Southbury residents gathered at Town Hall Thursday night to weigh in on how $183,299 in federal pandemic relief money should be spent, resulting in the approval to send the unused funds toward upgrades to town parks, including Settlers and Ballantine.
Of the 40 people in attendance, 29 voted in favor of transferring the funds for playground upgrades around town, while 11 voted against the reallocation, citing problems not with the parks, but with the board’s procedure.
The special town meeting, sandwiched between a separate public hearing and a regular board meeting, drew more than a dozen speakers during its public comment period. While a majority of public comments were in favor of the transfer of funds, some noted their frustration at not knowing the full or accurate cost of either option.
The tally of the votes among board members was split down party lines. The two Republicans on the board voted against it, while the four Democrats voted in favor of the reallocation.
A separate resolution transferring $287,000 from the Unassigned Fund Balance to the Pension Contribution Account, passed without discussion.
“It Behooves Southbury to Kick It Up a Notch”
During the public comment period, one resident said she had taken it upon herself to visit the two parks and inspect their conditions on the day of the meeting.
Karen Schwarzchild, a resident of eight years and a physical therapist with more than 50 years of experience, said what she found troubled her.
The woodchips covering the ground were “not acceptable for someone who has a disability,” she said. A lack of ramps to access the Ballantine Park playground was noted, as well as a barrier to entry for children with lower extremity disabilities.
“It was the first time that I took a really good look at it as far as disabilities are concerned,” Schwarzschild said, “and it behooves Southbury to kick it up a notch.”
Two members of the Parks and Recreation Commission spoke out in favor of the money going toward the playground upgrades, including William Hahn, who said, “I would be in favor of this 100 percent to go for more playground equipment that would make our parks more inclusive and give more parents and children more exercise than a frivolous splash pad that is used three months of the year.”
Michael Carrington said he had initially been a fan of a potential splash pad in town, but then started listening to input from the employees of the Parks and Recreation Department.
“Ultimately, what we’re here for is transferring this to something that might benefit a little of the town for a little bit of the time, to something that will benefit more of the town all the time,” he said.
Republican Dissent: Process, Not Parks
Both Republican Selectmen, Holly Sullivan and Jason Van Stone, clarified that their opposition to the resolution was not about the playgrounds.
Sullivan specifically asked why a transfer of funds in the full amount would be required without knowing the cost of the park upgrades.
While a preliminary estimate of $90,000 had been floated by First Selectman Tim O’Neil for park upgrades, it wasn’t until clarification was sought that a figure of twice that amount was mentioned.
In response to a question about cost estimates, Parks and Recreation Director Meghan Lennon said she understood the $90,000 figure to be per park, not for both combined.
Van Stone said he would have been more comfortable voting in favor of the resolution had the board arrived at its decision point more smoothly.
“Two weeks ago, the job was $90,000,” Van Stone said to the crowd. “Two minutes ago, we were told there were two quotes out there for $180,000. It’s really difficult for us on this board to make good, rational decisions on your behalf if the facts change every 15 minutes.”
Finance Director Dan Colton responded to some of the questions thrown at him, saying that the town’s purchasing policy requires sealed bids because the project is over $25,000.
He further explained that the money needed to be transferred before a Request for Proposal (RFP) could be issued and that the town generally discouraged contractors who had already provided preliminary estimates from bidding in the sealed process.
Sullivan pressed further. With the amount of money earmarked for the project publicly known, and the preliminary estimates now available, how do the two ideologies work together to elicit the most competitive bids?
Colton said that competitive bids are still received in the process, with “the value being out there” and he noted that the town’s purchasing policy says to go with the lowest bidder.
The exchange held before the public vote was cut short by the First Selectman’s Chief of Staff, who made a point-of-order comment saying, “this is not a meeting for the Board of Selectmen.”
“This All Feels Performative”
Selectwoman Wendy Bernard offered a counterpoint to concerns held by Republicans, pushing back on the framing of procedural missteps.
“The money has sat for four years, doing absolutely nothing,” she said. “It’s not like it’s being transferred to someone’s pocket.”
“This all feels performative,” she continued, echoing her remarks from previous board meetings. “This feels like a tempest in a teapot.”
She acknowledged that the board had taken every opportunity to correct everything in good faith, saying that the best interests of the town are always the consideration of the board.
Her remarks drew applause from the room; the crowd voted 29-11 in favor of the resolution.
A Selectman’s Response
Following the town meeting, Selectman Holly Sullivan issued a statement to the Record, pushing back on some of the comments made by her colleagues.
“The First Selectman’s misunderstanding or misrepresentation of his first major project by nearly $100,000, or double the cost, is not simply a ‘tempest in a teapot’ and should not be dismissed as a minor hiccup,” Sullivan stated. “For consecutive meetings, I sounded the alarm on financial red flags and improper process.”
Her statement continues, “We are now a board dominantly composed of educated, thoughtful women, which is why I was truly disappointed that Selectwoman Bernard resorted to accusations and shaming instead of acknowledging the severity of the financial errors that First Selectman O’Neil highlighted in a mortifying public display of ” incompetence.”
She called for her selectwoman colleagues not to be “quick to rubber-stamp the First Selectman’s plans” and to “take the time to ensure accuracy in the work that comes before us.”
“In three terms of service to the Town of Southbury, I have never stooped to name-calling, and I won’t start now,” said Sullivan. “I simply call on the new administration, once again, that we collectively need to do better.”
A $70 Discrepancy
A few hours before Thursday’s meetings began, the Record raised a question with town officials about a minor but notable inconsistency in financial documents regarding how ARPA funds have been spent so far.
Financial reports provided to both the Record and the Board of Finance – dating back to at least the summer of 2024 – listed the amount spent on pickleball courts as $163,450, leaving $183,229 remaining for a potential splash pad. However, the reallocation being voted on Thursday was for $183,299 – a difference of $70.
While the town acted correctly in advancing the $183,299 figure to the town meeting, the discrepancy in several monthly financial reports was attributed to the town’s transition between financial software systems, Colton told the Record.
The accurate figures, he confirmed, are:
Total ARPA budget line for splash pad/pickleball: $346,679
Actual spent on pickleball courts: $163,380
Remaining left for reallocation: $183,299
The discrepancy was not surfaced prior to the Record’s inquiry.
Following the issuance of a formal RFP, sealed bids will determine the project’s actual cost. Any remainder of the $183,299 transfer would remain within the park improvement line until the town decides how to utilize it.
The next Board of Selectmen meeting is scheduled for Thursday, June 18, in room 205A of Town Hall.
By Evan Triantafilidis
The Southbury Record 