Letters

On September 6, the Lake Agawam Conservancy sent an email stating that an ad in this newspaper titled “Save Pond Lane and Taxpayers’ Money” was a misleading title.

I disagree for the below reasons. I am also troubled that the conservancy’s email includes the seals of the village and the town. It is inappropriate that our seals be used to endorse a project that has not yet had full and open public discussion.

The ad did not state that the public would fund the gardens. It asked whether the conservancy had secured the funds to pay for the park and recommended that the trustees not consider a resolution for closing Pond Lane unless there are firm, binding commitments from donors.

The conservancy stated in its letter that it has “secured commitments approaching the $10 million needed to install the gardens.” The ad asked whether this is accurate. If the funds are secured then the donor commitment documents should be fully disclosed to the village.

The conservancy claims that the park will cost $10 million to install and $10 million to maintain through an endowment. Our trustees need a transparent budget before even considering this project, and a budget posted on the village website.

The conservancy claims that the closure of Pond Lane will benefit the public “from the increased value of this newly ‘waterfront’ land by gaining access to sailing … etc.” However, the trustees know there is already direct access to the lake from Agawam Park. Rather, they should ask the public if they want to trade a historic road for waterfront property.

This is an economic issue that impacts public access, and it should be addressed in an open and public forum. Hidden agendas are not healthy and foment distrust.

Pond Lane is an essential road to reduce traffic and is a beloved historic road on the National Register, and its closure will harm the business district. In fact, the Chamber of Commerce and most shop owners oppose the lane closure. Nevertheless, the conservancy stated that a Nelson Pope Voorhis traffic study it commissioned shows that the closure will not adversely impact village traffic.

The public deserves an independent traffic study commissioned by the village, given that roads are public property.

The conservancy stated that Pond Lane is unsafe. The village needs an independent assessment. Closing Pond Lane will only exacerbate the severe traffic congestion during the busy summer months and create a safety hazard on other streets.

Our trustees need to be accountable to the taxpayers, voters, homeowners and commercial tenants. For this reason, they need to have all the independent facts in front of them before passing irreversible resolutions.

Cathy Triant Buxton

Southampton