To The Editor:
An item on the agenda for the Waitsfield Select Board meeting on January 11 was a discussion of the proposed pocket park near the covered bridge. An update was presented by Joshua Schwartz covering the project from its inception to the present. Due to certain deadlines, the board needed to decide if the project was to go forward. About 30 residents were in attendance. The majority voiced concerns over the estimated $200,000 cost ($20,000 by the town, $180,000 by a grant) and the overall appearance of the finished product.
We were then informed that the architects’ drawings that had been in The Valley Reporter and online are just conceptual ideas! Nothing to do with what we may end up with! There will be other meetings to decide on the final design and cost. This is after the town jumps through hoops and tries to obtain proper permits, etc. to build in a flood plain. And you thought it was going to be easy. (Watch the meeting on MRVTV.)
A few people tried to take the select board to task by reminding everyone that voters authorized the park at Town Meeting in 2014. Article 6 of that agenda read, “Shall the voters authorize the Town to borrow an amount not to exceed $20,000, to be paid over a period of not more than five years and on such other terms as the Select Board shall negotiate, for the purpose of providing matching funds for up to two grant applications, if awarded, from the Community Development Block Grant- Disaster Recovery Fund for to implement the Bridge Street improvement projects identified in the Vermont Downtown Assistance Team (V-DAT) final report?"
Article 6 was approved by a majority voice vote. I thought, as perhaps many others did, that “matching funds” meant we would try to get an additional $20,000 funding, not $180,000 for this tiny project! Folks, it’s 0.05 of an acre of land! That’s 5/100s of an acre (2,178 square feet)! A few years ago the town paid $20,000 for the property; we voted an additional $20,000 for the project in 2014. Isn’t $40,000 enough to spend on this project? The consensus of opinion was that if another flood should occur, nothing will stop it. Take the $20,000, hire someone to design a simple park and use whatever is left to build it. Do you honestly believe the Disaster Recovery Fund Grant money should be used this way?
Larry Corthell
Waitsfield
