Quantcast
,

Norwalk Mayoral Candidates Receive Sustainability Report Cards from Sustainable Streets

NORWALK, Conn. — Norwalk mayoral candidates gathered at Greer Southern Table on Oct. 21 to receive their sustainability report cards from Norwalk’s Sustainable Streets.

Matthew Silber, part of the Sustainable Streets leadership, announced the grades and moderated the portion where candidates provided responses, rebuttals, and answered audience questions.

According to Sustainable Streets, the group’s leadership team coordinated with members to identify 12 sustainability priorities for Norwalk — ranging from safe streets and housing affordability to transit access and environmental sustainability. Their methodology included answers from a Google form sent to candidates, along with previous statements, voting records, and policy platforms.

The highest overall grade given was an A-, and the lowest was a D+.

Erik Vitaglione (A-)

Vitaglione earned an overall grade of A-, receiving an A for walking/biking, an A+ for transit, and a B+ for housing.

Silber said Vitaglione’s responses were ambitious and showed a strong understanding of local transit, though they revealed some unfamiliarity with procedural details such as parking minimums.

“[Vitaglione] provided excellent responses, showing ambitious goals and a strong understanding of the local transit system,” Silber said. “However, there were some misunderstandings about procedural aspects, and while his perspective on duplex housing was solid, Mr. Vitaglione showed less familiarity with the issue of parking minimums.”

During his remarks, Vitaglione said his policies are well-documented on his Instagram page and used his time to answer audience questions.

In response to a question about Norwalk’s transit development, he said the city needs more buses and more robust transit infrastructure.

“Why I was not fully enthusiastic about the parking minimums,” he said, “is because if we’re going to have a minimum for developers or whoever’s benefiting, how are they actually putting back into the transit infrastructure? If there’s going to be decarbonization, we need to maximize transit in those areas and calculate for more people moving in.”

When asked about gentrification, Vitaglione said he understands the issue personally because he has been directly affected by it.


Barbara Smyth (B+)

Smyth received an overall grade of B+, with an A for walking/biking, a B+ for transit, and a B- for housing.

Silber said Smyth demonstrated a solid grasp of bike/walk policy and a commitment to improving active transportation.

“While her answers on public transit showed general support, they reflected less direct familiarity with the details of the system,” he said. “On housing, Ms. Smyth expressed qualified support for forward-thinking policies such as duplex allowances and reduced parking minimums, while advocating for a cautious approach to avoid backlash.”

In her remarks, Smyth pointed to her record supporting safe streets, improving transit, and making Norwalk a less car-centric city.

“I want to see us continue to focus on complete streets, Vision Zero, and safe routes to school—where we’re widening sidewalks, narrowing streets, and adding trees to make our streets safer,” she said. “I want to see us become less car-centric, and I support boosting our transit.”

Smyth noted that the city’s tree canopy has improved significantly, increasing from just a few dozen new trees each year to more than 100.

On housing, Smyth said Norwalk cannot stop growing but should do so sustainably.

“Let’s look at how we can build in a way that sustains and protects our neighborhoods, keeping their cultural and historic feel,” she said.

Smyth said she spoke with Gov. Ned Lamont about H.B. 5002, requesting that the bill advance in some form to ease the burden of affordable housing placed on cities like Norwalk and Stamford.

She added that she does not support eliminating parking requirements all at once but favors a gradual, step-by-step approach that encourages residents to walk, bike, and use public transit.


Vinny Scicchitano (C-)

Scicchitano received an overall grade of C-, with a C- for walking/biking, a B- for transit, and a D for housing.

According to Silber, Scicchitano’s responses showed support for improving transit infrastructure but framed multimodal transportation more as a recreational amenity than a practical alternative.

“Particularly around bus shelters and broader mobility goals, his pro-business outlook aligns with efforts to strengthen the local economy and can enhance walkability,” Silber said. “However, he tended to view multimodal transportation more as a recreational amenity than as a serious alternative to car travel.”

Scicchitano said he supports widening Connecticut Avenue in a thoughtful way that encourages walking and biking. He cited Myrtle Beach as an example of wide roads that balance speed and safety.

He described Connecticut Avenue’s congestion as so bad that he couldn’t reliably travel to Stamford to play volleyball in a local league.

“A young lady that played on my team lived up Black Hill Road,” he said. “She beat me to Stamford on a bicycle.”

Scicchitano also expressed support for mass transit–focused solutions. He said that if the city continues to build apartments with limited parking and increased walkability, officials must also invest in the transit system.

He added that many companies struggle to find qualified workers because of the city’s high cost of living.

“Norwalk used to have a balance of co-ops, condominiums, starter homes, real rentals, real apartments that anyone could afford,” he said. “That all got bulldozed, and we went down this one myopic path of just building expensive apartments.”


John Kydes (D+)

Kydes received an overall grade of D+, earning a B- for walking/biking, a B- for transit, and an F for housing.

Silber said the leadership team found Kydes’ responses generally supportive but nonspecific.

“We thought it was strong when you said traffic in Norwalk is at an all-time high and that steps must be taken to get cars off the road in a way that also benefits the environment,” Silber said. “We think [your response] could be stronger when you say ‘one of my top priorities’ is to stop new apartment development in Norwalk. I think we just foundationally disagree with you.”

During his remarks, Kydes said his top concerns include overdevelopment and Education Cost Sharing grant funding. He reflected on his decade in city politics and his early involvement with the Bike/Walk Task Force.

He reiterated his belief that additional apartment construction will not lower rental rates, arguing that proximity to Stamford drives prices more than supply.

Kydes said Norwalk has changed dramatically in the past decade, becoming unrecognizable to many longtime residents.

“I know a lot of young faces here,” he said. “If you’ve gone away and come back to Norwalk, it’s completely unrecognizable.”

As a father of two college-aged children, Kydes said he understands the challenges young adults face in finding affordable housing. He said he doesn’t foresee lowering property values but wants to focus on reducing utility costs, improving the cost of living, creating more jobs, and boosting local economic development.

He said he plans to “organically” incorporate walking, biking, and transit opportunities into projects as mayor.

“We can incorporate business development with the walkability aspect of our city,” he said. “We could introduce a cost-benefit for whoever’s living in these apartments—that they get a job, that companies share some of the rental burden to attract people.”



Comments

5 responses to “Norwalk Mayoral Candidates Receive Sustainability Report Cards from Sustainable Streets”

  1. Thomas Blyth

    Just a quick note to say we made slight score adjustments after listening to candidates speak, but this table accurately reflects our grading as presented in our October general body meeting. Our final scores can be found in our op-ed here: https://norwalkcurrent.com/opinion-sustainable-streets-norwalk-grades-mayoral-candidates/

  2. Matthew Silber

    *Silber, not Silver!

    Thanks for the write-up Jacob!

  3. Bryan Meek

    Kydes ties Bonenfant for this badge of honor with their Fs. Vinny and Jo Bennet honorable mention with their D+.

    The mindset behind this survey is one contributing factor to the bone crushing traffic we have today that is doing the opposite and actually ruining quality of life. It is born of this fantasy that the textbooks are right and they can change human behavior simply because they think it’s the right thing to do. Instead of listening to what residents want, they think they know what’s best for us. It’s rather chilling.

    The reality is people are going to eat cat food before they give up their cars budget wise. NYC transplants will move here and BUY cars. Ask any High School kid if they would walk or take their car if it was an option. When driverless cars are the norm in a few decades and the cost curve comes down, fewer and fewer people will take public transportation and hardly anyone will walk anywhere more than a few miles and in most cases it will be for exercise or leisure. No one is riding their bike to stews to get ice cream and butter. The walkers I know usually drive to the beach or city hall to walk around. No one can walk to Cranbury Park without taking their life in hand. The one place we actually own the land and no one can figure out how to get a sidewalk in there.

    The narrowing of our streets and installation of these expensive sidewalks as a priority sometimes where they aren’t even needed over the actual fixing of roads like has been going on for too long has made our streets more dangerous than ever and that is backed up by data. We’ve had more street fatalities in just the last few years than I can remember in a long time. A new approach is needed. Smooth streets with traffic light that work will reduce aggressive driving and make streets safer to walk.

  4. Peter Marino

    We live in District B, and I couldn’t help but notice that 3 out of 4 candidates from my district didn’t even respond to your election questionnaire. That’s telling. And when you zoom out, nearly half of all candidates didn’t reply. What does that say about your organization’s credibility—or how seriously candidates take your outreach? And the grading, I was surprised that you gave a candidate who actually took the time to respond an “F” because he didn’t echo your talking points. And others with D’s? That’s not advocacy—that’s gatekeeping. If you want dialogue, you need to respect differing views, not punish them. An incomplete looks better than F’s and D’s to the average voter.

    In fairness to those who didn’t respond: who exactly are they responding to? Your website offers no transparency about leadership, membership, or structure. It reads like a shadowy advocacy group with an anti-car agenda. If you want to be taken seriously, you should be more transparent.

    Lastly, let’s talk about CT Ave. I’m an hardcore cyclist, and I wouldn’t dream of riding there. It’s dangerous, plain and simple. Encouraging people to bike on roads that aren’t built for it isn’t progressive—it’s reckless. That’s not a model for safe urban planning.

    Many times I’ve considered joining your Friday night rides, but honestly, I never felt like I’d fit in. Your messaging doesn’t feel inclusive—it feels ideological. If you want to build a movement, start by building trust.

    1. Thomas Blyth

      Hi Peter, I am a member of leadership at SSN. I’ll start by saying you’re always welcome at our Friday night rides, although the last one until Spring was last week. Bike Party is a casual all-abilities ride and typically has minimal to no discussion of our issues, so if you want to just have a fun ride with friendly folks and not worry about the other stuff, it’s ideal. We’re always looking for experienced cyclists to help the group learn about safe riding and help with callouts, so consider yourself personally invited when we start back up in the spring.

      With respect to transparency, we’ve received this feedback several times since we posted the report cards and are taking it to heart. We published our op-eds under our group name to present a unified opinion, but it makes sense that people want to be able to know that the people writing are actually their neighbors. We’re just now rolling off of the very large effort it was to get the report cards out, so if you have specific suggestions about ways to be more transparent, I would really like to hear them and take them back to the group.

      When it comes to response rate, I think candidates were swamped with campaigning. Some candidates who I think would have gotten high scores didn’t respond, and others who attended our general meeting where we presented the mayoral scores didn’t end up responding either.

      Connecticut Ave is tricky. You’re absolutely right that it’s dangerous to bike on. However, it has a lot of places people where need to go so it gets a decent amount of bike traffic already. Combining those two factors, people get killed, as has happened more than once this year. WestCOG is doing a redesign of CT Ave right now which aims to make it safer for bicyclists and pedestrians by redesigning some intersections, filling in sidewalk gaps, and adding a shared use path from Jefferson Elementary to Ferris Ave (as of the last public meeting). Because the grocery stores and other important destinations are farther west than that and we already have people biking along CT Ave to reach those places, we want that path extended at least to Richards Ave where it can link up with the bike lane towards NCC, keeping bikes and pedestrians safely separated from car traffic as much as possible. In conversation with the engineers at the public meeting, it sounded to us like they thought extending the path was feasible, but would require a little bit of political will from local leaders to get it into the plans, hence our desire for candidates to endorse the idea.

      Lastly about scores, our grades were assigned based primarily on the written responses and how strongly they indicated support for the policy priorities we outlined in the survey, which we roughly grouped into transit, walk/bike, and housing. Candidates who received a D or an F expressed indifference or opposition to those priorities, and we appreciated their openness and honesty about that given the time they took to complete the survey. Truthfully, candidates like Mr. Kydes and Mr. Bonenfant who are explicitly campaigning against a core issue of ours can hang their hat on and state proudly that a group that is pro-housing (including rental housing) gave them a poor grade on their housing positions in much the same way that a politician in favor of gun control doesn’t want to get an A from the NRA. With that said, we did give a slight bump to John Kydes’ and Vinny Scicchitano’s scores after they spoke at our general meeting and engaged in good faith with us. Unfortunately that didn’t get captured in NancyOnNorwalk’s writeup about our October general body meeting, but the final scores are in our op-ed: https://norwalkcurrent.com/opinion-sustainable-streets-norwalk-grades-mayoral-candidates/

      In the spirit of dialogue, thank you for your critiques. In the end, you and me and everyone who lives here just want Norwalk to keep being a great place to live. Knowing where SSN can do better is a good way for us to more effectively achieve that. You are certainly welcome at any of our events if you want to talk to some of us.

Leave a Reply

Secret Link