In a debate hosted by the League of Women Voters, Greenwich first selectman candidates, Republican Fred Camillo and Democrat Laura Erickson, engaged in a thought-provoking discussion regarding the town’s future, touching on key issues such as strategic planning and flood management; school library book choices; affordable housing; long-term debt; infrastructure; and more.
Chairing the event, Kay Maxwell acknowledged the remarkable and voluntary contributions of numerous community members.The first question was concerning the prospect of establishing a 20-year strategic plan for Greenwich.
Camillo responded, stating, “When I came into office, they were doing 15-year capital plans…It made much more sense to look at the five years right in front of you because things do change a lot. So we’ve transformed it a little bit to do that with an eye on the near future.” He emphasized the importance of longer-term perspectives when considering infrastructure, such as schools, but highlighted the practicality of a more focused five-year plan, given the frequently changing circumstances.
Erickson, while in alignment with Camillo on the challenge of a 20-year capital plan, distinguished between that and strategic vision, stating, “It’s really important to convene a summit and talk about the issues that we’re going to be facing in 20 years… We already know we have sea-level rise… We already know there’s dramatic changes in how people get around.”
Camillo added further, highlighting previous measures to leverage the expertise of residents in tackling issues, such as property development, asserting, “Everything we’re doing right now is with an eye towards the future.”
The debate transitioned to the pressing issue of flood management, particularly relevant given recent severe weather incidents.
Erickson position is that, “We really need to educate residents about perhaps new building techniques.” She addressed the inevitability of change due to natural causes and suggested adaptability, especially concerning residential planning and municipal infrastructure protection, would be pivotal in her administration.
In Camillo’s response, he highlighted his personal experience with flooding and discussed the fiscal challenges of infrastructure improvement, referring to a 2011 study, “It would be $300 million to fix everything in Greenwich…because our infrastructures are outdated. They’re all over 100 years old.” He underscored that changing weather patterns, antiquated infrastructure, and additional development present ongoing challenges for managing flooding.
Towards the conclusion, Erickson remarked, “If we can comprehensively plan for the most affected areas in town, there is federal and state money available to help us enact those plans.”
Camillo concurred, noting that there are ongoing efforts to secure federal funding through liaisons with state administrators, explaining, “We have done a plan there. Things are ranked. [Commissioner] Mark Boughton, …is confident that there is federal money there, which will help us. So we’re working on that with Commissioner Boughton.”
Regarding a question on affordable housing, Camillo illustrated the strides Greenwich has achieved, emphasizing the instrumental role of Greenwich Communities, previously known as Greenwich Housing Authority, and the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. “So 8-30G requires 10% of your housing stock. It’s not a great law as you know. If you haven’t put $25,000 into a unit since 1991, it’s not counted. So the old Armstrong Court where Grandma Camilla lived, none of that was counted. If you go by Armstrong Court now, it looks beautiful. It’s all going to be counted. So the best tool we have is Greenwich Communities. Just a few years ago, when we took office, I think it was about 5.2%, which is double our neighbors, except for Stamford and Norwalk. We’re about 5.8 now,” Camillo elaborated, pinpointing the growth of affordable housing initiatives in the area.
“Greenwich is doing right,” Camillo asserted, “But it’s not just to get to the 10%, it’s also for the people that are living here and giving them a quality of life.” He made a strong statement to Hartford, saying that “Greenwich is doing it the Greenwich way.”
Conversely, Laura Erickson underscored the crucial role of the state delegation in Hartford, positioning them as a key factor. While acknowledging the importance of Greenwich Communities and the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, Erickson also emphasized the need to assist developers in establishing moderate-income housing.
Erickson also highlighted the strategy of facilitating more local workers, such as “teachers, our firefighters, our first responders and other nonprofit workers” to access housing. Echoing a moral undercurrent, she declared, “We have a moral obligation to address this issue.”
Erickson, with a four-year tenure on the Board of Estimate and Taxation (BET), navigated through the question of budgets and long-term debt with her experience on the frontlines of budget management. Erickson asserted, “We need to engage residents earlier,” pinpointing the critical juncture of dialogue initiation to be “in the fall before the budget is presented by the first selectman.” According to her, this was pivotal in navigating through the intricacies of budget allocation, ensuring community members are well-acquainted with “where they fit in the capital plan, what is the priority, what is realistic.”
Camillo agreed, “Laura’s right,” while delicately weaving in a clarification that the budget process is a ceaseless endeavor, active “12 months a year.” Echoing Erickson’s sentiment on public engagement, Camillo shared a narrative where community involvement propelled a sidewalk project to fruition. “Maggie [Bound] worked really hard. It was textbook fashion and got it done,” he noted, illustrating the pivotal role residents play in steering capital projects and policy direction.
However, Camillo also emphasized the role of citizen feedback in their governance, reassuring, “we get inundated with emails all day long. That’s a good thing because there’s citizen engagement.”
Erickson retorted with a pressing acknowledgment of the need for a “consistent long-term capital model,” particularly in light of substantial school projects on the horizon, implying a potential need for a paradigm shift in existing financial strategies. “We need to figure out a way to finance those school projects responsibly rather than just delaying and deferring them,” she underscored, alluding to the dual needs of Old Greenwich School’s renovation and Central Middle School’s replacement.
Camillo, a former high school history teacher, elucidated his perspective on the ongoing national dialogue surrounding book bans and censorship in public spaces. “Our administrators and our teachers know what they’re doing,” he affirmed. His approach championed open dialogue with library administrators when the public raised concerns about particular books, stating, “No one was talking about banning books.”
Camillo recounted specific instances where citizens complained about the graphic content in certain books, prompting discussions with library heads and law enforcement. He also praised citizen engagement in this matter. “I think most people are there. It doesn’t matter if they’re Democrats or Republicans, they agreed with that,” Camillo reflected.
On the contrary, Erickson unequivocally rejected any form of book censorship, praising librarians for their expertise in selecting and organizing books for appropriate age levels. “People should have the freedom to read the books that they want to read,” Erickson declared. She also made connections to the broader national context, highlighting the dangers in movements that seek to restrict access to literature saying, “To me, that national level of messaging and that movement is reminiscent of Nazi Germany.”
Camillo explained, “no one is calling at least in my corner, for banning of anything. We’re in a free and open society. You let the people decide what they think is appropriate. But again, if you get a lot of people saying, ‘I think it’s inappropriate to have a pornographic book,’ and I’ve seen some of the pictures in the children’s section, I do think that crosses a line.
“I think we have to be very careful about saying when [a parent] has a question about a book, that they’re a book banner or they are some type of radical.”
Shifting gears, the candidates also dived deep into the issue of utilizing longer-term bond financing to fund the town’s long-term capital projects and infrastructure. Erickson asserted that the current model, which uses five-year debt for longer-term assets, is suboptimal. “You match the debt maturity to the life of the asset,” she asserted, advocating for increased debt management .
Camillo, while open to dialogue and slight modifications, strongly opposed any move towards long-term debt, referencing his own experiences growing up in Greenwich and observing other towns that he witnessed suffering from such financial strategies. Camillo stressed, “Not everybody is rich. A lot of people are house rich and income poor. Affordability is a big deal.”
Camillo went on to highlight his administration’s commitment to encouraging community engagement. He stated, “We have interviewed over 300 people [for boards, committees, and commissions]. We’re actually building a bench.” Camillo emphatically rebuffed allegations of lacking transparency. “We are out there all the time asking people to come in and interview with us,” he defended, further elucidating his team’s vigorous efforts to involve the public through various committees and task forces.
In the same vein, Camillo also underscored his efforts in ensuring transparency by giving out his personal cell number and utilizing social media platforms. He evoked Vince Lombardi’s motivational quote, saying, “You always shoot for perfection. You’re never going to attain it. But along the way, you may catch excellence.”
Erickson, on the other hand, recognized the profusion of talent in the community, commenting, “We have so much talent and so much willingness to volunteer in our community.” However, she critiqued the present board and committee selection process as somewhat “opaque,” probing about the clarity in available positions, qualifications, and consideration criteria. “It’s not always clear. What positions are available? What are the qualifications? How do you get considered?” she posed.
The discourse took a contemplative turn with the topic of the municipal nursing home, prompting candidates to ruminate over whether it should remain town-owned and professionally operated.
Erickson championed for the care of the senior population, stating it as a “core community value.” While she acknowledged healthcare’s intricate challenges, from stringent regulations to the ramifications of the pandemic, Erickson accentuated the importance of guardrails, accountability, and systemic redundancy. She expressed confidence in the board’s capacity to navigate these challenges, affirming, “I do believe we have learned our lesson.”
In his response, Camillo candidly discussed the financial strain the Nathaniel Witherell nursing home has placed on the town, explaining that $43 million was allocated towards its support in the last nine years. While he praised its services, reminiscing about his family members’ experiences there, Camillo implied a pragmatic approach is essential. “Having this conversation has been very good. Not only for the people of Greenwich but also for the institution itself,” he affirmed.
Erickson concluded by addressing the emotional and practical aspects of providing for the elderly, affirming the importance of having a dedicated place for senior citizens in the town. She noted, “They are so grateful to have a place that cares about their loved one,” and underscored the broader, more humane view that “there is a place to go for our seniors” and that it is not expected to make a profit.
Next the candidates dived deep into discussions about the town’s mill rate and overall fiscal strategies.
Camillo began by acknowledging, “Greenwich still has the lowest mill rate in the state.” He stressed the historical prudence Greenwich has demonstrated in financial matters, attributing the success to “every administration before this, every Board of Estimate & Taxation, and all the volunteers and other boards and commissions.” His perspective leverages the town’s long-standing reputation for attracting residents with a low mill rate, especially apparent during the pandemic when “people were moving to Greenwich more than the other towns,” he said.
He emphasized the necessity of balance, asserting that it’s vital to “make sure that you deliver services to people who live here, who expect it, but also if you can, you want to make sure it’s affordable for them.” He acknowledged that while the majority of the 63,300 residents “are not wealthy,” and many “work two and three jobs to be here,” the key lies in treating the budget as “everybody’s money” and being “very, very, very careful with that.”
On the other hand, Erickson framed her response through a lens of caution and strategic investment. “Do we want to pay our employees fairly? Of course we do. Do we pay our teachers a little more than our competitor communities? Yes, we do,” she stated, addressing the inherent complexities in managing fiscal responsibilities and community investment. She warned against under-investing in the community and highlighted that “shortsighted decisions that are being made are ultimately going to cost us more money, and taxes will have to go up eventually because we’re not planning for it responsibly.”
In her view, the present conditions, including having “almost $32 million of federal money through ARPA” and other financial benefits, places Greenwich in “very good shape.” Erickson expressed concerns that the tax rates over the past few years are not commensurate with the necessary investment in the community.
Erickson also aimed to dismantle presumptions about fiscal practices based on party lines. She reminded that “when the Democrats were in charge for two years in 2018-2019, the mill rate increased only less than 1.4% a year,” and urged the shattering of the “myth that Democrats are going to raise your taxes by 50%.” She affirmed, “We live here too. We want to protect our residents from high taxes.”
Camillo reciprocated in dismantling partisan myths, asserting, “I do want to shatter the myth that the Republicans don’t spend on capital projects because the Democrats when they were in charge spent I think 44 and 42 million respectively, and the last year we spent 73 million; in this year, 112 million. So, maybe there’s a little bit of myths going on on both sides there.”
For the full transcript of the debate, please see www.GreenwichSentinel.com online.
