Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Riverwalk And Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents at Preston hearing split as some urge Riverwalk scrutiny and others defend school funding
Summary
At the April 23 public hearing on the FY2027 budget, residents raised environmental and financial questions about the Riverwalk development and many urged maintaining or restoring school and public safety funding; local officials provided preliminary estimates and clarified grant funding for sidewalks.
At a public hearing April 23 on Preston’s proposed FY2027 budget, more than 50 residents spoke, offering mixed views on town spending priorities and development plans tied to the so‑called Riverwalk project.
Claire Stadtmueller opened public comment by questioning several concepts tied to the Riverwalk, including an indoor ski facility, and warned about possible environmental impacts and whether those concepts align with community priorities. She also raised HB 8002 as a factor potentially affecting housing and school enrollment. Selectwoman Sandra Allyn‑Gauthier responded that six of seven Riverwalk parcels are cleared by DEEP and that the estimated appraised value is about $14 million, producing roughly $80,000 in first‑year tax revenue under current assumptions.
Other residents urged restraint on spending and questioned whether the town should rely on future development revenue to offset operating costs. Andy Depta asked the board to consider another roughly $200,000 in BOE cuts, citing alleged prior spending variances of about $400,000; the board did not adopt the proposed additional cuts and reiterated contractual and accounting constraints.
Supporters of the proposed budgets—including parents and education professionals—urged preserving classroom resources. Kayla Thompson, a parent, argued that reductions would primarily affect students and classroom programs rather than administrative functions. Several residents, including Ray Sulrich and Melissa Lennon, urged restoration of a second Resident State Trooper to improve local coverage; others, like Paul Allen, questioned the need for a dedicated local trooper given state police services and suggested exploring shared services.
Commenters also raised questions about sidewalk projects in Poquetanuck Village; town officials clarified that the Poquetanuck sidewalks are grant‑funded and that the town owns the first 10 feet of roadside, and that those capital costs are not part of the operating budget being discussed.
The hearing closed after an additional comment and the board returned to its special meeting to act on the budgets. The public record shows substantial engagement on both sides: residents urging fiscal restraint and those warning about the consequences of cutting education or public safety resources. Town officials and finance staff provided figures and caveats—many revenue numbers tied to potential Riverwalk conveyance were described as estimates, and state agency processes (for trooper assignment and environmental clearances) were described as external dependencies.
