I didn't see Stonington Borough Burgess Howard Park III arrive for Monday's Board of Warden and Burgesses meeting in Stonington Borough, but he may well have strolled the short distance to Borough Hall from his condominium at the corner of Orchard and Church streets.

That walk would have taken the bow-tied Park directly across the freshly laid sidewalk of historic granite stones on Orchard Street, which became the centerpiece of Monday's tumultuous meeting of burgesses.

It turns out Park, as the borough commissioner of the streets, was the principal architect of a project that essentially lifted the stones from two streets elsewhere in the borough, eliminating those granite sidewalks, and had them laid literally at his front walk, where there has not been a sidewalk in recent history.

To add insult to what residents near the lost sidewalks described as an egregious affront on the historical character of their neighborhood, the theft, as they called it, occurred — literally — on the other side of the tracks.

The granite stones were removed from the ends of Bayview Avenue and Summit Street, where they intersect with Elm Street, a part of the borough that became isolated from the rest of the village when the railroad came through in the 19th century.

The sidewalks removed on Sept. 20 were the only two remaining sets of the granite stones, which originally were laid all through the village to help ladies with their skirts as they crossed the unpaved roads, on the east side of the village.

There are 21 granite sidewalks on the larger west side, the borough proper, with its more expensive real estate.

"We've been the ugly stepsister for too long, and this is the last straw," Dana Lewicki of Bayview Avenue, who submitted pictures of what she called the failing road and sidewalk infrastructure in her neighborhood, along with a petition with 100 names of people demanding the return of the stones.

Donald Maranell of Bayview Avenue, a former first selectman of the town, a member of the zoning commission in the borough and a past borough commissioner of the streets, also rose from the audience Monday to complain about what he said was the unnecessary removal of the stones.

Maranell said he hasn't subscribed in the past to the notion that the west borough treats the east borough unevenly, but the removal of the granite stones seems to be a concrete example of it.

The residents came prepared and in force to the meeting, armed with two petitions, pictures and historical research, including a photo of the removed sidewalks that was included in the successful 1979 nomination of the borough to the National Register of Historic Places.

They made the interesting point that the borough goes through a tortured process, with postings and meeting discussions, before it removes a tree.

The historical stones were removed with no notice at all. They said they could find no reference in meeting minutes to show that moving them to Orchard Street was ever discussed in public.

Park and Borough Warden Jeffrey Callahan were the only ones to respond to the residents' complaints. The other burgesses sat mute.

I found the responses by Park and Callahan totally unacceptable, and I don't live near the missing sidewalks. Some of the residents openly called it "spin."

The warden and burgess said the granite was removed from Bayview because the stones have given snowplows trouble. They said they were removed from Summit because the water company is going to install new water mains there, although they have no idea when, not even what year.

In the end, they said new stone sidewalks will be laid on Bayview when it is paved next year and on Summit after the new main is installed.

But Park said the new sidewalk on Orchard will remain. So where will the replacement granite come from?

Maranell, the former borough commissioner of the streets, was having none of the excuses, saying plows have worked with those sidewalks for years and the water company could be made to ensure their safekeeping during a main replacement.

I hope the residents keep pushing hard on this injustice. I know historical societies are notoriously sleepy, but Stonington's ought to take this as a wake-up call.

Park and Callahan said Tuesday the cost of relocating the sidewalks was a small part of the $54,000 cost of an entire project that also included paving Orchard Street.

If that's true, then they should spend that small amount of money again and make this neighborhood on the other side of the tracks whole again, right away.

I didn't see Park leave the meeting Monday, but I pictured him strolling down Church Street and across his new granite sidewalk.

This is the opinion of David Collins.

d.collins@theday.com