When Channel 8 Comes to Town – 1/6/2012

Posted by Bob on January 6, 2012 under Daily Blogs | 2 Comments to Read

It never ceases to amaze me how relatively minor matters assume a life of their own in local government.  For the past couple months our administration has been responding to a long-standing issue related to trash and recycling collection on the private road of Caitlin Circle, along Porter Avenue.  Our Mayoral Aide, Ed Carter; Recycling Coordinator, Sheila Baummer; Director of Public Works, Jim Stewart, Borough Attorney, Ned Fitzpatrick; and myself have been aware of this situation to varying degrees for months.  The matter was referred to the Street Commission, which is the appropriate forum to set policy for such matters.  In recent weeks, we were once again contacted by the property owners at the end of the street to provide assistance.  The situation is, in fact, an all too common result of decisions made long ago.

Caitlin Circle is one of numerous private roads in the Borough.  Private roads are those that are not accepted as public property, and there is generally not a requirement for local government to assume maintenance, plowing and/or provide other services.  Many such roads are owned in common by the property owners living in a particular subdivision serviced by the street.  For whatever reasons, decisions have been made over the years to provide various levels of service, particularly trash collection, to private roads provided trash and/or recyclables were brought to the end of the street.  While the Borough was not under any obligation to collect trash and/or recyclables, calls were likely made to the powers that were and decisions were made to provide such services.  In many cases, including the case with Caitlin Circle, this has been done for decades.  I would expect that Naugatuck is not alone with regard to such arrangements.

Our administration and the Street Commission having been working to reach a global resolution with regard to services provided to private and/or unaccepted roads.  As one might imagine, this a complex and lengthy process.  While residents along some private roads may not be entitled to services such as trash collection, it is certainly a disruption when such a service is ended for a property after having been provided for many years.  Our goal while resolving this issue has been to achieve a solution that has the least disruptive impact to residents while improving the efficiency of service delivery, and ultimately providing an equitable system for taxpayers.  It is very possible that the Street Commission will recommend eliminating trash and recycling collection in the coming months for certain private roads.  Such a decision, however, will be made intelligently, in conjunction with a sound implementation plan.  Any changes to  practices that have existed for years will need to be explained to those impacted.

The situation with Caitlin Circle is easily explained.  In the late 1980′s, a subdivision was created along Porter Avenue called the Porter Hill subdivision.  Six (6) homes were constructed within the subdivision and a private road was created called Caitlin Circle.  As is common with subdivisions, a declaration with various covenants and restrictions was recorded on the Borough’s land records.  When such covenants and restrictions are recorded, they bind all owners to the requirements thereof, regardless if said properties are later sold to subsequent owners.  The declaration effecting Caitlin Circle states that property owners within the subdivision were not entitled to trash collection.

Despite this provision in the declaration, a decision was made to collect trash for Caitlin Circle residents if the trash was placed at the end of the street.  One can argue about the logic of such a decision, but the fact is that for whatever reason, the Borough has been collecting trash for Caitlin Circle residents for what appears to be a period greater than twenty (20) years.  As local officials were attempting to address the numerous private road issues throughout the Borough, Public Works would continue to collect trash and recyclables, but for the continued complaints from the property owners at the end of the road.

The property owners of the lot at the end of the road have been concerned at the level of debris caused by neighbors who bring trash to the end of the road.  The portion of the road itself is actually owned by property owners of the first lot, a fact that was recently discovered by the Borough.  Without the property owners permission, the Borough does not have the right to enter upon private property to collect trash.  After very respectful and productive dialogue with the property owners, a temporary compromise was reached to provide residents along Caitlin Circle with garnet and grey containers with instructions to place the same on the opposite portion of the private road.  The containers should prevent the type of litter and debris from being scattered on the road if used properly.  Hopefully this arrangement will work in the short term, while the larger solution to this Borough-wide issue is determined by the Street Commission.

I am sure that WTNH Channel 8 would like to claim credit for “resolving” this matter.  Changes in the media have forced statewide, television news networks to become creative in attracting viewers.  Channel 8′s marketing hook is something to the effect of “we’ve got your back”, which was incorporated into its recent Naugatuck story involving Caitlin Circle.  The Channel 8 reporter, Ali Reed, did a very professional job investigating the facts and reporting the information accurately. Once the story hits the air, however, the tone changes to enhance the role played by Channel 8.  Apparently the lead-in to the story made a claim to the effect that our office was not involved until Channel 8 ran the story.  That is simply not accurate.

Our office, primarily through Mayoral Aide Ed Carter, has been working with the Department of Public Works to find a solution to the Caitlin Circle matter for months.  The temporary solution which will be implemented is very similar to one that had been proposed previously.  The Street Commission has been aware of the matter for some time as well.  The easiest solution for our office would simply be to eliminate collection immediately, as we are under no legal obligation to provide it.  This may ultimately be the action taken, but we would prefer to implement the same in accordance with a broader Street Commission policy.

I wholeheartedly admit that aside from an occasional weather forecast, I rarely if ever watch state television news broadcasts.  It is interesting, however, how such relatively minor issues are portrayed.  Every so many months news outlets like Channel 8 come to the Borough to do a story based on a phone call from a resident, and/or after a story appears in another form of media.  The Caitlin Circle matter was actually first reported in the Waterbury Republican-American by reporter Alia Malik on Sunday, January 1, 2012.  There is really no way to prove it and I am not alleging it happened in this situation, but I wonder how many times a local reporter from the Republican does the initial homework for a statewide television news story.

The usual pattern of Channel 8 is to send a reporter to a community to interview various parties on a time frame that fits into the mid-day or evening news cycle.  If local officials offer to provide greater detail at a particular time which does not fit nicely into the news agency’s deadline, one runs the risk that it will be reported that locals officials were “unavailable for” or “refused to” comment.  Maybe it is a coincidence, but it usually seems to me that such stories pertain to public infrastructure and/or local service delivery issues during slower news cycles.  Ms. Reed requested and was granted two (2) interviews with me, and took the time to learn the facts about the situation.  Our first interview, which can be viewed here, covers the history and the facts.  What results, however, is a couple seconds of the interview being spliced into the usual template of Channel 8 being a major actor in the relatively minor issue.

The last time I recall Channel 8 becoming involved in a local government matter in Naugatuck was during the heavy rain storms in March, 2011.  The story that day claimed something to the effect that Channel 8 was on the scene to assist a resident attempting to obtain Borough services about a flooding issue.  The implication was that, but for Channel 8′s involvement, the Borough would ignore the particular resident’s concerns.  There was only one problem with such an assertion:  Borough Public Works crews had been on the street the entire morning before the Channel 8 crew arrived.  Sometimes there is no need for the facts to get in the way of a good “we’ve got your back” story.

I get it.  The Information Age has forced certain media outlets to get creative to compete in today’s marketplace.  Those who read blogs such as this probably do not rely on short features on television to obtain their understanding of local issues. Those who truly believe that the Channel 8′s of the world “have their back” probably are not reading this.   It is strange to me, however, that of all the serious and big-picture matters that local communities face on a daily basis, how much time is devoted by television news coverage to stories that impact so few and often times are already being addressed.  Our administration believes that providing access to the media to cover local government is our responsibility, and is vital to a healthy democracy.  While I doubt my opinion matters to media outlets like Channel 8, I would hope that someday statewide television media would someday return to covering local communities for journalistic reasons consistent with their noble profession rather than simply using towns as pawns in their marketing strategies.