The recent East Haddam meeting on private roads raised numerous concerns, not only about road maintenance but also about deeper issues of governance, equity, and historical injustice. The town’s decision to halt services on private roads without prior notification has left many residents questioning the administration’s accountability, transparency, and understanding of its obligations to all taxpayers.

The Problem of “Private Roads”

The town claims it has limited responsibilities for private roads, primarily ensuring emergency vehicle access. However, many residents, including yourself, have deeds with no explicit mention of “private road” status. This discrepancy raises serious questions about how the town determines its responsibilities and whether it is unfairly shifting the burden onto residents.

Furthermore, the town’s phrasing during the meeting—suggesting it did residents a “favor” by providing occasional services—feels dismissive and condescending. These services are not optional favors; they are fundamental obligations to all taxpayers, regardless of where they live.

Racist Clauses in Deeds

Adding to the frustration is the historical context of many property deeds in East Haddam, which include racist covenants. While these clauses are now legally unenforceable, their presence serves as a stark reminder of systemic inequities that have long influenced property ownership and town policies. The fact that the town continues to treat certain residents—those on so-called private roads—as less deserving of equal services underscores how these historical injustices remain embedded in modern governance.

Failure to Notify Residents

One of the most egregious points raised during the meeting was the administration’s failure to notify residents about its decision to stop maintaining private roads. Residents were not given an opportunity to prepare, voice concerns, or seek alternative solutions. Instead, the decision was made unilaterally, leaving many feeling blindsided and disregarded.

Mismanagement of Funds

As taxpayers, residents on private roads contribute equally to the town’s revenue. However, by withholding services from these areas, the town is effectively creating a tiered system where some taxpayers receive fewer benefits than others. If the town justifies this decision based on the “private” status of certain roads, it opens a slippery slope: should cul-de-sacs, which also serve limited numbers of residents, be exempt from plowing and maintenance?

Such practices suggest a mismanagement of funds and a lack of accountability. Tax dollars are meant to serve the collective good, not to perpetuate inequities or cut corners.

A Call for Equitable Governance

East Haddam’s administration must address these issues urgently and comprehensively:

1. Clarify Road Status: Conduct a transparent review of all deeds and road statuses to ensure consistency and fairness in service provision. Residents should not be penalized based on vague or outdated classifications.

2. Acknowledge Historical Injustices: While the town cannot change the past, it can commit to equity moving forward. This includes publicly acknowledging the racist clauses in many deeds and ensuring that current policies do not perpetuate inequities.

3. Provide Equal Services: All taxpayers, regardless of road status, deserve equitable treatment. If the town collects taxes from residents on so-called private roads, it must provide comparable services or reduce their tax burden proportionally.

4. Improve Communication: Decisions that affect residents must be communicated clearly and in advance. The lack of notification about halting road services reflects poorly on the administration’s commitment to transparency and respect for its constituents.

5. Reassess Budget Priorities: The town must ensure that its budget reflects the needs of all residents. Allocating funds equitably and responsibly is critical to maintaining trust and avoiding perceptions of favoritism or mismanagement.

Conclusion

The issues surrounding private roads in East Haddam go beyond plowing and maintenance; they touch on deeper questions of equity, governance, and historical accountability. The administration’s current approach—marked by poor communication, inequitable service provision, and a lack of transparency—fails to meet the town’s obligations to its residents.

East Haddam must do better. Only through open dialogue, fair policies, and a commitment to justice can the town truly serve all its residents, not just a privileged few.