Ordinances Changed at Town Meeting

Town Meetings have gotten a makeover. After last June’s well-attended meeting had to be moved from the Veterans’ Room to the second-floor auditorium of Town Hall, and nearly turned ugly, First Selectman Bill Morrison and his team seem to have learned their lesson. This time, at the November 12, 2025, Town Meeting, the registrars of voters were present, checking identification – just as on Election Day – and copies of all the relevant ordinances were available. 

The ordinances in question, which we reported on in more depth after the September informational hearing on the matter, were largely mundane changes and were listed on the agenda as follows (you can also read the amended text here): 

1. To amend ordinance 1-7 Economic Development Commission, allowing for the appointment of four (4) alternates. 

2. To amend ordinance 2-5 ordinance for Driveways 

3. To amend ordinance 5-1 Discharge upon Town Highway 

4. To amend ordinance 5-2 Surface Treatment of new streets 

5. To amend ordinance 8-2 Staffordville Beach Usage Rules & Regulations 

6. To repeal ordinance 8-3 amendment to Staffordville beach ordinance 

All of the motions to approve the ordinances were passed, but only one inspired much discussion. Former candidate for First Selectman Brian Bagley raised concerns about the changes to ordinance 2-5. 

A section of Ordinance 2-5 with suggested edits.

The ordinance, which require all driveways to meet building standards either when the property is built or when the “...use of the travel way negatively impacts an abutting property or street…,” had definitions and fines added to make it more enforceable: 

“Any person or property found in violation; including, but not limited to, failure to obtain a permit, failure to meet construction standards, or allowing runoff discharge of water, gravel, or other material onto a roadway shall be issued a written notice of violation. If corrective action is not taken within 10 days of notice, a fine of $25 per violation shall accrue until compliance is achieved.

The town may also take corrective action and assess costs against the property owner in the form of a lien.” 

Bagley expressed concern that a driveway, which was up to code when it was built, could now be deemed “not acceptable” by the town. However, as you can see from the suggested amendments, the portion of the ordinance requiring compliance was already in place.

Still, Morrison said, "That is not the intent,” and that he would take the comment under advisement.

Bagley attempted to table the motion; however, Morrison stated that, procedurally, the best course of action was to vote on the motion and defeat it if necessary. 

Steve Geryk, who is also Chair of the Board of Finance, said, “If you’ve done something to create a hazard, then it should be addressed.”

Ultimately, a vote was taken by hand and passed 17-13.