NARROWSBURG, NY — Over the week of August 21, two recessed Tusten Town Board meetings were held to discuss the much debated grant-funded pavilion project at the Tusten Multigenerational Park, aka the Flats ballfield.

The meetings ended with no definitive conclusion about whether the pavilion would be built. The board voted, 4-1, to send out bids on the pavilion project as a means to get more information rather than rendering a final yes on moving forward.

In reaction to residents’ concerns over the original proposed size of the pavilion, 30 feet by 50 feet, a downsize to 20 feet by 24 feet was agreed upon at the original regular board meeting on August 8.

Based on feedback from the project’s architect, Charles G. Wood and Associates, for buildability and ADA compliance, the pavilion size will need to be 24 feet by 30 feet. 

Additionally, the flush toilet, which had been abandoned from the original proposal as it was a pain point for many residents, might still have to be included. 

Town supervisor Ben Johnson said that under advisement by the town attorney, public bathrooms must be included due to the pavilion’s title as a “place of assembly.”

The need for toilets might not be immediate. Board member Jane Luchsinger said that in conversations with the state, she had determined that port-a-potties were OK, but that the state would like a permanent toilet there eventually. 

During both meetings the pavilion project continues to be divisive among the board and public alike.

The issues of cost, maintenance, safety, traffic and commercialization of the area as a result of the pavilion were reiterated. Others expressed the desire for the pavilion to provide shade, a place for kids to play and a space for the community to gather. 

Friction around transparency of the project process was raised during each meeting. 

Flats resident Pattie Capobianco said, “the controversy that many of us felt is that there wasn’t transparency.” She went on to say that “the devil is in the details,” in the lack of awareness regarding the details of the grant, including its size, kitchen, bathroom and potential commercial use.

The board responded to claims about transparency. Board member Greg Triggs responded to claims around transparency after receiving an email that he said accused the board of “backroom deals.” Triggs said, “It’s frustrating, it’s frustrating and it’s unfair. Because there is no evidence to that point.”

In follow-up conversations, asking if it was possible for the grant to be used for a different project in light of disagreement among the board and residents about the pavilion, Luchsinger told the River Reporter, “I believe the community expressed themselves for a smaller pavilion and the town board did their best to comply with their desires.”

In addition to the bids, the board will request a proposal from the parks committee on how the pavilion would be used—similar to a policy manual. Both this and the bids will be reviewed at a special meeting on Tuesday, September 5 at 5:45 p.m., held at the ballfield at 75 3rd Ave. in the hamlet.