Town Hall Grant:
Answers Needed

My patience is wearing very thin. I'm almost at the end of my rope. I can't take it any more. I crave closure.

I'm talking about Bethel's old town hall. For years and years I've observed a definite inertia as to the building's restoration and rehabilitation. Initiatives, ideas, preliminary projects, and suggestions have come and gone—mostly gone into some sort of astronomical black hole where they either disappear, or else they peter out and are delayed indefinitely.

I'm tired of such things as "we are still waiting for the architect or engineer or contractor to get back to us." Or, "we can't move until the people at Labor and Industry make a ruling on (this or that)." Or, "we've got to get a legal opinion on liability issues." Or, "we need a more specific statement as to how the building is going to be used" (a question that has been beaten into the dirt for years now). Or, "we don't know how the weather this winter (or this summer) will affect the budget." Or, "this is not the time because we're all financially stressed."

I admit there has been some progress on the town hall. After interminable, detailed and expensive discussions with engineers and contractors about the water leakage problem in the foundation, and after expensive and speculative recommendations, a half-dozen or so determined citizens resolved the issue by spending a few afternoons digging a shallow ditch that effectively drew off much of the surface water. And then, finally, after literally years and years of goofing around, the town repaired that grossly-streaked and rotten roof, thanks to money assiduously raised for the Town Hall Fund by interested parties. But the foregoing accomplishments are simply not enough in view of the long time span over which they occurred.

Now I understand that the federal government has authorized a fabulous, humongous, once-in-a-lifetime $301,000 windfall grant for the old town hall, provided the town can raise an equal amount through donations, appropriations, or bonding.

I, for one, don't know yet how I would vote on a bond. Much would depend on the impact it would have on our property tax rate. I certainly would oppose it if a bond means an additional 10 cents on the tax rate for the next few decades. I would definitely support it if it means an additional one cent. If it's in-between, I would do some soul-searching about it, as would many other residents.

But before the town begins to probe its collective soul, we need without further delay an authoritative public statement from town authorities as to how much of a bond we would need (depending on how much money is already in our Town Hall Fund) and on how much such a bond would cost the town if we float it now.

It shouldn't be difficult to find out. A call to the proper banking or state authorities should yield the figure. Then, let us voters sit down and decide at a special town meeting whether we want to avail ourselves of the opportunity to match the $301,000 federal windfall and thereby get a total of $602,000 for some truly significant renovations to the building.

If we decide that we want to raise the money, that's fine. If not, that's fine too. But I urge that we settle the matter sooner rather than later. The rare possibility of getting $301,000 is something that the town ought to tackle immediately.

Christopher D. Costanzo

Bethel