Residents press task force to protect Warner's Pond at public comment session

Several residents used the meeting's public‑comment period to urge the task force to preserve Warner's Pond and to press for clearer information about how each alternative would affect access, habitat and long‑standing community uses.

An extended emotional testimony from a long‑time neighbor described the pond as a deeply held personal and community asset that provides quiet recreation and nature access: "I've lived through almost 46 years. I'm gonna be 80 in 3 weeks... this is an asset I thought I would have. I feel to have it taken away," the resident said. Other speakers cited past petition and survey results and urged the task force to prioritize the pond's protection.

Public commenters offered numbers and local context: one speaker recalled a town survey with 3,602 responses and another summarized petition efforts claiming roughly 900 signatures (including paper and online responses), with about 600 from Concord residents. Speakers also emphasized equity and recreational access, noting that residents who cannot afford private waterfront access rely on the pond and its surrounding park.

Several commenters asked that the task force make accessible, up front, basic frequently asked questions — for example: water quality and swimming safety, likely impacts on flooding, and how long proposed amenities would take to materialize under each alternative. "You need 15 or 20 minutes at the beginning — that's called what we learned," one commenter said, urging the task force to present a concise primer at the public forum so questions are not repeated.

Others urged inclusion of cultural and historical context: a speaker who said they had spoken to a member of a local Indigenous community asked that the history and use of the pond by Indigenous people be recorded and shared as part of the public record and outreach materials.

Technical and risk concerns were also raised. Dan Stapleton, a local resident, asked for explicit clarity on what would be known and when if the group pursues dam removal: "There's really no turning back on that alternative," he said, and urged the task force to make clear whether the town would commit to constructing proposed amenities if expected outcomes (for example, a 4.5‑acre open water area) did not occur within a given timeframe. He also asked whether FEMA map‑revision analyses and potential flood‑insurance impacts would be available before the town commits to a path.

The public comment period closed with a request that the task force publish its timeline and supporting materials — including technical memos and a list of experts consulted — so residents can review the basis for the group's recommendations before or at the public forum.

The task force planning team later proposed a March 13 public forum with presentations from each work group followed by an open‑house style Q&A and poster stations so residents can leave written comments and ask clarifying questions in small groups.