Category Archives: Letters

Letter to the Editor: Endorsing J. David Kelsey—a ‘Generous Supporter of All Things Old Lyme’—for Board of Finance

Posted on by

To the Editor:

I’m inspired to write this endorsement after seeing the Democrat Town Committee’s [DTC] video ad attempting to smear Dave Kelsey. Dave does support Republican causes at the national and state level. He also supports the Old Lyme Republican Town committee of which I am a member. Most notably, yet not mentioned in the DTC ad, is Dave’s service to our community. Aside from serving the BOF [Board of Finance] for the past 17 years, Dave is a generous supporter of all things Old Lyme.

  • Dave was a lead donor for the Phoebe Griffin Noyes Library renovation.
  • Dave donated hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Lyme Art Association skylight renovation.
  • Dave and his daughters are the benefactors for the Kelsey Family Center at the Roger Tory Peterson Estuary Center.
  • Dave has purchased and renovated numerous apartments in town to provide local housing to the Lyme Art Academy students.
  • When Big Y attempted to build another gas station on Halls Road, Dave acquired the lot through personal finances to preserve the space (where Hydrangea Galore now is).
  • And if you notice graffiti on the Lyme St. underpass or the Mile Creek rail bridge, contact Dave — he has paint and willingness to help cover it up (and he’ll text you at 6am to go paint with him), so long as he is not already busy volunteering to pull ragweed from behind our town hall.

I could easily add another dozen or so bullet points, although I think it is clear. We are fortunate to have such a benevolent citizen here in town.

Facts, not fear.

Sincerely,

Steve Spooner,
Old Lyme.

Letter to the Editor: Lyme School Board Rep’s Endorse Zelek as ‘Uniter’

Posted on by

To the Editor:

As Lyme’s representatives on the Board of Education, we are proud to endorse Christy Zelek for selectperson.

In our work representing the citizens of Lyme and supporting the students, teachers, and staff of Region 18, we know firsthand the value of thoughtful, steady leadership. Christy embodies those qualities. Though endorsed by the Lyme DTC (and we are both Democrats), Christy is a lifelong independent who consistently puts community above politics. She brings a practical, cooperative spirit that Lyme needs in its local government.

Christy’s long record of volunteerism in our schools and with local Scouts reflects her deep commitment to Lyme’s families. She understands that strong schools are the heart of a strong town, and she will continue to champion the values that make Lyme such a special place to live and learn.

Above all, Christy is a uniter. She listens carefully, builds consensus, and approaches challenges with integrity, accountability, and kindness. These are the traits that make effective public servants—and great role models for our youth.

We look forward to working with Christy to strengthen our schools, our community, and our shared future.

Sincerely,

Anna B. James,
Lyme CT.

Gavin Lodge,
Lyme CT.              

Letter to the Editor: Contrary to RTC Mailer Statement, Lyme Affordable Housing Commission (AHC) Member Says AHC Does Not Believe in High-density Housing

Posted on by

To the Editor:

In recently mailed campaign literature to Lyme voters promoting their candidates for First Selectman and Selectman, the Republican Town Committee made inaccurate and dishonest comments about Lyme Democrats and the Affordable Housing Commission (AHC).

Republicans are falsely claiming that the “Democratic chaired and controlled” AHC has “called for the creation of a ‘Cluster Overlay Zone’ to accommodate high-density housing in Lyme.”   

The AHC does not believe in high-density housing in Lyme. The Commission’s vision is to preserve Lyme’s rural character and maintain autonomy in land use decisions. Few specific decisions have been made yet because AHC has been waiting for Lyme to approve its 2025 Plan of Conservation and Development (PoCD). To date, only a draft is available, but a public hearing will be held on November 12 with a final vote on November 17. (The report-writing subcommittee of the Planning and Zoning Commission is composed of two Republicans and two Democrats.)    

Various methods of creating affordable housing have been discussed by AHC. Nothing, with the exception of using accessory apartments built on existing lots (ADUs), already permitted in the zoning code, has been recommended. While AHC supports this concept, to be town-approved affordable housing units, they will have long-term deed restrictions, which owners have refused to accept.

Using an Overlay Zone will not create high-density housing in Lyme. An Overlay is a clearly defined zoning modification that can be used in a selected area for a desired purpose, such as affordable housing. It is applied over an existing zoning district. It is site specific and does not apply to the entire town. Republicans ought to understand what an overlay zone does and how it can benefit our town before they erroneously make accusations.

Why does Lyme have to consider using an overlay? After considering all the costs of a modest house, including: acquiring land, necessary infrastructure, construction, some landscaping, roadway access and dealing with common obstacles such as rock ledge and wetlands, the AHC concluded it is not possible to create affordable housing in Lyme without building more units on selected parcels of land than the current zoning allows. (This would only be done in a limited number of selected areas.)

Lyme’s PoCD respondents want affordable housing for Fire Department and Ambulance workers, teachers and older residents. 57% were 65 years or older.   

Incidentally, the low number of Republicans on the AHC could be remedied if more Republicans would volunteer to join the Affordable Housing Commission.         

Sincerely,

Phyllis Ross,
Lyme, CT.

Editor’s Note: The author is a member of Lyme’s Affordable Housing Commission and Planning and Zoning Commission.

Letter to the Editor: Old Lyme is a Functioning Democracy, No Need for ‘Venom’ Being Injected Into Local Campaign Rhetoric

Posted on by

To the Editor:

As an independent resident of Old Lyme for the past 38 years, I have recently become very distressed by the unpleasant tone of the local campaign rhetoric. The people who serve in our local public offices are our neighbors, most of whom volunteer their time and energy in service to the town welfare and functioning. In a town the size of Old Lyme the material and status benefits are minimal at best. It is reasonable to expect a wide variety of values and opinions as to how best to achieve optimal benefit and function. Most town business is also conducted either in public or at least on public record. Thus, citizens are free to keep fully informed as what is being considered and done.

In recent political discourse one party has decided to accuse their neighbors and current office holders of greed, dishonesty, laziness, ignorance and concealment. They have, further, claimed to have the mission to “protect” the town from these destructive forces. This inflammatory language seems designed to arouse anger and fear that our town is under malevolent threat.

Most people who live in Old Lyme do so by choice and value the small semi-rural nature of the town. Old Lyme does face some important challenges, as our local strip malls go up for sale for instance. People will and should have many differing ideas about these issues. it is, however, a functioning, small New England democracy, with town meetings and neighborly town office holders. There is no need for the venom that is being injected into our civil discourse.

Sincerely,

Suzanne Derry,
Old Lyme.

Op-Ed: Tuesday, November 4th & the HROD

Posted on by

Editor’s Note: F.B. (Rick) Drake of Old Lyme submitted this op-ed to us. He is a career architect with national and international design experience in the creation of small towns.

Some candidates in the coming election are taking credit for the defeat of the HROD [Halls Road Overlay District], an easy claim to stake. After all, the most controversial debates and the final vote on the proposal took place during the current Administration’s tenure in Town Hall. Whatever was wrong with the Overlay must by association at least, if not by direct action, have been their fault, right?  Maybe, but the subject’s worth at least a slightly closer look.

The Halls Road Improvement Committee (HRIC) was created in 2015 and labored for 10 years through changing memberships and five different town administrations, three Democratic and two Republican, to produce the proposal that was defeated earlier this year.  Each of those administrations no doubt influenced the committee, but none made it law. The ultimate authority to accept or deny the proposal resided with the Zoning Commission.  That’s certainly how events unfolded in 2024 and ’25.  The HRIC was allowed to complete its work without undue interference from the current administration. Ditto the Zoning Commission, which was allowed to consider and vote on the proposal also without interference. In fact, contrary to the claims of some, the current administration acted appropriately in January not by voting to approve the Overlay per se but by voting to approve its submittal to the Zoning Commission for its consideration and conclusion. Absent that vote, the decade long process would still be ongoing and a structured opportunity to stop, reassess and reconfigure it would have been postponed yet again. Forwarding the Overlay to the Zoning Commission for a vote was the opposite of controlling the process. It was allowing that process to operate as it was meant to.  

That said, the importance of an administration’s influence can’t be entirely discounted, and  there are good examples that reinforce that point.  

  • While the current administration refrained, as it should have, from directing the HRIC’s work, it used its influence in a positive way to arrange meetings between HRIC leadership and some of its most vocal critics. This author knows this to be true because he participated in some of those meetings as a critic. But even then, at the end of the day, the administration allowed the system to function and the HRIC to incorporate – or to set aside – its critics’ concerns as it, the HRIC, not the Selectmen, was charged to do.
  • An earlier administration’s influence, however, actually had a more direct and profound effect. One analysis of the HROD attributes many of its shortcomings to the hiring of a lead consultant put forward by that earlier administration, a consultant that was arguably unqualified to do the work. Whether the earlier administration failed to grasp the technical challenges of the HROD and/or the lack of qualifications of the consultant it put forward or not, a case could reasonably be made today that the shortcomings of the HROD were ultimately more the result of that consultant’s hiring than of many of the decisions rendered by the HRIC’s lay members, themselves.

Credit for defeat of the HROD, however, is, itself, worth a closer look. Without a town-wide vote, the party affiliations of the HROD’s opponents are unknown. Claims of credit for its defeat, therefore, or inferences to that effect by any group other than “the Citizens of Old Lyme” are unfounded and, more to the point, misleading. Opposition to the HROD, or support for that matter, crossed party lines. This author is just one of many who criticized the Overlay on technical grounds, not political (Drake letter to the ZC 2/18/25).  Furthermore, an examination of the vote taken by the Zoning Commission reinforces the fact that the Overlay faced multilateral opposition. Of the four negative votes cast, two were in fact Democrat or Democrat endorsed and two were Republican. Any single group’s claims of unilateral credit for defeating the measure, therefore, or inferences of same are at best unsubstantiated if not disingenuous during an election cycle.

In time, the community may come to realize that the greatest shortcoming of the HROD experience was not the number of its housing units or the length of its buildings but rather the unwarranted politicization of the effort, an unfortunate outcome for which neither the HRIC nor the current administration is responsible. The Administration shepherded the HROD to a majority vote decision by the Zoning Commission after HRIC members had contributed incalculable numbers of hours of time and myriad personal sacrifices in an effort to improve our town. Critics might agree that some of those efforts were imperfect, but claiming they were politically motivated requires proof not innuendo. The town and the committee members in particular deserve better.  

F. B. Drake

Editor’s Note: This op-ed was updated with a revised headline.