I write as you not only as a candidate for First Selectman in the upcoming election, but someone like you who loves Fairfield. Suburban planning, especially in my hometown, has been an interest of mine for many years, and I can remember going back to 2000 researching, writing and gathering input from thought leaders. My biggest source of pride was finding the buried town plans in the Fairfield History Museum library, only to discover they were ornaments in the town office. In other words, vested interests took our town plans, literally put them on a shelf, and wrote their own to suit their needs.
I won’t sugarcoat it: as many of you who get The Voice communications or have heard me speak know, the current POCD has limited value. Here is the vendor’s plan. Please mark it up like I have. It is not their fault and is professionally assembled; the trouble is they are reporting to the wrong people. The document is totally built around construction – 8 of the 10 executive summary items are about developments. I know that it’s under the guise of filling multifamily housing mandates, but we have solutions to mitigate that requirement immediately. Perhaps more seriously, there are major mistakes with the maps and neighborhoods that must be rectified.
It is not enough to poke holes at something; you have to have solutions. We have every right to return to the approved Town Plans from before 2000 that were “shelved”, which is when the synthetic Commerce Drive district (2000 plan) and the third railroad station emerged, which are the mustard seed for much of our problems. Here is an article with links to the authentic town plans.
I have started an outline of a POCD. We can work on it for the next month until the election. I also started a page just for Fairfield here.
We have not even come close to fulfilling the state’s many mandates (below) regarding health, safety, and environmental protection. We are woefully shy in meeting the State’s requirements in many areas. Look at just the list of what the state requires:
Community development action plan of the municipality.
Need for affordable housing.
Protection of public surface and ground drinking water supplies.
Use of cluster development and other patterns consistent with soil types, terrain, and infrastructure capacity.
State plan of conservation and development.
Regional plan of conservation and development.
Physical, social, economic, and governmental conditions and trends.
Needs of the municipality, including human resources, education, health, housing, recreation, social services, public utilities, public protection, transportation, and cultural communication.
Energy-efficient development patterns, renewable energy use, and energy conservation.
Protection and preservation of agriculture.
Most recent sea level change scenario.
Need for technology infrastructure.
Statement of policies, goals, and standards for physical and economic development.
System of thoroughfares, parkways, bridges, streets, sidewalks, trails, and other public ways.
Promotion of coordinated development for efficiency, economy, and general welfare.
Identification of areas for compact, transit-accessible, pedestrian-oriented mixed-use development and land reuse.
Recommendations for land use (residential, recreational, commercial, industrial, conservation, agricultural, etc.) with a map.
Recommendations for population density in different parts of the municipality.
Address inconsistencies with growth management principles (e.g., redevelopment, housing opportunities, transportation nodes, environmental conservation, etc.).
Development of housing opportunities, including multifamily dwellings, consistent with local conditions.
Promotion of housing choice and economic diversity, including housing for low and moderate-income households.
Consideration for older adults and persons with disabilities to live in their homes and communities.
Provisions for home sharing, accessory apartments, and expanded definitions of “family” in single-family zones.
Focus on development and revitalization in areas with existing or planned infrastructure.
Additional Requirements for Municipalities Contiguous to Long Island Sound:
Consistency with municipal coastal program requirements.
Consideration for restoration and protection of Long Island Sound’s ecosystem and habitat.
Design to reduce hypoxia, pathogens, toxic contaminants, and floatable debris in Long Island Sound.
Optional Recommendations:
Conservation and preservation of ridgelines.
Location and improvement of airports, parks, playgrounds, schools, and public buildings.
Location and extent of public utilities and terminals.
Extent and location of public housing projects.
Programs for plan implementation (e.g., schedules, budgets, zoning enforcement, affordable housing plans, open space acquisition, greenways development, corridor management areas).
Proposed priority funding areas.
Other beneficial recommendations for the municipality.
Inclusion of maps, explanatory material, photographs, charts, or other data.
Sewerage System Identification:
General location and extent of areas served by existing sewerage systems.
Areas where sewerage systems are planned.
Areas where sewers are to be avoided
Here are some excerpts, which have been edited to remove PII (Personally Identifiable Information) while maintaining the full context of the warnings issued.
February 11, 2025: On “Selective Information”
“I truly appreciate your work and feel you are in impossible positions. First of all you have to go twice a month until late and be presented with stuff for the first time and are expected to make detailed decisions... On top of that, the constant pressure you are under to succumb to developers’ plans is astonishing... Plus the unfettered stream of lies and selective information that you are fed is particularly bothersome. The root problem is that we have no governance at the state level. We’re actually victims locally, under the thumb of outside vested interests.”
March 24, 2025: The “Baker’s Dozen” of Municipal Reform
“The state – what the French call l’état – has compelled the town to eliminate the town planner... we must re-establish Town Services. Fairfield has a legislative branch (RTM) and executive office (First Selectman) but no judicial arm, no court of public opinion. There is an issue with the hiring process for the new Director... Legally and for best practices, it should be posted and candidates interviewed. The role is too important for a social promotion from within.”
April 1, 2025: The Fresh Start & The “Buried” Plans
“I have been looking forward to tonight for 25 years... I remember reading the first town plan written by the vendor in 2000, and telling him then, ‘This is not that good.’ “I know”, he sheepishly replied. I have the outline of a new Plan that stands on the shoulders of the 5 previous town plans... These are the same plans our retiring zoner buried. My goal is nothing short of stopping ALL the new buildings by saying we can revert to the 2.5-story standard.”
June 10, 2025: Charter Revision & Governance Oversight
“Department heads should live in Fairfield. Public employees shouldn’t have ‘lifetime’ jobs; there should be training, reviews, and clear expectations. There’s little oversight in departments like DPW, HR, Assessor, Zoning, and Purchasing.”
September 19, 2025: The “Shredded” POCD Submission
“I am extremely concerned that major requirements from the State go unaddressed. I have thoroughly marked up the vendor’s latest POCD draft... it details numerous falsehoods, flawed assumptions, and dangerous recommendations. It uses dangerously outdated flood maps, pre-dating 11 straight years of rising sea levels. It erases the historic Black Rock neighborhood and replaces it with a ‘fake Commerce Drive district’.”
FORMAL REQUESTS
Administrative Moratorium: I ask for a pause to all large-scale development approvals and POCD regulatory amendments until this dossier is reviewed and the maps are audited after the election on Feb. 3.
Dissolution of the fake district called Commerce Drive == back to its original name of State Street – and numerical districting to return to neighborhoods
Roll back of zoning to 2.5 story buildings and extended family zoning instead of multifamily
Public Inclusion: I insist that this submission be included in the permanent public record of the TPZ and that a formal response be issued regarding the specific statutory failures identified.
I submit these documents with altruism on behalf of the residents of Fairfield. We are 50 years behind; it is time for the town to catch up.
Respectfully,
Matthew Hallock