Take Your Kids Elsewhere - South Windsor Connecticut Doesn’t Want ‘Em
February 20, 2008
South Windsor’s town motto should read:
“Give me your 55 and older, with no school age children living at home, who want to live on a cul-de-sac on a half-acre lot.”
In a recent article in the Hartford Courant, Town Manager Matthew Galligan reportedly said the following about why the town purchased over 40 acres of land for $2.8 Million to keep as open space:
“Galligan said purchasing the land is a good financial move because it will keep the land from being developed into homes, which would add children to the school system.
If 40 homes were built with two children per home, there’s a potential for $800,000 a year in school costs, Galligan said.” - Hartford Courant
Doesn’t that make you feel welcome?
Town leaders across Connecticut are strapped to keep costs under control and their target is children - keeping them out by limiting development that would attract families with children.
This attitude is disturbing but all too familiar.
Connecticut is the home of NIMBY, or Not in My Backyard. And Not in My Backyard is not a welcoming philosophy.
I found this old article in the New York Times about NIMBY in Connecticut. What was true in 1987 is true today:
”According to Dr. George B. Sternlieb, who is the director of the Center of Urban Policy Research at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, N.J., and a specialist in planning. ’Success breeds conservation,’ he said. ‘If you don’t need the jobs, people feel self-satisfied. If you have an unemployment level of 4 percent and an enormously profitable state racking up huge surpluses, you don’t have the hostage of jobs.’”
We don’t want houses with kids because it will lead to more education costs and higher taxes, we don’t want a new biodiesel fuel plant in Suffield because it will ”destroy the town’s rural character, we don’t want a liquified natural gas facility in Long Island Sound because it could harm the Sound, and we don’t want a group home for troubled kids down our street in Old Saybrook because of safety concerns.
Success breeds conservation
The truth is we don’t need to bring in a plant in Suffield to create jobs because we don’t have enough housing the employees could afford anyway and unemployment is low. In fact, we don’t have enough people to fill the jobs we do have.
We don’t need to attract families to our communities because we have an aging population to fill our housing.
We don’t need a group home in our neighborhood because we have poor cities where we can dump our neediest citizens.
And we don’t need Broadwater or nuclear power or coal plants because most of us are wealthy enough to bear the increases in fuel costs.
The problem with NIMBY is that it prevents change for better or worse- it assumes that the way things are at this moment are ideal. I think we can do better.
Entry Filed under: Connecticut, Real Estate Market. Tags: affordable housing, NIMBY.
10 Comments Add your own
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed
1. Florida Commercial Real Estate | February 21, 2008 at 1:34 pm
Oh my! Well what can one say. Did this type of thinking move to California and build commuins.
I get what they are saying but families bring economic growth, jobs and vitality to an area that pay taxes that do inturn improve the area schools included.
One thing I have learned is that elderly people have alot to offer to the children there wisdom and there time and this part of our communities breaking down can be of no good. I also see that the children keep people young and active with there need for answers and to observe. It’s a good mesh. Ever head how the nursing home near the grade school people are more alert.
2. Liese Howarth | February 21, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Suffield’s zoning regulations strictly prohibit chemical manufacturing, and under all definitions I have found, biodiesel production is chemical manufacturing. Before you criticize and call people names you should do a little research.
LIese Howarth
3. berealct | February 22, 2008 at 12:02 am
Liese-Did I call someone a name? I just looked back through my post and don’t see anything that you could be referring to.
I actually did do my research and came across your name in several articles about the plant in Suffield. I appreciate how passionate you are about the issue and you have a right to say that I’m wrong but I did not call anyone names. Check my post again.
4. Port Orange House | February 22, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Sounds like you need a large developer to come into your community and build a large retirement community. With so much community interest the city planner should look into this for the community.
I find the comment they don’t want to pay school taxes but are wealthy enough to pay there bills interesting.
5. berealct | February 22, 2008 at 8:10 pm
There are actually a number of 55 and older developments in South Windsor already. Almost all the affordable new construction in central CT is 55 and older - and we still wonder why we can’t attract young families.
6. Friday Feed Bad&hellip | February 23, 2008 at 1:47 am
[...] Beganski has a wonderful post up in Take Your Kids Elsewhere - South Windsor Connecticut Doesn’t Want ‘Em. Don’t skip it simply because you’re not from Connecticut though, some great points [...]
7. Apella | February 25, 2008 at 5:19 am
If a town is buying up land to ensure no childern included families buy how would HUD view the purchase?
I do not know off the top of my head if this falls under Fair Housing but it does make me wonder.
Should a government have that ability?
8. berealct | February 25, 2008 at 1:46 pm
That’s a really good point. This is going on all over the State- towns refusing development that would bring in families. Towns can’t say, “we are buying this land to keep out Asians,” so why is it OK to keep out children. Hmmm.
9. daytona beach florida remax | February 29, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Sounds like time to get new town leaders who can balance a budget and provide for a commuity. Seems like they need to check there job description and realize they are there for the community not part of a community.
10. Friday Feed Bag&hellip | April 19, 2008 at 12:13 am
[...] Beganski has a wonderful post up in Take Your Kids Elsewhere - South Windsor Connecticut Doesn’t Want ‘Em. Don’t skip it simply because you’re not from Connecticut though, some great points [...]