What’s going on -
Comments reflecting a difference of opinion about how to proceed with development of facilities at Crellin Park reflects an underlying tension that has been unresolved since the last election. Those differences in opinion can translate to questions that apply to board members and town residents, especially those who are involved with town business, town committees, and anyone who cares about Chatham.
Questions like these:
Who is in charge here? Who gets to decide what’s going to happen in Chatham? Do my opinions matter? Can we collaborate and get along, discuss differences respectfully and listen to each other? Can we agree to disagree? Do I trust the board’s decision making process?
The Town Board has a responsibility to listen to all of the residents of Chatham, and to its credit, the Town Board has sponsored many public meetings in addition to required public hearings to present proposals and draft laws in process. Usually, the public comment segment of board meetings is largely productive, and the board benefits from hearing opinions on issues at hand. These forums are important opportunities for a wide range of opinions to be heard, and for potential compromises to be made.
The current town board has a majority. The new majority asserted early on, consistent with NYS law, that it is the entire board’s responsibility to make decisions for the town, and that the supervisor, who has specific powers and duties, holds one vote out of five on decisions that come before the board. This contrasts with a board where a supervisor sits with the majority, and may have more autonomy to operate without board conflict to make decisions and take action and to have more weight in board decisions. The latter approach seemed operational in the previous administration and Supervisor Collins has had to readjust to the new board’s expectations.
Here’s some background on the Crellin Park discussion and some reasons the questions noted earlier are pertinent:
Changes in the Town Supervisor and the makeup of the board in 2020 resulted in many changes, including a discontinuation of work on a draft Park Plan that had been submitted to the previous board by the Parks and Recreation Committee. It was never considered by the new board. Newly elected Supervisor Collins worked with volunteer residents and the Director of Recreation to identify and carry out decisions about park improvements, with the support of his majority,
These projects may be seen as improvements to park infrastructure, and in fact have added recreational elements to the park. At the same time, the projects are not the result of an overall plan and typically lack any plan for future maintenance beyond an expectation that volunteer involvement will be sufficient. While hopeful, this resource may be insufficient to reliably maintain the functional value of the projects for the users of the park in the future.
Since new board members were elected in 2024, the Parks & Recreation Committee has resumed work to finalize a park plan that would order priorities, anticipate and plan for funding needs, and introduce a coherent vision of the park.
An update on this committee’s work is what set off the discussion in public comment as some audience members perceived that the Parks & Recreation Committee was recommending a discontinuation of work on any projects that are currently planned. This jump to a conclusion occurred even though the Board had responded to the idea of a moratorium; discussed at length their opinions about delaying some but not all projects; had reached a consensus that a full stop on projects was not desirable and that consultation with a professional park planner was agreeable to the board.
Hence the questions:
Who is in charge here? Who gets to decide what’s going to happen in Chatham? Do my opinions matter? Can we collaborate and get along, discuss differences respectfully and listen to each other? Can we agree to disagree? Do I trust the board’s decision making process?
The board was able to regroup and despite some clear disagreements on the matter reached a consensus to approve work on an application for a grant for playground equipment; and to proceed with the planting of trees as proposed in the report by the Invasive Species Awareness Committee Chair. The board did not yet decide how to address siting of any equipment obtained through grants in the short term, but concurred on the advisability of getting some professional consultation on future park development.
In response, resident and landscape architect Wendy Carroll generously offered to work with the Parks & Recreation Committee, the Recreation Director, and the volunteers who have done construction and maintenance at the park. She suggested that a preliminary mapping of current and planned projects and facilities at the park could be helpful to the board in making plans for the park, especially with regard to projects already in the pipeline.
Will this offer be accepted? It could be the first step on a path to resolve some of these questions.