LETTERS: Relocating Wilton’s Community Gardens is NOT a GOOD Thing

Last week, GOOD Morning Wilton reported on news that was announced at Tuesday evening’s, July 19 Board of Selectmen meeting: that gardening is not allowed on the State-owned land in Allen’s Meadow that is leased to the Town, and Wilton officials were now in the hunt for town-owned space elsewhere to relocate the gardens. Several residents expressed their anger and disappointment on GMW‘s Facebook post about the article and elsewhere on social media, while others reached out to town officials, including First Selectwoman Lynne Vanderslice.

Two of those residents who wrote to Vanderslice and the other Board of Selectmen members forwarded their letters to GMW.

Vanderslice responded to some residents’ comments on Facebook, reiterating what she had explained during the July 19 BOS meeting about why the state has said ‘no gardening allowed’ on its land (including a prohibition in the lease). She wrote that the town had signed a five-year lease extension in 2018, and state officials had only learned of the gardens during a visit to Allen’s Meadow as part of the lease renewal process. Vanderslice said there is no plan to utilize the land for something else — like a turf field or more parking — as some residents have suggested.

“The person response[ibl]e from the State visited the site. Notified us of the [lease] violation with an order to cease. After discussions, they allowed a delay to give us time to develop an alternative site and to allow the crops to harvest.

“As we learned during our more than 18 months negotiating a lease for the extension of the NRVT, all levels of state government are concerned about the scope of potential liability associated with soil disturbance. The current state lease is for 5 years. It did not afford the permanency we will have with the new town-owned location.”

Below are the letters shared with GMW:

“The Reasons Don’t Add Up”

Good Morning Lynne,

I’m sorry to be a bother, but I really feel the need to weigh in with my thoughts on the sudden and immediate removal of the community garden at Allens Meadow. I’ve had a plot there for the past 16 years. I’ve spent many enjoyable hours there, listening to the birdsong, quietly enjoying nature, and getting to know my fellow gardeners, so this affects me deeply and personally.

The reasons we have been given for our eviction really don’t add up, which has contributed to the confusion and growing frustration amongst the gardeners. Please allow me to address each of the various and somewhat conflicting statements that have been made regarding the removal of the gardens.

We were told that the state said that “the gardens were illegally encroaching on state-owned property” and that “the lease only allowed for passive recreation and the storage of landscaping materials … and that community gardening was not allowed.” I could easily make the argument that gardening is a “passive recreation.” Frankly, it’s about as peaceful and passive as it gets, and ultimately highly beneficial to the environment. I also find it hard to believe that the lease specifically says, “Community gardening is not allowed.” Out of all the possible activities that the lease carves out as being prohibited, one of them is community gardening? I suspect that the specific language in the lease is being rephrased. I would like more transparency to know what exactly the lease says because it’s pretty hard to imagine that someone would find gardening objectionable.

As for the state’s complaint that “we were charging a fee without compensating the State, which was a violation of the lease,” again I think there’s a simple solution: The town could raise the fee for the garden plots so that the state could get their cut. Certainly, that’s preferable to eliminating the gardens altogether, and I’m sure the state would welcome the additional income.

Pesticides and digging were also thrown out as possible objections to the gardens. In my opinion, these are all non-issues. All of us at the community garden pride ourselves on organic practices. It wouldn’t be a hardship at all for us to collectively pledge to refrain from using pesticides. As for digging, a garden hoe doesn’t go very deep. To my knowledge in its 47 years of existence, no gardener has ever dug up anything alarming – no drums of toxic materials, no caches of weapons, no dead bodies. I think it’s safe to say at this point that no unwanted surprises exist below the surface of that soil.

For what it’s worth, I’d like to point out that all of the aforementioned objections seem more like technical nonconformities that could easily be rewritten in a new lease rather than insurmountable deal breakers. I’m sure the town’s counsel could make a presentation to the state pointing out the many wonderful benefits of our community garden (we’d be happy to help pull that together), and then hammer out a new lease that would place the town in compliance.

In addition, I’d like to know why other alternatives weren’t considered before making the draconian decision to remove the gardens altogether. Aren’t some of the gardens on town-owned land? Couldn’t they stay and the others be moved to adjacent plots also on town-owned land? Surely, that would be far less expensive and disruptive for the gardeners and for the town than to find a new location elsewhere and get it plowed and set up with irrigation.

I’d also like to understand how the Sept. 26 evacuation date was determined. Did anyone take a look at the gardens before coming up with this date? Even a cursory peek would reveal that this isn’t possible. The growing season isn’t even over by then! Carrots, butternut squash, raspberries, tomatoes, brussels sprouts, corn, pumpkins and most flowers are still going strong by the end of September. We’ve all spent a lot of time and money planting up and caring for our gardens, and now we have to rip them out before they’re even done producing for the season?

As for the removal of the individual gardens, please bear in mind that they were established by each gardener over many years. Fencing, gates, irrigation systems, plant supports, stonework, garden tools, low tunnels, and raised wooden beds were brought in bit by bit over time. It will take several months and require the use of trucks to haul everything out. Most of us also have perennial plants and flowers that will need to be dug up and replanted elsewhere while we wait for the town to find a new location. Some of these plants can’t be dug up until they go into dormancy. For peonies, that’s in October, and for dahlia tubers, it’s in mid-November.

Lastly, I hope the town understands the toll this will take on all of us, particularly our elderly gardeners. Most of them don’t have the strength or energy they once had to re-establish their gardens, and they’ll be reluctant to make the financial investment in their gardens all over again at this stage of their lives. This is a huge loss for them, and it shouldn’t be taken lightly.

Frankly, I’m very discouraged and disappointed right now. For the town to immediately order the removal of the gardens based on such flimsy and dubious objections by the state and promptly negotiate an unrealistic eviction date without input from any of the gardeners is really outrageous. I’ve seen first-hand how slowly the administrative process works here in town, so I find it disturbing how quickly the powers that be leaped into action and came to this unilateral decision at the expense of so many. Not only is it a heavy-handed approach with very bad optics, but it naturally raises eyebrows and has folks wondering if there isn’t some sort of hidden agenda going on here.

I would like to ask that this issue be added to the next Board of Selectman’s meeting on Aug. 2 so that the public can weigh in with their thoughts.

Thank you for your consideration.

Suzanne Knutson

‘There are Options to Consider’

Good morning,

There are infinite reasons why the community gardens should remain at Allen’s Meadow, and many residents throughout the community (not just community gardeners) have been expressing them passionately so I won’t address those here. Instead, what I’d like to specifically address is how we can allow the gardens to remain at Allen’s where they’ve been for 47 years. From what I’ve recently learned and otherwise understand, I believe there are at least two viable options to consider:

Option 1 — to continue with community gardening on the state-leased land at Allen’s Meadow, the Town could either amend the current lease or create a separate lease for this section of leased land that would need to include environmental language in compliance with the State’s regulations (e.g. no pesticides, herbicides, and any other required stipulations). We have been led to believe that “digging” is not okay and is why community gardening on state-leased land at Allen’s Meadow is no longer allowed, when in fact “digging” into the soil to plant a tomato plant is perfectly okay in a community garden, it’s the lease that needs to be modified (or a separate lease) as described above specifically for community gardening use. [Side note: if pesticides/herbicides are an issue on state-leased land, are ball fields 1-4 not chemically treated?]

Option 2 — as a good portion of the gardens is on Town land, rather than move the entire operation, why not keep the town-owned plots intact and create additional plots on existing town-owned land that abuts the gardens on the NW side of the invasive hedgerow? This is far more cost-efficient as well — there is an onerous cost and inconvenience to gardeners to move all their infrastructure, perennial plants, stonework, etc. to a new location (mandating two months to do this is frankly presumptuous, inconsiderate, and offensive); the Town would also spend far more money developing a new site (including adding irrigation) than they would [by] adding more plots to the existing Allen’s location.

Option 3 — if there is no ulterior motive (as was stated in yesterday’s email blast) for such a sudden and hasty demand for exodus from Allen’s Meadow, while far less than ideal why not at least leave the [approximately] 50% of plots on town-owned land intact and search for a much smaller comparable site elsewhere in town for the other 50% [that are currently] on state-owned land? Another money-saving suggestion. And, if the State is saying that gardening is not permitted under the existing lease agreement, why the rush to dismantle all the infrastructure to the ground — is it not the activity itself that conflicts with the terms of the current lease? I can’t imagine there would be any objection to leaving infrastructure and perennial plants in place while a new site is being searched for, especially given the unreasonable timeline being asked of us.

I’d like to understand if either of the options described above (especially 1 and 2) were considered and if so what the reasons were for not going ahead with either to allow a 47-year-old town establishment to remain where it is? I’m also requesting that this topic be added to the next BOS meeting on Aug. 2 so that the public can continue to voice their concerns on record.

The Pollinator Meadow project that I’m working on behind the community gardens, match-funded by Sustainable CT as you know, was not created in a vacuum as a stand-alone habitat. It will enhance the existing biodiversity created by the confluence of different habitats at Allen’s — fields, woods, woodland edges, watercourse, and especially the community gardens. They all work differently but together provide a unique and invaluable web of life for birds, bees, butterflies, and other wildlife.

As you know, I’ve been leading birding trips for various organizations at Allen’s Meadow for decades and Allen’s is known throughout the State and beyond as a magnet for birds, in large part due to the community gardens adding to the biodiversity of this town park. Birders throughout the Northeast (one from as far as Florida) descended upon Allen’s in October when a very rare Harris’s Sparrow that should have been in Texas decided to pay a visit. Allen’s is written up in books and journals on “best birding locations in CT.” The Sparrow Workshop I led there last Fall for the CT Ornithological Association had the best results of any location in the entire state, in large part due to the presence of the community gardens and their adjoining habitats.

In closing, I’d also like to mention that there is no silver lining to gardeners vis-a-vis not having to deal with congestion during sporting events if the location is moved — it’s quite the opposite actually. I can’t tell you just how many soccer moms and dads (Wilton residents and out-of-towners alike) need a break from the action and walk the paths of the gardens marveling at its beauty, its butterflies, its birds, its tranquility, and they often are recipients of gardeners’ generosity in way of cut flowers or produce. That is a real asset to the Town’s image.

So I ask you, as many others have and will, please let’s find a way to work within the State system to allow community gardening to remain at Allen’s Meadow by considering either of the options mentioned above. Thank you.

Respectfully,

Joe Bear