacement of lost land. All alternatives needed to be reviewed… My conversation with Councilor Sheets took place around Sept. 12, 2005. I did receive another call regarding the Merritt Property with a different proposal, that of a temporary parking area during construction, with the parking being converted to athletic fields once construction was completed. This later proposal was a more acceptable action.

“I still hold to point that all action to date has been preliminary in nature. I have not received any site plans, no indication of the affected size/area, time lines or official request to change the layout of the Merritt Property.

“I also had [a] telephone converation with Councilor Natalie Billing on November 1, 2005. I did at that time not recall the ‘building’ option as previously identified.” Mr. Stygar’s faxed statement was dated Nov. 2, 2005, the day after the council meeting.

Ms. Burfoot-Billing said Nov. 2 that she felt the contact between the engineer and Mr. Stygar was a “preliminary conversation about what the constraints are–what’s allowed and what’s not allowed.” Ms. Sheets said her notes and Mr. Stygar’s statement show that the first approach reflected the town’s “desire/intention” for a building, though no “plan” existed.

The controversy took place against the background of environmentalists’ opposition to the proposed parking lot, as well as support for a resolution proposed by Councilor Elissa Wright to put strong protection into the land records for tracts purchased with open space funds approved by voters in 1988. Ms. Wright’s resolution was defeated in July and replaced by a less strongly worded and less comprehensive measure proposed by Ms. Burfoot-Billing.

GOSA contended in a citizen’s petition to the Town Council Oct. 18, 2005, that the council should have been made aware — during the debate on the Wright resolution — of discussions for use of the property. The GOSA petition noted that Town Manager Mark Oefinger told the council [in September] that he knew of plans for the parking lot as of May 26, 2005.

[Note: the GOSA citizen's petition was read by Jim Furlong, a GOSA director, who wrote the news item directly above.]