Now they'll have you arrested for using your public land, I suppose....
Boy, these people are arrogant.

I guess they think we'll all run away from this issue because they have a lawyer.
Let's give them a test, shall we?
I went to a meeting of the Cornfield Point Association this morning (January 25), and what an educational experience it was.
These people just don't get it. Despite the reports I've heard, the imprseeion I got was that more than half of the Cornfield Point residents are in agreement with the Association and its stupid lawuit (though they're not happy with the idea of paying for it).
They're trying very hard to cloak the issue of theft of public land with bogus "safety concerns." Over and over, I heard about how it was going to be carnage, death, and ruin if four (that's right, just four!) of the public acess areas got one parking spot each. According to the Cornfielders, this would be hideously dangerous, with people running down their kids left and right.
Nobody seemed to be able to explain, though, why it is that having a car exit a parking space would be more dangerous than one coming out from one of the driveways, of which there are many in Cornfield Point. Nor did they explain why it was not dangerous for residents' cars to be backing out of these very same places, which some of them use to park their cars.
However, from the general (and consistent) tone of the Cornfielders' speeches, it was abundantly clear to me that the real reason they believe the parking-space cars are dangerous, and the driveway cars are not, is that the parking-space cars would be driven by people who can't afford to live in Cornfield Point - and therefore, are dirtballs. And these are the type of people who accuse people like me of stirring up "class warfare."
One woman (who was vehemently against parking spots because of the danger), even said that the "public areas were there so people could get a view of the ocean while they're walking or driving down the street."
Maybe I'm dumber than a box of rocks, but it seems to me that having someone stare off to the side while they're driving down the street would be a bunch more dangerous than letting them stop the car to enjoy the view.
I asked a simple question, which I thought was a perfectly legitimate one, but was met with stony silence from the Association leaders (quite a few people in the room got a good laugh out of it, though). Here's what I asked:
If, as the Association claims, it has owned the land for seventy years, does it intend to pay the town seventy years' worth of back property taxes if they win their lawsuit? Further, if they've actually owned this land for all these years, why haven't they been
paying property taxes on it all along?
I had to leave before the end of the meeting (and a good thing, too, as I was getting sick of listening to these people - and Mrs Kopcha was getting a mite testy as well), but you can bet that I'll keep you informed of any news.
I will promise you one thing. I will not give up on this issue. Listening to these people has strengthened my resolve to do everything that one, lone guy can do to stop them from stealing our land. I will flog them mercilessly in this website and any other forum I have access to, because someone has to speak up. The "safety concerns" about the parking spaces are clearly a smokescreen to cover their real desire: to keep the rifraff away from their neighborhood.

I've said this before, and I'll keep saying it until it gets through to these people (though it probably won't). It's a very simple concept, and I don't understand why they can't seem to grasp it (too much money for lawyers, and not enough sense of community, maybe):

If you don't want the public near your house, don't buy a house near public land.
Here's the latest story from the Hartford Courant on the attempted theft of public land by the Cornfield Point Beach Association, with our commentary. To read about this ridiculous situation from the beginning, click here. You'll enjoy it.
This story © 2003, The Hartford Courant, reproduced with their kind permission. Please respect the Courant's ownership of this material. You may print this page for your personal use, or refer others to this page, but may not otherwise copy or retransmit this information in any form.
Dispute Over Road Endings Deepenl February 7, 2003
By CLAUDIA VAN NES, Courant Staff Writer
OLD SAYBROOK -- The town's efforts to make certain that the public has access to road endings with views of Long Island Sound on Cornfield Point has hit another snag.
An attorney for residents Richard and Dianne Leighton claims "appropriate action" will be taken to prevent trespassing at the Belleaire Drive road ending where the Leightons are adjacent property owners.
The Leightons say half the ending belongs to them, not to the town or to the Cornfield Point Association. This claim adds another layer to a dispute between the town and the Cornfield Point Association that dates back decades and has heated to the boiling point. Cornfield Point residents recently have engaged in legal action to cut off public access to the Sound in their neighborhood.
"So much for discussion and negotiation," First Selectman Michael Pace said Thursday after he read a letter from attorney Ralph Wilson. Pace, however, has a document of his own to possibly trump the Leightons and the association which claims in its lawsuit that the association owns the road endings. The document - a 1922 survey map of the roads on Cornfield Point done for the original developer - was discovered Thursday in the attic of town hall by Candy McConochie, who's in charge of building maintenance.
Each of the town roads, including Belleaire, ends at the top of the bluff overlooking Long Island Sound on the survey map. That proves, according to Pace, that the association's claim that it owns the unpaved endings of these roads has no legal basis.
These endings over the years have been encroached on by adjacent property owners who also maintain them. A chain link fence at the end of Belleaire, for instance, runs inside the grassed over road ending next to the Leighton property.
The letter from Wilson came in response to one Pace sent Jan. 23 to all property owners adjacent to road endings on Cornfield Point saying the public works crew will be setting granite posts in the endings to mark the town's boundaries. If the next door neighbors want their plantings in the ending removed, they should contact the public works department within 45 days, the letter says.
Wilson claimed in his letter the town discontinued the Belleaire road ending 70 years ago, and half the ownership reverted to the Leightons who acquired the property by adverse possession.
This, Pace figured, means even if the association wins its lawsuit, the Leightons would claim ownership of their half of the road ending, preventing not only the public from using the land but association members as well.
So, Mrs Kopcha, I hope you're happy. You've managed to damage your neighbors' reputation--now, the public perception of Cornfield Point residents is that they're a bunch of greedy, arrogant people who will pay lawyers to try to steal public land, just to keep the rest of us from looking at your ocean views. This perception, of course, is wrong - note the Cornfield Point residents who filed the petition against your stupid lawsuit - but "Cornfield Point" will now and forever be equated with "idiotic lawsuit to try to steal public access" in the minds of many Old Saybrook residents (and others throughout Connecticut).
Nice job of promoting a sense of community in Old Saybrook. Thanks a bunch.

I'll be adding links to the whole sordid history of this story, but am too tired to do it right now. Please check back in a couple of days.

Back to the ourriver.org home page.