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

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.

Letter to the Editor: Why Won’t Old Lyme Republicans Participate in a Debate?

To the Editor:

As a long term beach resident of Old Lyme and a past elected official, I have had the honor to serve with members of both parties and independents. I am however disappointed that our Republican candidates have refused to participate in a debate with our Democratic opponents.

One has to wonder why.  Perhaps they do not want to publicly defend their misleading attacks on Martha Shoemaker or perhaps their alignment with the priorities of the GOP and Project 2025 or most disturbing their support for Trump/MAGA. So much for “All politics are local”. Very disturbing.

Martha Shoemaker and her running mate, Jim Lampos, have proven themselves as dedicated public servants who “put the people of Old Lyme first”.  They have worked diligently and transparently to address long standing issues, many of which were stalled under prior Republican leadership.  Only through open meetings and community engagement have they shown what responsive, responsible government looks like.

Running a town requires Listening and being willing to engage in “Honest” discussion.  I urge my fellow residents whether you be Democratic, Republican or Independent to support them on Nov. 4-Row A for leadership that represents every resident of our beautiful town.

Sincerely,

George Finley,
Old Lyme.

Editor’s Note: The author is chair of Old Lyme’s Board of Assessment Appeals and a member of its Harbor Management Commission.

Op-Ed: The Not-Secret and Completely Transparent Facts About Tantummaheag Landing

Editor’s Note: This op-ed was submitted by George T. Frampton Jr., who owns12 Tantummaheag Rd. in Old Lyme.

Because Old Lyme Republican have apparently refused to debate the Democratic slate for Town Selectmen, the public has little way of evaluating the truth or falsity of their claim that the current administration tried to promote a “secret land deal” in 2024 by proposing a short-term agreement to help resolve the legal status of Tantummaheag Landing.

Fortunately, since the current governance structure of the Town makes secret land deals impossible –– in two important respects –– there is no validity whatsoever to that claim.

First, Connecticut’s system of recording land records preserves public transparency and ensures that private land use rights are always objectively determinable. Those records show conclusively that we –– not the Town –– own the Landing in fee simple, as Tim Griswold’s Town Attorney publicly conceded at a BOS meeting in August 2022 and Town officials and its counsel have repeatedly confirmed publicly and privately.

While the Griswold administration originally claimed there might have been a “public highway” along our back driveway based on a 1701 right of way, we discovered and published more than two years ago official Town records establishing that this right of way never went down what is now our back driveway, wasn’t even being used and indeed couldn’t be found in 1712, was replaced by another right of way in 1713 (which traces the current Tantummaheag Road and never  touched our property), and that by contract with the then-landowner Richard Lord,  the Town agreed to surrender all rights to any and all Town rights-of-ways over and through his property upon his death (which occurred in 1727).

Indeed when Lord became First Selectman in 1720 one of the first things he did was register in Town records additional documents (witnessed and notarized deeds and a will) making sure those records would also confirm that his heirs could no longer be bound by any rights of way –– just in case the Town ever tried in the future to reverse that bargain by ignoring its agreement to unburden the property. He was quite prescient.

Second, Connecticut’s governing structure guarantees that land-use restrictions or changes  by the Town be made in open meetings accessible to all residents, which is precisely what occurred in the spring of 2024 when the current Administration put forward for public comment what was no more than an agreement to establish a process for resolving the issue without either party giving up any rights. Since then, in fact for the last two and a half years, no Town official or lawyer has ever disputed  -–– in public or in private –– the validity of the official documents or their effect, or articulated a single coherent legal position, claim, right or theory of any kind that would provide any further basis for any remaining Town claims to public access whatsoever.

Their inability and failure to do so speaks for itself. 

As we found out, there was indeed an inconvenient truth embedded in the modern history of Tantummaheag Landing  which we discovered through our historical research: That in the midst of the depression in 1931 another Griswold administration arranged to “steal” for the Town what was then the back driveway to our property by hiring a surveyor who conveniently ignored the fact that the 1701 right of way had been replaced by a different route in 1712 which itself ceased to exist in 1727; then intentionally mis-mapped the 1701 route (which would have gone under what is now an ice-pond created before 1900) so that the Town could use our back driveway for river access. We even discovered a typed and signed letter from the surveyor to the Town Selectmen conveying his discomfort at the fact that he had changed the 1701 route to avoid its having been inundated by the ice pond and to give the Town the opportunity to use our back driveway in its place (a document that at some point mysteriously disappeared from the Town map drawer).

To be sure, our historic governance structures are sometimes complicated, tedious and a bit arcane; this is often what makes finalizing Town decisions cumbersome and often delayed. Even so, not only is there no “secret land deal” involving our back driveway, but the torrent of misinformation about this issue over the past four years makes clear that the Town will be best served by leaders with the background and experience needed to arrive at legal and fair decisions about private property rights while honoring the pathways and complications history and state public meeting law constraints have imposed on Old Lyme’s government.

Letter to the Editor: Writer ‘Disheartened’ by Old Lyme Republican Postcard; Requests Civility, Absence of Divisiveness Going Forward

To the Editor:

Recently, I was very disheartened to receive a postcard from the Old Lyme Republican Party.

At a time when voters are interested in fact-based strategies for governance, this communication was an unobjective smear campaign against Martha Shoemaker. Rather than listing the items the Republican slate plans to initiate if elected, it was a list of slurs and innuendos aimed at our First Selectwoman.

In a divided nation where objectivity and cooperation are absent from the federal government, a negative communication with no details about the platform is unproductive and divisive. The voters of Old Lyme deserve candid and adult discussions of plans for the next term, not childish smear campaigns.

In an election, the future of local government should be a more productive and mature conversation.

Let’s be civil, not divisive. 

Sincerely,

Fred McCullough,
Old Lyme. 

UPDATED: Livestream Link Announced for ‘Meet the Candidates for Board of Education,’ Will Continue to be Available Post-Debate

OLD LYME — 10/22 UPDATE: Wednesday’s debate will be live streamed at this link: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCF2_W7yYtFwx067Ici9776Q/live. The link will continue to be available after the debate so the recording can viewed at a later date as convenient by anyone interested.

Lymes’ Youth Service Bureau (LYSB) is hosting a “Meet the Candidates for Board of Education” forum on Wednesday, Oct. 22, at 7 p.m. at the Lyme-Old Lyme Middle School auditorium.

The event will be moderated by Eric Parker of WFSB and both livestreamed and recorded.

All community members are invited to attend the event.

The forum provides a valuable opportunity for the public to hear directly from the candidates running for the Region 18 Board of Education. Attendees will gain insight into each candidate’s positions, priorities, and plans for the future of our schools.

In advance publicity information about the event, LYSB states, “Don’t miss this chance to make an informed decision and help shape the future of education in our community.” 

For more information and to submit questions, visit: www.lysb.org/boe  The deadline to submit questions was Monday, Oct. 20.

olwenonline.com/ is proud to sponsor this important event.

All five open spots on the board of education are for four-year-terms.

The eight candidates running for the four Old Lyme spots open on the board of education are:

  • Jason Kemp, Old Lyme, Democrat, Incumbent
  • Jarod Bushey, Old Lyme, Republican
  • Brandy Campbell, Old Lyme, Republican
  • Michael Hansen, Old Lyme, Democrat
  • Shaun Mastroianni, Old Lyme, Republican
  • Cynthia Love McCollum, Old Lyme, Democrat
  • Carlos Piña, Old Lyme, Unaffiliated — endorsed by the Old Lyme Republicans
  • Sheryl Shyloski, Old Lyme, Democrat

The two candidates running for the single Lyme spot open on the board of education are:

  • Anna James, Lyme, Democrat, Incumbent
  • Lannie Mossberg, Lyme, Unaffiliated — endorsed by the Lyme Republicans

Editor’s Note: This article was updated to correct Mossberg’s affiliation.