1 April—Forget about April Fool’s Day. At least for now.

A week ago, 25 March, the selectmen of the Town of Litchfield met with the burgesses of the Borough of Litchfield in an historic—and, one might even say, productive—summit. You won’t find anything about the important meeting in the Hearst Republican-American, despite what Hearst calls “our commitment to local news.” You can read an excellent précis of the summit conference in Litchfield.bz. And here are the essentials of the meeting minutes as transcribed by Burgess Elisa Bauer acting as clerk, amended as necessary:

a. Discussion of Blight Ordinance/Enforcement/Zoning: G. Carr [warden] explains the Borough Board concerns of blight properties in the Borough, the research the Board has done with other towns/cities in Connecticut as well as Council. She further discussed the Ordinance that has been drafted and the concerns that members had in relation to implementing. G. Carr asked if the Town was considering a Blight Order/Ordinance?

D. Raap [first selectman] explained the Board has discussed the subject, also has concerns in the implementation of such, the cost, the management of and the subjective nature. R. Parilla [burgess] recommended the BOS review the BOW&B document. D. Raap will add to the BOS next meeting agenda.

[Does the Borough really have blighted properties? Sure it does, and right on the axis.]

At a previous meeting G. Carr & D. Raap discussed the possibility of the BOW&B creating a Zoning/Enforcement ordinance for the Borough. G. Carr explained the Board has been in discussion with Spencer Musselman, Litchfield Land Use Administrator. Together issues of concern are being discussed and the creation of a Zoning Ordinance is not necessary.

b. Sidewalks: D. Raap explained that the Town has had some lawsuits due to tripping on sidewalks. She would like a document from the BOW&B explaining the responsibility of sidewalks in the Borough relating to lawsuits. G. Carr explained the Borough does have an ordinance regarding sidewalk maintenance for owners in the Borough. The use of materials that business owners use during the winter season has caused some deterioration of the brick sidewalks in the business district. The Borough has repaired several areas of concern. The matching of the brick color is not available, however our contractor does reuse existing bricks whenever possible. Our sidewalk remediation was funded by ARPA [federal government COVID-19 giveaway] and the balance of those funds are being used for the East Green project. She also advised the award of a Connectivity Grant that is being used for the East St. and Woodruff St. remediation project. Those walks will be asphalt.

D. Raap advised a meeting with the DOT is scheduled for April 2nd to discuss traffic in the center of town. D. Raap stated several residents questioned having benches installed in areas of frequently used by walkers. G. Carr responded that this would affect homeowners in the center of town, the walks are not wide enough for this to happen and questioned if specific areas were requested. D. Raap said they were not specific areas.

c. Parking Enforcement Officer: BOS feel parking in the center of town is an issue that needs addressing and would like BOW&B input. D. Morosani [selectman] feels the cost and revenue needs addressing, J. Tenney [selectman] suggests splitting the cost, J. Zullo [selectman] wants a partnership, perhaps the use of permit parking, also suggested having Economic Development create a map showing designated parking areas perhaps though Goggle Maps. Discussion on the use of a QR code system, developing a scope of enforcement, hiring a part-time enforcement officer, enlisting the Resident Troopers to enforce the parking rules.

G. Carr shared a 1993 Inter-local Agreement that has since expired, that gave the enforcement authority to the town. D. Morosani requested a copy, G. Carr will send to him. J. Bongiorno [selectman] suggested the issue be added to the next BOS agenda for discussion including the possibility of our Resident Troopers issue parking tickets. G. Carr explained that this past season the Borough did hire a traffic officer during high traffic weekends and does have it in the budget again for the next fiscal year.

[Permit parking? Designated parking areas? QR code system? For God’s sake, there hasn’t been a parking problem since the superior court moved out several years ago. Let’s not create a problem for the sake of bureaucracy.]

d. Heritage Plan and Implementation: The plan does not have an implementation date as of yet and is still under review. The elimination of parking on the south side of Center Green is one idea that was presented. D. Morosani wants to change the traffic through the center of town perhaps by eliminating North St Extension and removing some of Monument green to allow large trucks to turn right to access Route 63 South rather than accessing it through North St Extension. He has made a sketch of his suggestion. G. Carr explained the green is a National Historic Landmark and there is no interest in “cutting” into it. The Borough intends is to protect the Greens. Working together for a solution is advisable.

[Warden Carr is absolutely right. Moreover, the problem isn’t the so-called North Street Extension (a.k.a. Union Street). It’s at the north side of the east green where Rte 118 runs into Rte 202. Actually solving that would be a Herculean accomplishment. And artificial intelligence won’t help.]

e. Plants/Banners on Light Posts: L Hillman [burgess] explained a quote of $11,000 was given to the Borough to have plants hung along the main street as in the past. However, it does not include, watering, sometimes twice a day, dead heading and fertilizing. R. Parilla suggested if the Parking QR Code system is implemented perhaps some of that revenue could be used for the plants and or maintenance. The Borough does not have it in the budget or the maintenance that would be necessary. No interest in the placement of banners on the poles.

[$11,000 to water and deadhead goddamn plants? Are they kidding? Why not just forget about the plants on the lampposts? They’re a pain in the neck literally and figuratively. And nobody really gives a damn about them anyway.]

f. Improved Signage for the approach to the Borough: G. Carr stated no objections to such signage as “Entering the Historic Borough of Litchfield” to be placed just outside of the entrances to the Borough. She also commented on the number of signs that exist in the Borough. D. Morosani questioned if there is a State requirement for signage. D. Raap will have the Economic Development Committee research. R. Parilla and J. Tenney volunteered to do a sign audit.

[Does anybody really give a damn about “historic borough” signs either?]

g. April 2nd Meeting with CTDOT: D. Raap advised the April 2nd meeting will be held in her office at 10:00 with two state traffic engineers, R. Alexe, D. Morosani, K. Faraci, and W. Boehme. Discussion will be on traffic patterns, traffic lights and signage. [Not for public consumption.]

Future joint meeting on June 1, 2025 at 6:00 p.m. at the Litchfield Fire House was agreed with items to be addressed: QR coding for parking, blight ordinance, sign audit and Google Maps. [For public consumption.]