Category Archives: Town Hall

TOP STORY: Old Lyme First Selectwoman Fined by FOI Commission for Witholding Requested Documents

Posted on by

Shoemaker Admits Mistake, Will Pay $250 Fine Herself

Old Lyme First Selectwoman Martha Shoemaker. LymeLine file photo.

OLD LYME–The state Freedom of Information Commission (FOIC) has taken the rare – but increasingly utilized – step of issuing a civil fine to Old Lyme First Selectwoman Martha Shoemaker for failing to turn over public records about alleged sexual improprieties at the Old Lyme Ambulance Association to a local online news outlet, CT Examiner.

The commission, charged with administering and enforcing the state’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) voted Wednesday to uphold a report from hearing officer Valicia Harmon. A staff attorney for almost 20 years, Harmon in an audio recording of the meeting told the commission it was only the third or fourth time she’d found a case concerning enough to warrant a fine. 

She set Shoemaker’s fine at $250.

Known colloquially as the state’s Sunshine Law, the FOIA attempts to shine light on the halls of government by preserving access to public documents and meetings. 

CT Examiner reporter Francisco Uranga at the meeting told the commission it took 168 days for Shoemaker to hand over two incident reports at the center of the case, which he said contained allegations that an intern was touched inappropriately and repeatedly by an adult emergency medical technician with the independent Old Lyme Ambulance Association. 

The employee resigned. An investigation by the Connecticut State Police was closed in December after prosecutors declined to move forward with the case, according to state police.

Shoemaker, who is in her first term as first selectwoman, said in a phone interview that she made a mistake. 

“I accept the decisions by the FOIC and I have worked diligently over the past year to educate myself and my staff as well as to improve upon our internal processes for responses to requests for town records that my office receives,” she said. 

Shoemaker received the incident reports on March 18 and 19 of last year, according to Harmon’s report. The resignation letter from the employee involved in the alleged incident came on March 19. 

The report said Shoemaker testified she didn’t provide the reports because they “didn’t come to mind” when she was asked three months later for documents related to alleged incidents of sexual harassment or assault. 

Shoemaker told LymeLine she will pay the fine personally. 

“It is not coming from the town coffers,” she said. 

FOIC Executive Director Colleen Murphy in a Thursday phone interview with LymeLine said three of the 14 cases heard by the commission this week included a fine, which she described as unusual. She said it could be evidence of a philosophical shift in a commission that historically has relied on training opportunities to try to encourage government officials to “do the right thing.” 

State lawmakers in 2023 increased the maximum fine for violations from $1,000 to $5,000. 

“In the aftermath of that legislation passing, we’re seeing some more traffic in the area of fines,” she said. 

What is Reasonable?

According to Harmon’s report, CT Examiner in June 2024 asked Shoemaker for documents including employee rosters, resignation letters and any allegations of sexual assault or harassment. Uranga and CT Examiner writer Andy Thibault the next month filed a complaint with the FOIC stating the first selectwoman had not provided all the requested information and had improperly redacted one document. 

The reporters asked the commission to impose a $5,000 fine and mandatory FOI training. 

Uranga on Wednesday told commission members the documents are important because they revealed the allegations he was investigating turned out to be about “sexual assault, not simply sexual harassment.” 

“That distinction, I think, is crucial and clearly documented in the redacted reports, and goes to the heart of why we take this case (and the delay) so seriously, and why it simply defies belief that the first selectwoman of a small, privileged town could fail to recall these incident reports until prompted by Attorney Harmon,” he said in prepared remarks at Wednesday’s commission meeting. 

Harmon in her report said it was only after the first evidentiary hearing in December that Shoemaker provided the news outlet with the two incident reports detailing incidents of alleged sexual harassment that led to the resignation of a town employee. 

“If they hadn’t filed a complaint with the commission, it’s likely that those records would never have been discovered,” Harmon told commissioners. 

Harmon told commission members that her recommended fine reflected the gravity of keeping the public in the dark on the serious matter, while taking into account the selectwoman’s willingness to put corrective measures in place. 

“I thought that the fine was small, but it was firm,” Harmon said. 

Harmon said she didn’t believe Shoemaker intentionally violated the Sunshine Law. But she said the standard for authorizing a fine doesn’t require a person to act with intent. 

The law empowers the commission to impose a fine if there are no “reasonable” grounds for withholding a document. 

“And I think that it wasn’t reasonable to not recall that there were these two investigation reports concerning a very serious incident that resulted in someone resigning,” Harmon said. 

Town Attorney Kristi Kelly, of the New London-based Suisman Shapiro law firm, told the commission she had “no knowledge as one of the town’s attorneys that an incident report even existed” until the December hearing. 

The documents were provided to CT Examiner within a week of Kelly finding out about them, she said. 

The commission’s 5-2 vote in favor of Harmon’s decision was opposed by two members with experience as local elected officials. 

Commission member Matthew Streeter, a former South Windsor mayor, who went on to become a professional town manager, said he has sympathy for elected officials in small towns. He said first selectmen often don’t have the experience that trained professionals do. 

“These are people that volunteer,” he said. 

He said the commission used to reserve fines for repeat offenders, with education for first time offenses. “But now I think that it seems that we’re changing it, that we’re going to just throw the book the first time to a first selectman.” 

Member Jonathan Einhorn, a former New Haven alderman, made a failed motion to strike the civil penalty from the report. He ultimately voted with Streeter to reject the hearing officer’s decision. 

Murphy, the commission’s executive director, said in her phone call with LymeLine that members are trying to “figure out the contours” of the legislature’s decision to allow heftier fines – and whether that means more of them. 

The commission in April issued its first $5,000 fine to a town attorney in East Haven accused of flouting the state transparency law and repeatedly defying directives from Harmon, who was the hearing officer in that case as well.

Murphy reiterated commission members have relied historically on training as a way to encourage compliance. “It’s too early to tell, but they may be headed in a slightly different direction,” she said.

Editor’s Note: 6/28: This article has been updated to note that Shoemaker is in her first term as First Selectwoman.
6/29: This article has been updated with a photo of Shoemaker.

TOP STORY: Old Lyme Wetlands Commission Denies Swaney’s Request to Change Permit Conditions at Three Mile River Gravel Pit

Posted on by
1

OLD LYME–More than a year and a half after environmental complaints publicly surfaced on the banks of the Three Mile River, the owner of a controversial gravel pit on Tuesday said he will undo changes local officials said he never should have made in the first place. 

The move came after the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission on Tuesday declined to take up a request by 308-1 Mile Creek Road owner Ron Swaney to walk back conditions placed on an “after the fact” permit approval the agency granted in March to bring Swaney into compliance with local regulations. 

Swaney’s request, if approved, would have allowed him to sidestep the commission’s requirements to rectify unpermitted work that had taken place. This work included the addition of pavement millings to the driveway and the placement of boulders within the banks of the river, among other violations. 

The news was greeted as a victory for the contingent of neighbors and environmental advocates who have mobilized around the issue. The group includes 59 people, who signed onto a June 20 letter opposing any changes to the conditions. 

“Time and again this property has been the site of astonishingly flagrant violations, time and again the town has attempted to bring its owners to operate within the law, yet time and again as cease and desist orders are lifted the conditions ordered with these permissions have gone unfulfilled,” the letter said. 

Shore Road resident Peter Caron after the meeting applauded the commission for not amending the conditions.  

“All in all, we’re happy that the commission stuck to their guns and they want to protect the river as much as possible,” Caron said. 

Commission member Michael Aurelia during the meeting said getting Swaney to come to the table with a permit application was a labor-intensive process. 

“It wasn’t easy,” he said. “We had to actually start court action to get an application.” 

The lawsuit, which was filed in November of last year, is pending, but not active now that Swaney is working with the commission to address the compliance issues. 

William E. McCoy, Swaney’s attorney, after the meeting said he disagreed with the contention that it took a lawsuit to spur his client to act. He would not elaborate. 

Swaney declined to comment.

The Alternative

McCoy warned commission members during the meeting that enforcing the conditions could do more harm than good. 

An April 13 report from certified soil scientist Joseph Theroux proposed leaving a portion of the millings, keeping some of the boulders, and adding a new section of berm to protect the river.

Theroux was hired by Swaney to come up with a mitigation plan as required by the commission. The assessment came after he visited the site to find conditions “stable” in the areas he recommended leaving untouched. 

The millings, boulders and berm “all stabilize the erodible stream banks/road bed, partially prevent flood waters from flooding across the roadbed and silting up the ponds, and prevent erosion and sedimentation on the road bed from entering the river,” Theroux wrote. 

McCoy said his client would go along with the commission’s conditions if necessary, but emphasized Theroux’s plan, “Potentially is a better remediation program than was put together at the last meeting of the commission, when it decided this.”

The commission’s permit conditions also require Swaney to ensure the culvert near the entrance to the property remains clear to prevent flooding. Swaney and his team have blamed beavers for continually clogging the culvert with their dam activity. 

Aurelia during Tuesday’s meeting said it became obvious to him during the commission’s June 10 site walk that the culverts were failing. He said he also saw fragments of roof shingles in the road millings that commission members worried would get washed into the river. 

Commission member John Mesham said he believed the culvert is not adequately sized. 

“So if you want to not do some of this remediation, bring us an engineering report and a resizing of the pipe, because that’s what most of this goes back to,” he said. 

Mesham referenced a letter from resident Raina Volovski, who identified herself as a certified soil scientist, wetland scientist, and erosion and sediment control professional with 15 years’ experience. 

Volovski said she attended the commission’s site walk as a member of the public, where she found issues that exacerbated flooding conditions in some areas while also contributing to low water levels in the three interior ponds on the site. 

“The property is within a mapped floodplain. Flooding is supposed to happen. The unpermitted impacts and proposed mitigation are not going to eliminate the flooding and will potentially increase flooding issues and additional wetlands impacts,” she said. 

Consensus Decision

The commission did not take a formal vote based on advice from Land Use Coordinator Eric Knapp, who cautioned members that a motion on the matter would constitute an appeals process that would add another layer to the ongoing legal situation. 

The commission directed Knapp to work with consulting town engineer Geoffrey Jacobson to approve the bond Swaney must post with the town before work can begin. The amount, which is meant to ensure the commission’s conditions are met in a timely manner, was tentatively set at $10,000 by Swaney’s project engineer. 

Knapp said he will review Swaney’s work to ensure compliance, with the option to bring in a consulting expert if necessary.

A permit from the zoning department authorizing Swaney to excavate the site expired in May. Knapp on Wednesday said the Zoning Commission will not take up a permit application until Swaney has “fully complied” with the inland wetlands permit. 

Knapp noted that a surface water discharge permit from the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection has also expired.

Letter with 60 Signatures Sent to Old Lyme Inland Wetlands Commission About Gravel Pit Violations

Posted on by
Reply

Editor’s Note: We were sent a copy of a letter submitted Monday, June 24, to the Old Lyme Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission in advance of the commission’s Tuesday evening meeting. A violation status update on the 308-1 Mile Creek Road property is included on the meeting agenda.. Letter organizer Peter Caron gave permission for LymeLine to publish the letter in full—he said it had been signed by 60 residents.

June 20, 2025

To the Old Lyme Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission,

Greetings.

We simply wish to convey our dismay at efforts by the owner of 308-1 Mile Creek to once again avoid fulfilling the orders of this commission. Time and again this property has been the site of astonishingly flagrant violations, time and again the town has attempted to bring its owners to operate within the law, yet time and again as cease and desist orders are lifted the conditions ordered with these permissions have gone unfulfilled.

This commission has been incredibly patient. The most recent inadequate application was (despite overwhelming community opposition) approved, but with entirely appropriate conditions requiring the applicant to undo some of the damage illegally done to the wetland. Rather than abide by the terms of that decision or appeal it, the owner instead now proposes to leave most of the most blatant violations in place, and to place additional fill in the wetland buffer. The absurdity of the situation, and the gulf between assertions made in the current owner proposed mitigation plan and reality on the ground were both readily evident at June 10th’s site walk.

Along with equally dominant impressions by many in attendance that the driveway really does not belong there, and that its widening and ad hoc improvement is only making the situation worse (and being struck by the drastically reduced water levels in the siltation ponds, themselves regulated inland wetlands), it was hard to ignore that: between the inadequate culvert (which contrary to promises made to this commission, appeared clogged) and the illegally placed boulders and berm (much of which is now sprouting invasive mugwort), the applicant is engaged in completely under-engineered and unlawful river impoundment impacting the river, its associated wetlands, and neighboring properties, with more severe impacts likely in the future if allowed to continue.

We suggest that, if continued use of the driveway is the objective, the appropriate course of action would be securing the permits required to make the culvert adequate from the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection and the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The still unmapped but abundant vernal habitat in the floodplain upstream would have to be taken into careful consideration, but, if the driveway were to allow the swollen river to pass, it would go a long way towards handling the natural floodplain inundations currently being regularly experienced, without the damages illegal bandaid solutions are incurring.

We find the arguments made by the owner’s soils scientist for not completing the mitigation steps ordered by this commission entirely unconvincing. Erosion of the “millings” (placed without permit and of unknown origin) was clearly visible. References to elevations and wetland delineations in the owner’s latest mitigation proposal are worth little, since, crucially, the wetland’s extent before the fill violations occurred still hasn’t been properly mapped, and an accurate up to date survey showing the relevant driveway and river elevations still hasn’t been performed (despite the false characterization in Indigo’s WRP-1 plan of Annino Survey LLC’s limited data accumulation work as constituting an A-2 survey, it is actually a class D). While we understand the owner may have thought otherwise when he took the property off his former employer’s hands, the long history of egregious harm being committed on the property cannot and does not justify the further and ongoing injury being done to the land, the river, the town, and the law.

In light of the persistent noncompliance with this commission’s orders and the history summarized in the Valentine’s Day letter to this commission signed by scores of residents, we again urge this commission to commence revocation of the fundamentally flawed October 2022 permit in accordance with §14.5 of its regulations. We also suggest it may be appropriate for the most recent permit to be revoked, as its requirements are not being met. Otherwise, we urge the commission to at a minimum insist that the mitigation work it ordered be fully completed under the oversight of a town contracted professional at the owner’s expense.

Thank you for your work. We very much recognize its importance, are grateful for all of your time and efforts, and wish you a relaxing summer.

Sincerely,

Olaf Bertram-Nothnagel and Peter Caron,
Old Lyme.

TOP STORY: Old Lyme WPCA Chair Cinami Seeks to Get Sewer Project Finally Flowing, Requests Additional $7.6 Million

Posted on by
Old Lyme Water Pollution Control Authority Chairman Steve Cinami addresses a $7.6 million bond authorization request for sewers to First Selectwoman Martha Shoemaker, center, Selectman Jim Lampos, left, and Selectwoman Jude Read, right.

OLD LYME–6/22 UPDATED: Headline amended: Six years ago, a $9.5 million request to install sewers in the Sound View Beach area got the go-ahead from voters at a town-wide referendum – but the project stalled.

Now, amid inflation exacerbated by the COVID pandemic and other factors, the Old Lyme Water Pollution Control Authority (WPCA) is back with a request for another $7.6 million. 

The state-led, decades-long charge to clean up Long Island Sound by ridding the area of septic systems involves a plan to require residents of three private beach associations and the public Sound View Beach community to install sewers. Continued concerns about the cost of the project and successive rounds of construction bids coming in higher than anticipated have dragged out the process.

Steve Cinami, chairman of the Old Lyme WPCA, visited the Board of Selectmen and Board of Finance this week to plead for approval to go to referendum for the bond authorization necessary to support the Sound View portion of the project. But selectmen balked at the lack of information about how the project will affect the Sound View residents who will have to repay the loan.

Old Lyme officials all along have said the cost of the Sound View project will be borne by the system’s users, not the town’s tax base. 

This time around, significant additional funding from the state and federal government will leave those users responsible for about $8.5 million of the $17.06 million project, which Cinami has emphasized is less than the amount requested at the 2019 referendum. 

He said the new numbers shake out to about $26,000 over 20 years, or $1,932 per year, for a property owner whose house has one bathroom, a kitchen, and four bedrooms or less.  

In August of last year – before the latest round of bids came back and before state and federal funding was secured – Cinami at a public meeting told residents the WPCA was estimating the cost to a user would be about $22,556 over 20 years, or $1,368 a year, for a similarly sized home. 

Assessing ‘affordability’

Selectman Jim Lampos at Monday’s selectmen’s meeting asked for more specifics about fees in addition to the annual project payments for which users will be responsible. He said connection costs and future capital spending for infrastructure improvements in the system flowing through East Lyme into New London will affect user’s sewer bills here in Old Lyme. 

“Before we go to a referendum, I think we have to give the property owners a clear idea of what the affordability is going to be,” he said. “And the taxpayers are going to want to know this before going to a referendum. They’re going to ask for it.”

Cinami estimated the average yearly fee would be around $500 per year in the Sound View area. Beyond that, he said he would have to “try” to develop a rough cost structure. 

State Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) Project Engineer Carlos Esguerra last year said the agency sets the amount that residents can reasonably be expected to spend at 2% of the town’s median income, which he identified at the time as $122,000. That equated to $2,440 a year.

There is also a state law specifying a town cannot assess property owners for any amount higher than the percent increase in the property value attributed to the sewers. He said an assessor hired by the Old Lyme WPCA before the previous referendum estimated sewers would increase home values between 10 to 12%. 

Documents from the Sound View Coalition, a grassroots group opposing the sewer project, show an assessor hired in 2020 by the group found sewers would increase residential property values by 7% and commercial properties by 10%.

Cinami, who has been criticized for his abrasive manner at meetings, also heard complaints at Monday’s meeting from Shoemaker and Old Lyme WPCA member Dennis Melluzzo about the chairman’s alleged attempts to quell questions and dissent. 

Shoemaker said she was made to feel uncomfortable asking questions at the June WPCA meeting, while Melluzzo described feeling disrespected by Cinami while speaking up at last month’s WPCA meeting. 

Cinami said he was just trying to run an efficient meeting. 

“I feel, maybe it’s a misperception, but I feel as though I’m trying to get stuff across and I’m interrupted on a constant basis by members.”

He told Shoemaker he was sorry if she took offense, and said he owed Melluzzo an apology as well. 

Capital Costs

At Tuesday’s finance board meeting, member David Kelsey expressed concern about the financial impact of any large-scale capital upgrades that could happen in the future at the New London wastewater treatment plant into which Old Lyme’s sewage will flow. 

He said he’s heard for the past 10 years that DEEP was pushing for the installation of sewers in Old Lyme “because they wanted more users to spread the cost of upgrades in New London.” 

Cinami said he wasn’t aware that the city was on the verge of any major capital projects. 

New London Director of Public Utilities Joseph Lanzafame in a Wednesday phone call disputed Kelsey’s characterization of the situation. 

“There’s no truth to that. Not from our standpoint,” he said. “Somebody else may have other motivations, but from our standpoint, the contribution that Old Lyme is going to give towards the facility is very marginal.” 

A contract between New London and the four beach communities signed late last year calls for the beach associations to pay 1.2% of annual treatment plant capital costs and the town to pay 0.5%.

He estimated the city has spent $15 million over the past 10 years, but could not predict what the future holds in store. 

“But as far as major upgrades, I mean, we’re not looking at hundreds of millions of dollars of work to be done,” he said. 

He said the city does not have plans to upgrade the plant to be able to handle additional flow, which he described as an extremely difficult undertaking. But if that kind of upgrade did happen, he added that Old Lyme ratepayers would not be affected unless the beach associations or the town wanted to purchase some of the increased capacity. 

The current contract with New London allows the beach associations to send up to 120,000 gallons of sewage per day to the treatment plant and the town to send up to 50,000. They have the right to purchase up to an additional 130,000 gallons per day as more people in the beach communities tie into the system.

Lanzafame said he’ll be happy if Old Lyme doesn’t ask for additional capacity in the future. 

“I mean, I’m going to be quite frank. That’s just what it is. Wastewater capacity is a big deal, and it’s just not unlimited,” he said. 

Back at the finance board meeting, Kelsey predicted the costs to each user – including the minimum $1,932 payment homeowners will need to pay for 20 years, the cost of tying into the system, the annual fees and the increased tax bills from their new property values – are likely to result in angry residents. 

“It’s not going to be pleasant when all these numbers come out, is my basic point,” he said. 

While Cinami acknowledged residents in the affected areas will be required to hook up to the system, he added a caveat. 

“There are some new (septic) systems down there that cost sixty thousand dollars; We will probably not have them hook up immediately,” he said. “But any any system that’s in variance, which is, I would say, 97% of all the systems down there, will have to hook up.” 

Next Steps 

In addition to asking for more information on the financial impact for Sound View residents, the Board of Selectmen emphasized that the details of a Cost Sharing Agreement between the beach associations and the town must be finalized before they will ask residents to authorize more spending at a referendum. 

Another issue still outstanding revolves around the portions of the sewer project to be undertaken by the Miami Beach and Old Lyme Shores Beach Associations, which Cinami said have not yet gone out to bid. He said the beach communities’ project officials, who are waiting for approval by the state DEEP before opening the bid process, are hoping to make their selections by the end of July.

Cinami assured selectmen that winning bids received earlier this year for the Sound View work will remain valid through October, though he acknowledged the bidder selected to build the system’s shared pump station has not formally committed to keep his bid open that long. 

Shoemaker said Cinami’s request to schedule a referendum for August 14 won’t be possible because the traditional polling location in the middle school is being renovated and will not be available.

TOP STORY: Old Lyme Selectwoman’s Call to Disband Halls Road Improvement Committee Rejected by Shoemaker, Lampos

Posted on by
Old Lyme First Selectwoman Martha Shoemaker, center, with Selectman Jim Lampos, left, and Selectwoman Jude Read, right.

OLD LYME–Selectwoman Jude Read is calling for the dissolution of the Halls Road Improvements Committee (HRIC) as the Old Lyme Board of Selectmen continues to back away from big picture changes to the road that have evolved over the past decade. 

On the selectmen’s table now is a scaled-back plan that includes new sidewalks, but no other substantial upgrades like the bow bridge and trail system envisioned by the HRIC. First Selectwoman Martha Shoemaker in May signed off on a grant application to the Connecticut Department of Transportation (DOT) for $800,000 to install sidewalks on the north half of Halls Road. 

Josh Morgan, DOT Communications Director, said in a Tuesday email that he expects the award announcements to go out in the next several weeks. 

During their Monday evening regular meeting, the selectmen considered creating a new committee to guide the process if a grant is awarded. But Read emphasized the existing Halls Road committee should be disbanded before forming a new one. 

“The other thing I think would be helpful – these are my thoughts – is, if and when we start a new committee, we’re careful about the charge, what the goal is, (and) how many people are on that committee.” 

Read also suggested requiring a unanimous vote when appointing members to a new committee. She is the lone Republican on the board with Shoemaker and Selectman Jim Lampos, both Democrats. 

Lampos and Shoemaker declined to disband the committee right now because they need more information on the status of projects that were pending when selectmen voted to put the group on a hiatus in April.

The HRIC has been controversial since it started in 2015 under Democratic then-First Selectwoman Bonnie Reemsnyder with a charge to consider a master plan for the commercial span. The result – honed over the course of dozens of public meetings, information sessions, and workshops – evoked images of village-like storefronts and apartments, a pedestrian bridge, more greenspace and sidewalks. 

Reemsnyder successor Tim Griswold, a Republican, a few years later called the vision too grandiose. He said at the time that he preferred to focus on building sidewalks one segment at a time before considering such broad plans. 

But opposition came to a head earlier this year when more than 550 people filled the Lyme-Old Lyme High School auditorium for a public hearing on changes to the town’s zoning regulations that the committee hoped would turn their vision into reality. 

The proposal to create an overlay district in the commercial zone would have allowed as many as 40 housing units per acre to be built above, or behind, ground-floor businesses. 

The plan was rejected by the Zoning Commission, HRIC Chairwoman Edie Twining subsequently resigned, and the board of selectmen put the committee on hiatus while attempting to manage the fallout. 

Crossing That Bridge

Before making any decisions on whether to disband the HRIC, Shoemaker and Lampos on Monday said they wanted to get a better understanding of how much has been spent on Halls Road projects to date and which contracts remain outstanding. 

At the behest of the HRIC, selectmen in 2023 hired AI Engineers of Middletown to come up with plans for a pedestrian bridge over the Lieutenant River and a trail system between Lyme Street and Halls Road. The company’s work was funded with $135,000 in federal American Rescue Plan money and a $28,500 grant through the Connecticut Recreational Trails program.

Old Lyme Finance Director Anita Mancini said the committee spent $13,500 of the trails grant so far. 

The committee in an FAQ document said AI Engineers was tasked with taking charge of conceptual designs, formal designs, permitting and the construction bid process. No funding for construction has been secured. 

The decision to accept or reject the designs would be up to the public, according to the committee. Old Lyme’s form of government calls for the public to vote on major decisions at town meetings, with options to send the biggest issues to referendum. 

Shoemaker said the town could be responsible for returning $13,500 to the state if the town doesn’t complete the design project. 

Read argued it might be prudent in some cases “to take a loss.”

“Is it better to lose $13,500 or spend another $15,000, have it designed, and not be sure if the town’s going to approve it or not?” she said. 

Shoemaker and Lampos reiterated they need a better idea of the financial picture first. 

They said it’s been difficult to pinpoint how much has been spent, and in which line items, in a decade of budgets overseen by multiple administrations. 

Lampos credited the current selectmen with making the budget process and town procedures more transparent. 

“I think there’s a lot of clarity, but there’s just so much that we can answer for what happened before us,” Lampos said. 

LymeLine in April requested documents related to the amount expended so far on HRIC projects. Shoemaker on Monday said the information will be available next week. 

Lampos, who wrote the grant with Shoemaker’s executive assistant Katie Balocca, emphasized there is nothing in the grant to cover the HRIC’s bow bridge proposal. 

“It is currently on hiatus. We’re not addressing it,” he said. 

Building the bow bridge would require the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection to transfer ownership of its property on the east bank of the Lieutenant River to Old Lyme, which the agency has agreed to do as long as the town agrees to put a fishing pier, a dock for portable boats and parking spaces there. 

Lampos acknowledged the idea, like other elements of the HRIC plan, is controversial. That’s why the grant application focuses solely on sidewalks. 

“Almost everybody was saying, ‘forget the overlay,’ half the people were saying, ‘forget the bridge,’ and just about everyone was saying, ‘but we want the sidewalks,’” he recounted. 

Read wondered if a new committee should be limited to overseeing only what’s in the grant or if they should be empowered to look at other improvements and funding sources. 

“We have requests for sidewalks, lighting, signage, beautification,” she said. 

Lampos put it this way: “If we don’t get the grant, I think we cross that bridge at that time.”