This Week’s Letters to the Editor

Editor’s Note: The Letters to the Editor section in the Woodbridge Town Chronicle is a place where community voices can be shared and heard. In the print newspapers of years past, letters to the editor were often the liveliest section, where readers spoke directly to one another, the broader community, and its leaders. To submit a letter for consideration please refer to the submission guidelines.

First-time Voter Asks: Affordable for Who?

To the editor,

I’ve heard my whole life that Woodbridge just needs to build more housing, and our problems will be solved. Add a couple dozen “affordable” units here, another dozen there, and everyone’s better off—right? Well, in the words of Norm Kelly: “You can’t pour from an empty cup. Take care of yourself first.”

We can debate how to do affordable housing as long as we want, but can we do it in good faith when it’s already unaffordable for the people here? For example, look at this year’s dilemma: about a $1,300 jump per house in taxes just this year alone.

And the pattern isn’t limited to a few unlucky households. When you look at the distribution of tax changes town-wide, most homes saw increases in the low thousands, some saw modest decreases, and a small number faced very steep hikes. In other words, the typical homeowner paid significantly more.

When our costs jump, we make tough decisions and cut elsewhere in our budgets. However, when our government has the same problem, they vote to pass it onto us. It’s far easier to raise taxes than for a family to magically find new income, especially when money’s already tight. If we have to live within our means, our leaders should show the same discipline.

As a first-time voter, I’d love to move back to Woodbridge after college, but that possibility fades each year. For having a top school system, we don’t do much to keep our graduates here, and make Woodbridge a place the next generation can afford.

We grew up enjoying Woodbridge for its schools, people, and open space. You only get one hometown to return to. That’s why I’ll be casting my first vote for A Common Ground For Woodbridge, and I urge everyone to do the same.

— Daniel Mowerman

Our Land, Our Legacy — What You’re Not Being Told About the CCW Master Plan

To the editor,

The CCW is a public asset that, if developed thoughtfully, can have lasting benefits for Woodbridge. The September 2025 Master Plan falls short of that potential. Don’t be misled by First Selectman Cardozo’s claims of the Plan’s “success.” Here is what you need to know:

1. No unanimous support.
   Contrary to claims, the Plan does not have full Board of Selectmen approval. In April 2025, the Board unanimously supported a “bento box” approach to planning, which would provide the information necessary for the Board and the public to make informed decisions on which land uses to pursue. This is not how the September 2025 Master Plan functions. Despite the efforts of Selectmen McCreven, Vogel, and me, the “final” Plan has never been formally discussed or voted on by the Board.
2. Public input ignored.
   Residents overwhelmingly supported open space, trails, and revenue-generating commercial space. Yet the plan includes a 100-unit assisted living facility, which received no public input. Even more concerning, the community may not have the opportunity to vote on the Plan, potentially bypassing their voices on land they collectively own.
3. Open space is not protected.
   The Plan only “considers” or “explores” a conservation easement -- the only legal mechanism to guarantee permanent protection of open space. Without it, the land remains vulnerable to gradual loss.
4. Revenue projections are unrealistic.
   The $2 million annual revenue figure relies on a facility unlikely to be built in a market already served by two assisted living centers. The cost-benefit analysis of the additional ~200 residential units also ignores impacts on schools and housing turnover, making the claim unreliable.

I do not endorse this Plan. Any proposed development must simultaneously include a conservation easement. CCW can unify Woodbridge, but only if development balances revenue with permanent conservation and genuine community priorities.

— Andrea Urbano

The writer is a member of the Woodbridge Board of Selectmen and a candidate for re-election on the Republican Party–endorsed slate (Row B on the ballot).

Concerns Raised Over Timing of Fountain Street Decision

To the editor,

At the last Board of Selectmen meeting, I made a prediction that the Town Planning and Zoning Commission (TPZ) would reject the Fountain Street project at their October 21 meeting as was scheduled for a vote. Of course, this was totally unexpected since their actions of changing our zoning laws in favor of the developer and then refusing to reverse them despite the objections of so many of our residents, made it obvious they were in favor of it.

Once again as many of us arrived at the meeting we were informed that a vote would not be taken. This is typical TPZ tactics, and it is deeply disturbing that it comes less than two weeks prior to our town election. Even half of the TPZ members were visibly upset with the last-minute decision. As one member said, “it smells,” referring to the decision and the timing. One must wonder who is calling the shots. Certainly not the TPZ. It all reeks of back door manipulation as the election nears. Disgraceful.

Woodbridge voters are extremely intelligent, and I certainly hope they see through this confusing delay of the voting process as it pertains to the most controversial project in our town’s recent history. The Democratic Town Committee and First Selectman Mica Cardozo have clearly stated that they are proponents of providing diverse housing options in Woodbridge. Fountain Street is the start of that promise. Two more years of the DTC and Cardozo could give you a Woodbridge you might not recognize. Please think carefully about your vote and decide if you are willing to risk the possibility of high-density housing in our residential zones.

— Matthew T. Giglietti

The writer was a member of the Woodbridge Board of Finance from July 1986 to December 2023 where he served as Chairman for 35 years (1988–2023).

“Let Voters Beware” on Unchecked Development and Town Spending

To the editor (and all Woodbridge neighbors),

“Caveat emptor!” According to the dictionary: “let the buyer beware.”

As local elections loom, it’s a clarion call to safeguard the physical attributes of our town at a crossroads; we could lose forever what each campaign team calls, “the largest unprotected parcel in Woodbridge.”

With plans in Washington finalized to allow oil and gas drilling in the pristine Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, it seems imperative locally to preserve the natural features, wildlife habitat, and recreational opportunities we can, specifically at the CCW.

Projected revenue for the Democrats’ proposed CCW development doesn’t include unassigned expenses for clubhouse demolition, water main expansion, gas line extension, sewer hook-ups, and other site-preparation costs. It doesn’t mention costs of additional police patrols, ambulance and fire calls, snow plowing, and road improvements.

The Democrats’ proposal ignores intangible costs like traffic congestion and demand for untold, increased Town and educational services. Another timely finance phrase comes to mind: “if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.”

A Democratic campaign mailer two years ago promised they would ‘find savings,’ yet this year’s budget has the largest increase in years. Now the same group risks making the town even more costly to operate.

In the 29 years I’ve lived here no local issue has divided residents more sharply; a CCW development project would only prolong the rancor. The parcel is mostly paid for by now –it’s common sense to perpetuate its pristine place as open space.

On Fountain Street, a high-rise, high-density apartment building is proposed, with an ominous, far-reaching zoning change already adopted to allow it. As I read it, the current administration distanced itself from the process but not the high-density impact.

On November 4, let voters beware: unchecked development will bring unwanted, untenable costs, and our town’s small-town heritage hangs in the balance.

— Laurence Grotheer

The writer served four years on the Board of Finance, five years on the Board of Selectmen, and was Chair of the Woodbridge Democratic Town Committee twice, for several years each time. He is no longer a WDTC member.

Editor’s Note: Letters reflect the perspectives of their authors. They are published to foster dialogue about issues of local concern, including questions of governance, transparency, and accountability, as well as topics such as highlighting upcoming or past events from community groups. To submit a letter for consideration please refer to the submission guidelines.