741 Colonel Ledyard Highway

Ledyard, Connecticut 06339-1551

(860) 464-3203

TOWN OF LEDYARD

Town Council

council@ledyardct.org

Meeting Minutes

Chairman Gary St. Vil

Regular Meeting

Wednesday, October 8, 2025

7:00 PM

Town Hall Council Chambers

In-Person: Council Chambers Town Hall Annex

Remote: Information noted below:

Join Zoom Meeting from your Computer, Smart Phone or Tablet:

https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85818631326?pwd=ip77mxCllNTQT5TDijHAJ3aj4OA2ii.1

Audio Only: Telephone: +1 646 558 8656; Meeting ID: 858 1863 1326; Passcode: 571452

CALL TO ORDER

Chairman St. Vil called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. at the Council Chambers, Town Hall

Annex Building.

Chairman St. Vil welcomed all to the Hybrid Meeting. He stated for the members of the

Town Council and the Public who were participating via video conference that the

remote meeting information was available on the Agenda that was posted on the Town’s

Website - Granicus-Legistar Meeting Portal.

II.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

III.

Councilor William Barnes

Councilor April Brunelle

Councilor Jessica Buhle

Councilor Kevin Dombrowski

Councilor Carmen Garcia-Irizarry

Councilor Tim Ryan

Present:

Councilor Tony Saccone

Councilor Gary St. Vil

Councilor Adrienne Parad

Excused:

IV.

PRESENTATIONS

MOTION to authorize the Mayor to accept the Connecticut Secretary of the State Early

Voting Grant in the amount of $10,026.07.

In addition, upon receipt of funding appropriate the Connecticut Secretary of the State Early

Voting Grant in the amount of $10,026.07 to Account# 21010301-56100-G0015 entitled

"Registrar - Operating Expenses - Misc. Grants".

And, authorize the Registrar of Voters to expend the Early Voting Grant in the amount of

$10,026.07 to pay for expenses associated with Early Voting provisions in accordance with

Public Act 25-168.

Chairman St. Vil stated at the Town Council’s September 29, 2025 meeting they authorized

the Mayor to accept the Connecticut Secretary of the State Early Voting Grant in the amount

of $10,026.07. He stated that because there were questions regarding the Early Voting Laws

the Town Council invited the Registrars to attend tonight’s meeting to provide some

information and to bring more awareness to the guidelines. He welcomed Registrar Diana

Mann to come up to the Podium to talk about this important subject.

Registrar Diana Mann stated that she and Deputy Registrar Patricia Carman Frost were

present this evening to provide an overview of the Early Election Laws and the Secretary of

the State’s Early Voting Grant in the amount of $10,026.07. Ms. Frost passed out the

following handouts regarding the upcoming November 4, 2025 Election and Early Voting

Information Mrs. Mann explained in a letter dated September 19, 2025 the Town received

notification that pursuant to Public Act 25-168, the Connecticut Secretary of the State would

again provide grant funding to each municipality this year in the amount of at least $5,000;

for costs related to conducting early voting. She stated based on the Secretary of State’s

formula Ledyard was scheduled to receive $10.026.07; and that the grant funding would be

distributed starting in September 2025 contingent on municipalities detailing their intended

use of the funds.

Mrs. Mann continued by explaining that the Connecticut Early Voting Laws were initially

passed by Public Act 23-5 in 2023, noting that these Early Voting Law would apply to

elections and primaries that occur on or after January 1, 2024. She also explained that the in

accordance with Public Act 23-5 every municipality had to create at least one early voting

location and had the option to establish more, noting that Ledyard’s Early Voting Location

was in the Lower Level of the Town Hall.

Early Voting provisions were as follows:

· General Elections: 14 days of early voting

· Primaries: seven days ahead

· Special Elections: four days

Mrs. Mann stated for the November 4, 2025 General Election Early Voting would begin on

October 20, 2025 and would run for fourteen days ending on November 2, 2025. The hours

would be from 10:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. every day including the weekends. She stated on the

last Tuesday, and Thursday, the hours would be from 8:00 a.m. - 8:00 p.m.

Mrs. Mann stated that Municipalities were surprised that the Secretary of State Office was

providing grant funding this year. She stated the Registrars Office planned to use the grant

funding for the following:

· Printing of Ballots

· Tabulators - Mrs. Mann stated for the July 8, 2025 Referendum regarding the one

Question pertaining to Juliet W. Long School Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning

System (HVAC) Project the cost was $700 for the thumb sticks. Therefore, she stated

that they did not know what the cost was going to be for twelve candidates that were on

the November 4, 2025 Ballot.

Deputy Registrar Patricia Carman Frost addressed the Registrar’s budget noting that the

estimate was based on minimum cost for the eleven tabulator machines. She stated the

machines would not work without the executable file they receive from ES&S and that

each voting machine had to have its own file. She stated the Programing piece cost was

over $7,000. She stated this cost did not include the cost for each line on the Ballot. She

stated last year they only had one machine, and the cost was over $5,000. She stated

because the Secretary of State was not allowing Municipalities to use the voting

machines for Early Voting that all those ballots would need to be counted by hand.

However, she stated for Election Day (November 4, 2025) that they would have all

eleven voting machines available. Mrs. Mann added that the Same Day Registration

Ballots would need to go through one voting machine tabulator; and Absentee Ballots

would need to go through one voting machine tabulator; and then they would have voting

machine tabulators for the three Voting Districts. Ms. Frost stated that they would also

have to have a back-up Voting Machine tabulator for each District.

Ms. Smith stated because the Early Voting would be carrying into Election Day that

some of the Grant Funding would be used for the work that has to be done on Election

Day. She stated because ES&S would not provide a cost estimate that they were not sure

what their total costs were going to be for Early Voting and Election Day, noting that the

$10,026.07 grant funding could be fully expended just for the cost of the tabulators.

Councilor Barnes questioned whether the town’s MIS Department could do the work that

ES&S does for the Elections. Ms. Smith stated that the town’s MIS Department could

not do this election work. Mrs. Mann stated that they had to use ES&S because the

information goes to the Secretary of State’s Office. Councilor Barnes questioned whether

there were other vendors the Town could use. Ms. Smith explained per the Secretary of

State’s Office ES&S was the only vendor they could use. Councilor Barnes stated that he

did not mind being required to do something, however, he stated it was problematic.

because ES&S could not give the town a quote.

Councilor Dombrowski stated that he agreed with Councilor Barnes’ comment that

ES&S not being able to provide the town a quote was problematic. However, he stated

the Municipalities were locked-in.

Councilor Ryan requested clarification, noting that ES&S was the only vendor that

Municipalities could use in the State. Mrs. Mann and Ms. Smith replied stating that was

correct. Mayor Allyn, III, explained that the State makes the deal and then tells the

Municipalities what they have to do.

Councilor Buhle stated that she understands that in Election Security that the State

wanted to make sure all citizens had a safe and secure way to vote. However, she stated

that it was a problem when a vendor/organization had no incentive to provide a

competitive rate. She stated realistically it does not cost ES&S that much to program a

thumb drive.

Councilor Dombrowski stated that the frustration was not that the State has told

Municipalities that they had to use a particular vendor to support the election. He stated

the frustration was that they were less than a month away from the election, they know

what the Ballot was going to contain, however, the vendor that was supplying the secure

software to support the tabulators could not tell them the cost.

Councilor Ryan questioned whether the Registrars have experienced this in the past with

ES&S not being able to provide cost estimates for their services. Mrs. Mann stated that

they have; and she noted for the Fiscal Year 2025/2026 Budget Referendum that she was

shocked when they received the ES&S $700 Invoice for a simple “Yes or No” Question.

Therefore, she stated every time they had the Referendum the cost was $700 resulting in

a total cost of $2,100 for the three Referendums (May 20, 2025; June 10, 2025 & July 8,

2025 (JWL School HVAC Project).

Chairman St. Vil questioned whether ES&S costs were fairly consistent from year to

year; or whether they were surprised each year when they receive ES&S Invoice. Mrs.

Mann stated that the costs were not consistent from year to year, and that they were

surprised.

Councilor Dombrowski stated for this year they were using a new tabulator. Mrs. Mann

stated Councilor Dombrowski was correct, noting that they used the new tabulators for

the Fiscal Year 2025/2026 Budget Referendum; and that the November 4, 2025 Election

would be the first time they were using the new tabulators for a General Election. She

stated for the Budget Referendum they only used two tabulators one at voting location

and one tabulator as the backup. However, she stated for the November 4, 2025 General

Election that they would be using all eleven tabulators because of the three Voting

Districts, Early Voting Ballots, Absentee Ballots, Same Day Registration, plus backup

tabulators. Councilor Dombrowski stated that he did not think the $10,026.07 Secretary

of State’s Grant Funding would cover all these costs.

Chairman St. Vil questioned whether the Registrars included enough funding in their

General Government Budget for these costs. Ms. Mann stated in preparing their

Department’s Fiscal Year 2025/2026 Budget they included funding to support the

workers at the Polling Locations, and $10,000 to support the tabulators for the November

4, 2025 Election, which included the maintenance fee. She stated because their old

tabulators cost $2,500 that she included $3,800 for the new tabulators based on the

information that was provided. However, she stated that this was based on the November

4, 2025 General Election, explaining that they did not plan on the cost to run the three

Referendums that were held for the Fiscal Year Budget (2 Referendums) and Juliet W.

Long Heating Ventilation & Air Conditioning (HVAC) Project (2 Referendums).

Councilor Buhle stated the permitted use of the $10,026.07 Secretary of State’s Grant

Funding was for costs directly tied to Early Voting; examples include but were not

limited to: labor costs, printing costs, location, equipment and supplies. Therefore, she

questioned whether the Registrars were planning to use the Secretary of State’s Grant

Funding to pay for the labor to staff the Early Voting and then move budgeted labor costs

to pay for the tabulators, noting that the tabulators at Districts 1, 2, & 3 were not related

to Early Voting; stating that she believed these would be Same Day Voting Expenses.

She stated the labor costs for Early Voting, would be their Early Voting Costs. She stated

because money was fungible, that they could move the money that was allocated in the

General Government budget for labor costs money over to pay for the tabulators; and

then use the Grant Funding to pay for the labor costs.

Mrs. Mann stated that Finance Director Matthew Bonin stated that they could not use the

$10,026.07 Secretary of State’s Grant Funding to pay for labor costs, because those costs

were already budgeted for.

Councilor Buhle stated that she had concerns that the Secretary of State was going to say

that paying for the tabulators for Districts 1, 2 & 3; or the tabulators for Same Day

Registration were not related to Early Voting expenses; and that she wanted to be sure

that the use of the Grant Funding was not conflicting with the way the State anticipated

the funds to be used.

Ms. Smith responded stating that she did not think Councilor Buhle was understanding

how this all worked. She explained that Same Day Registration would be occurring

during Early Voting; however, this would be done manually. She stated when they get to

Election Day that all of the Ballots have to go through the tabulators (Absentee Ballots,

Same Day Registration Ballots, etc.) at the Central Location, which was District 1; just

like every other election. Therefore, she stated that it was all part of Early Voting.

Councilor Buhle stated that she was appreciative of Early Voting noting that her husband

would have been disenfranchised during the last election, if not for Early Voting.

Chairman St. Vil thanked Mrs. Mann and Ms. Smith for attending tonight’s meeting and

for the information regarding Early Voting and the upcoming November 4, 2025 General

Election.

RESIDENT & PROPERTY OWNERS (COMMENTS LIMITED TO THREE (3)

MINUTES

None.

VI.

COMMITTEE COMMISSION AND BOARD REPORTS

None.

VII. COMMENTS OF TOWN COUNCILORS

Councilor Barnes stated October was National Cybersecurity Awareness Month. He stated

that this was important to him in his day job; and it was important to him in the role he

serves on the Town Council. He encouraged the town to continue to consider the deployment

of the multi-factor authentication capability within the Microsoft Cloud for access to Teams.

He stated that the multi-factor authentication was the single most important thing the town

could do to avoid the possible compromise of a town member’s email box; and whatever

information may be disclosed. He stated that he appreciated these efforts were continuing

and that hopefully they could see that activated within the next few months.

Councilor Brunelle reminded everybody that as the weather started to turn and storms start

coming in, that it was a great time to make sure they were signed up for “Notify Me” to

receive notifications. She stated for those who were not already signed up that they could

visit the town’s website at: www.ledyardct.org to sign up to receive email and/or text

messages. She stated that it was a good way to know about road closures or other problems

they should be aware of.

Councilor Ryan stated that he had comments related to a specific agenda item this evening.

Therefore, he would reserve his comments for later this evening.

Councilor Saccone stated the heating season was upon them and that he wanted to remind

residents if they were heating their homes with wood, pellets, or coal this season to be

careful. He stated the Fire Departments would be responding to numerous house calls

because residents think the ashes from their wood stoves were extinguished when they dump

them into a plastic container and putting them on the side of the house, and then they end up

burning the house down. He stated ashes and charcoal can take up to 72-hours to cool off. He

stated if residents take their ashes outside that they take them away from the house and soak

them in water. He asked residents to please be careful this winter season.

Councilor Dombrowski stated in keeping with the comments regarding Fall weather that the

leaves were beginning to fall from the trees. He urged motorists to drive with caution noting

that wet leaves make the roads slippery. He went on to state that the deer were now active,

noting that they are out at dusk and dawn. He stated every year Ledyard has a number of

deer/vehicle strikes and he asked that they be mindful of the deer when driving in the area.

He also asked that motorist obey the Stop Signs, noting that they were not optional and did

not mean Yield. He stated although he has not seen this in Ledyard that he has seen in other

town’s that Red Lights mean to “Curtsey and Go”. He stated that it was concerning when he

sees someone pull up to a Red Light and then go straight through the traffic light. He stated a

Red Traffic Light means “Stop”.

Councilor Buhle stated October was Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Month. She

expressed her empathy to all those in their community who has experienced pregnancy and

infant loss. She stated that she knows how isolating and heartbreaking the experience was

and she was sending love to those in their community who were or have gone through the

experience.

Chairman St. Vil stated this past weekend he was out and about town talking with residents

and he noted that spoke with Mr. Bruce Garstka who was the Chairman of the Agricultural

Commission. He noted that Mr. Garstka brought to his attention an email the Town Council

received regarding the Clark Farm Lease. He explained that the Agricultural Lease for a

portion of the Clark Farm Property would terminate in March, 2026 and to ensure that the

property would not go fallow that the Agriculatuaral Commission was requesting a process

to vet a new lessee for the property. He stated in talking with Mayor Allyn, III, that this

matter should be addressed by the Land Use/Planning/Public Works Committee. Councilor

Garcia-Irizarry, LUPPW Committee Chairman, stated that the Committee met with Mr.

Garstka at their October 6, 2025 meeting and discussed his request.

VIII. REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES

MOTION to approve the following Town Council Minutes

Special Meeting Minutes of September 10 2025 (Executive Session)

Regular Meeting Minutes of September 10, 2025

Moved by Councilor Dombrowski, seconded by Councilor Garcia-Irizarry

VOTE: 7 - 0 - 1 Approved and so declared (Brunelle abstained)

APPROVED AND SO DECLARED

RESULT:

IX.

COMMUNICATIONS

Correspondence List - October 8, 2025

REFERALS

XI.

COUNCIL SUB COMMITTEE, LIAISON REPORTS

Administration Committee Report Fiscal Year 2025/2026

Councilor Buhle stated the Administration Committee met earlier this evening and

forwarded a few appointments to the Town Council for consideration at their October 22,

2025 meeting.

RESULT:

Community Relations Committee for Diversity, Equity & Inclusion – Report- Fiscal Year

2025/2026

Councilor Brunelle stated the Community Relations Committee for Diversity, Equity &

Inclusion met on September 17, 2025; and also held a Special Meeting on September 29,

2025 to discuss putting together a little message to the town to encourage listening, working

together and collaborating. She stated the overall environment in the State was a little

elevated and hot. Therefore, the Community Relations Committee for Diversity, Equity &

Inclusion wanted to make sure they were aware of; and that they were helping to make it a

little more tolerable in their town. She noted that the Committee had an item on tonight’s

agenda regarding their proposal that she would further discuss later this evening.

RESULT:

Finance Committee Report Fiscal Year 2025/2026

Councilor Saccone stated although the Finance Committee has not met since the last the

Town Council meeting they have one item on the Consent Calendar this evening regarding

tax refunds.

RESULT:

LUPPW Committee Report Fiscal Year 2025/2026

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry stated the LUPPW Committee met on October 6, 2025 and

discussed the following: (1) Status of work to designate the Spicer Homestead Ruins, located

within the Clark Farm property, as a Registered Historical Site - Councilor Garcia-Irizarry

noted that the Historic District Commission Members Mrs. Karen Parkinson and Mr. Doug

Kelley attended the meeting and explained that they were continuing their work on the

initiative; and would most likely not be ready to present a Report to the LUPPW Committee

until December or January. She noted that the LUPPW Committee agreed to keep the Spicer

Homestead Ruins on their Agenda; (2) Agricultural Leases of Town-Owned Land -

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry stated that Agricultural Commission Chairman Bruce Garstka

attended the meeting to discuss his Memo dated August 27, 2025 regarding the

Commission’s interest to create a List of Criteria for the Leasing of Town-Own Land such as

Clark Farm and former Norwich State Hospital Property to encourage the properties be used

for Agricultural purposes and to prevent them from going fallow. She stated the LUPPW

Committee authorized the Agricultural Commission to develop a List of Criteria for the

leasing of Town-Owned Land that would encourage agricultural use; and they asked Mr.

Garstka to come back to the LUPPW Committee once they have developed the List; (3)

Transfer of Town-Owned Open Space Land to Avalonia Land Conservancy - Councilor

Garica-Irizary stated that Avalonia Land Conservancy President Dennis Main, Conservation

Commission Chairman Michael Marelli, and Land Use Director/Town Planner Elizabeth

Burdick attended the meeting to provide some background regarding the transfer of the

following Town-Owned properties to Avalonia Land Conservancy: (a) 19 Avery Hill Road

Extension, Ledyard, known as the “Kettle Hole” property; and (b) 13 Applewood Drive,

Ledyard. She explained that the Conservation Commission was in-favor of transferring these

properties to Avalonia Land Conservancy and that the Planning & Zoning Commission

conducted an 8-24 Review and has provided a “Favorable Recommendation” with some

conditions. She stated the town owned properties would be combined with other Avalonia

Land Conservancy properties to remain open to the public for passive recreation and to be

protected in perpetuity. She noted the LUPPW Committee asked Avalonia Land

Conservancy President Dennis Main to provide a letter to the town requesting the transfer of

the properties to their Organization prior to presenting the request to the townspeople. In

addition, the LUPPW Committee forwarded recommendations for the Town Council to

schedule a Public Hearing in accordance with CGS 707-163e and a Special Town Meeting in

accordance with Town Charter, Chapter VII; Section 9 to be held on November 12, 2025.

Councilor Dombrowski noted that setting the Public Hearing and Special Town Meeting

would be on the Town Council’s October 22, 2025 Agenda.

RESULT:

Liaison Reports

Permanent Municipal Building Committee Report Fiscal Year 2025/2026

Councilor Brunelle stated the PMBC met on Monday, October 6, 2025 and they basically

discussed an installation at the Ledyard Central Office, and the Solar Array Installation at the

Juliet W. Long School which has been completed. Eversource had to reschedule turning the

solar array on, noting that a date has not yet been provided. The Gales Ferry School was in a

holding pattern and they were waiting for more information regarding the Roof Installation.

Public Safety Commission Report Fiscal Year 2025/2026

Councilor Saccone stated on September 25, 2025 their Police and Firefighters conducted a

water rescue after a vehicle went into the Thames River near the Yale Boat Lauch in the

Gales Ferry Village. He stated on September 10, 2025 the Town Council recognized Chief

Dispatcher Paul Smith, and he stated the September 25, 2025 incident tied into the

importance of their Emergency Dispatchers being the ultimate First Responders. He stated

the Caller, who was probably disturbed, told the Dispatcher what he was going to do; and

immediately crews were dispatched to the location, however, he stated when they arrived it

was too late as the vehicle was already 90% under the water. He stated one of their Police

Officers and Gales Ferry Firefighters jumped into the water and broke through the windows

and got the individual out, noting that they were alive today. He stated he wanted to bring to

light all that their First Responders do for their community.

Board of Education Report Fiscal Year 2025/2026

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry stated although the Board of Education met last night she was not

able to attend the meeting.

Library Commission Report Fiscal Year 2025/2026

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry stated the Library Commission met on September 17 and

September 22, 2025. However, she stated because she was in Puerto Rico that she was not

able to attend.

Economic Development Commission Report Fiscal Year 2025/2026

Councilor Buhle stated she was not able to attend the EDC’s October 7, 2025 meeting.

XII. REPORT OF THE MAYOR

Mayor Report Fiscal Year 2025/2025

Mayor Allyn, III, reported on the following: (1) Deer Strikes - Mayor Allyn stated to date this

season Ledyard has had 39 Deer Strikes. He stated a few years ago they had 126 Deer

Strikes, which was extremely high. He stated as Councilor Dombrowski mentioned earlier

this evening that he hoped that motorist would pay attention to their peripheral vision,

noting that often the Deer will be standing on the side of the road and will suddenly decide to

enter the road; (2) Gales Ferry School Roof Project - Mayor Allyn stated that Town would be

entering into Mediation with the Roofing Contractor, which would be scheduled for

December, 2025 or January 2026. He stated that he would keep the Town Council apprised

of the situation; (3) Library Director has resigned her position - Mayor Allyn stated the

position was posted on Monday (October 6, 2025) and to date the town has received two

applications; (4) Southeastern Connecticut Council of Governments Local Transportation

Capital Improvement Program (LoTCIP Grant - Mayor Allyn stated yesterday he met with

Southeastern Connecticut Council of Governments to discuss a new LoTCIP Grant

Application to seek funding for a bridge located on Lantern Hill Road that was not rated

high. He stated they would be meeting with an Engineering Firm and SCCOG to review the

Plan to see if they were confident the Project would be eligible for the LoTCIP Grant

Program. He stated if they find that the Project was eligible for the LoTCIP Funding that it

would save the Town about $1.2 million; (5) Economic Development Commission October

6, 2025 Meeting - Mayor Allyn stated at the EDC Meeting they discussed a Small Town

Economic Assistance Program Grant (STEAP) for the construction of sidewalks in Gales

Ferry. He stated the STEAP Grants usually come out in late February, and that they would

have to have their engineering and design work completed. He also explained that because

Route 12 was a State Road that they would have to obtain Encroachment Permits from the

State Department of Transportation (DOT). He stated if the town was going to seek to do

some development in Gales Ferry, that would be similar to what was done in Ledyard

Center, that they would need to start allocating funds to conduct the design and engineering

work and then look for a LoTCIP Grant, noting that he did not think that the STEAP Grants

would provide enough funding for the project; (6) Elks Police Appreciation Dinner - October

10, 2025- Mayor Allyn stated that he would be attending the Dinner on Friday evening,

noting that two Award Recipients would be from the Ledyard Police Department. He stated

that he would report back on who the two recipients were at the October 22, 2025 Town

Council Meeting.

Questions to the Mayor

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry addressed Food Waste Composting, and she questioned the status of

Southeastern Connecticut Regional Resource Recycling Authority (SCRRRA) Organic

Composting Facility. Mayor Allyn stated that SCRRRA has picked up where Blue Earth

Composting left off. He stated that SCRRRA was still waiting to receive their Permit from the

State for their Organic Waste Composting Facility. He stated once SCRRRA obtains their State

Permit that it would be a huge catalyst for the whole area.

Councilor Saccone noted the weight load for the Bridge on Lantern Hill Road, and he noted that

the Gales Ferry Ladder Truck weighed 42-tons. He stated if the Bridge could not support the

weight that the ladder truck and tanker trucks would have to be diverted, which would result in a

significant time delays in responding to fires in that area. Therefore, he stated that including this

in the Local Transportation Capital Improvement Program (LoTCIP) Grant Application may be

an important factor to note. Mayor Allyn thanked Councilor Saccone for mentioning the weight

of the fire apparatus stating that the Lantern Hill Road Bridge Design Rating would need to be

50-tons. He stated the other Lantern Hill Road Bridge was currently out of service, therefore, he

stated the Desing Rating for the two bridges on that road would need to match.

Councilor Barnes questioned whether the Lantern Hill Road Bridge being out of service would

affect the homeowners and fire insurance for the adjacent property owners. Mayor Alllyn stated

the adjacent communities were aware that the bridge was out of service. He stated the Lantern

Hill Road Bridge was shared between Ledyard and Stonington, noting the other side of the

bridge was in Stonington. Councilor Barnes stated with the bridge being out of service that it

would affect Mutal Aide in responding to fires. Mayor Allyn stated that Councilor Barnes was

correct, explaining that it would be a problem, because Ledyard’s Mutual Aide comes from the

Olde Mystic Fire Department on that end of Lantern Hill Road, stating with the Bridge being out

of service the Olde Mystic Fire Department currently cannot get up that way. Therefore, he

stated that they would have to look for alternatives, noting that the Mashantucket Pequot Fire

Department would probably be a good alternative because they would come in from this side of

the Lantern Hill Road Bridge.

Chairman St. Vil questioned the reason some of the Stop Signs that were on the galvanized posts

in the Highlands area were taken out and sandwich board stop signs were currently in place.

Mayor Allyn stated that he was not aware of the Stop Sign situation in the Highlands and that he

would look into the matter and get back to Chairman St. Vil.

RESULT:

XIII. OLD BUSINESS

None.

XIV. NEW BUSINESS

CONSENT CALENDAR

MOTION to reappoint the following members the Inland Wetland & Water Courses

Commission for a two (2) year term ending October 31, 2027:

*1.

*2.

Mr. Michael Marelli (D) 4 Lee Brook Drive 193 Iron Street, Ledyard

Mr. Justin DeBrodt (U) 5 Erins Way, Ledyard.

APPROVED AND SO DECLARED

RESULT:

MOTION to reappoint the following members to the Library Commission for a two (2) year

term ending November 7, 2027:

Mr. John Bolduc (U) 14 Monticello Drive, Gales Ferry

Ms. Ellin M. Grenger (D) 15 Bittersweet Drive, Gales Ferry

Ms. Cynthina Wright (D) 6 Larule Leaf Drive, Gales Ferry

Ms. Elizabeth Rumery (D) 2 Bluff Road, Gales Ferry.

APPROVED AND SO DECLARED

RESULT:

MOTION to approve two tax refunds in the combined total amount of $6,393.90 each exceeding

$2,400.00 in accordance with tax collector departmental procedures.

*3.

Lereta Tax Service for Kin Chan & Cuihua Zheng

Eric Carlson $3,102.29

$3,291.61

Moved by Councilor Dombrowski, seconded by Councilor Garica-Irizarry

VOTE: 8 - 0 Approved and so declared

APPROVED AND SO DECLARED

Kevin Dombrowski

RESULT:

MOVER:

Carmen Garcia-Irizarry

SECONDER:

Barnes, Brunelle, Buhle, Dombrowski, Garcia-Irizarry, Ryan, Saccone, and

St. Vil

AYE:

Parad

EXCUSED:

Administration Committee

MOTION to appoint Mr. James Thompson (D) 6 Pennywise Lane, Ledyard, to the Inland

Wetland & Water Courses Commission to complete a two (2) year term ending October 31,

2026 filling a vacancy left by Ms. Lynmarie Thopmpson.

Moved by Councilor Buhle, seconded by Councilor Dombrowski

Discussion: None

VOTE: 8 - 0 Approved and so declared

APPROVED AND SO DECLARED

Jessica Buhle

RESULT:

MOVER:

Kevin Dombrowski

SECONDER:

Barnes, Brunelle, Buhle, Dombrowski, Garcia-Irizarry, Ryan, Saccone, and

St. Vil

AYE:

Parad

EXCUSED:

Community Relations Committee for Diversity, Equity & Inclusion

MOTION to endorse the Community Relations Committee for Diversity, Equity & Inclusion’s

message to be distributed in the form of a Digital and possibly a Printed Flyer “We Encourage

all Ledyard Residents to Listen, Collaborate, and Find Common Ground. Progress comes from

Teamwork” as presented in the draft dated September 29, 2025

Moved by Councilor Brunelle, seconded by Councilor Buhle

Discussion: Councilor Brunelle stated that this was basically the Elephant in the Room noting

that tensions in the country have gotten a little heated. She stated that they like to think of their

Town as our home, our neighbors, our friends, and our family. So the Community Relations

Committee for Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion felt that it was important to put forth a message to

remind everybody that we are all here together and that progress does come from teamwork. She

stated that it was a good message to put out there digitally and in a flyer form. She stated it was

just a little thing and something nice noting that to encouragement was always good, rather than

negativity.

Councilor Buhle stated that she pictures the Flyer with inspirational photos, stating that she

wanted the background to be really pretty pictures of Ledyard with a great positive message. She

stated before tonight’s meetings that she and Councilor Dombrowski were discussing the many

things where we were all very similar and alike; and the many shared experiences. She stated

that recently things have been so divisive that it was nice to have situations where the y could

recognize that they have common ground.

Councilor Barnes stated during the Community Relations Committee for Diversity, Equity,&

Inclusion’s meeting that they talked about one of the ways the town has come together in an

incredible way was the Farmers Market. He stated that they talked about a photo of the Farmers

Market being the center of the flyer; and he questioned whether Councilor Brunelle was able to

obtain authorization to use a Farmers Market photograph.

Councilor Brunelle stated the Farmers Market did not want to associate themselves with DEI

(Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion) for fear of retaliation and angering people, which was the whole

point of the message, which she found very disappointing, but that was their right. Therefore, she

stated that she did not want to use a picture they were not comfortable with.

Councilor Barnes stated the message was provided by Councilor Parad and the idea was that it

would not just be a sheet with words, but that it would also include a photograph. He stated if

they had a photograph they could use that he thought that it would make the flyer more

impactful. He stated there were things that happen every day in town that show teamwork,

collaboration and community. He stated that this message would ring more true if these things

were expressed on whatever they produced.

Chairman St. Vil stated that he agreed with the sentiment of the message, noting before tonight’s

meeting they were having a discussion around life. He stated that sometimes they forget that they

were not just Councilors working together, but that they were coworkers, they were neighbors,

they were friends. He stated to reinforce that sentiment whether it was in written form or

digitally that it was one of those things that it could not hurt especially in the divisive climate

they were in today.

VOTE: 6 - 2 Approved and so declared (Dombrowski, Ryan not in favor)

APPROVED AND SO DECLARED

April Brunelle

RESULT:

MOVER:

Jessica Buhle

SECONDER:

Barnes, Brunelle, Buhle, Garcia-Irizarry, Saccone, and St. Vil

AYE:

Dombrowski, and Ryan

Parad

NAY:

EXCUSED:

General Items

Discussion and possible action to review and consider text amendments to the proposed "An

Ordinance Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics And Ethics Commission" in

preparation to present at a Public Hearing.

MOTION to adopt a proposed “An Ordinance Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics

and Ethics Commission” as presented in the draft dated September 10, October 8, .2025.

Moved by Councilor Buhle, seconded by Councilor Brunelle

Discussion: Councilor Buhle stated that she would like to Amend the proposed “An Ordinance

Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics And Ethics Commission”.

Councilor Ryan questioned whether the proposed amendments that Councilor Buhle was

presenting this evening were attached to the Agenda Packet. Councilor Buhle stated that they

were not; and that she would send them to him.

Councilor Dombrowski stated that he would not be ready to vote on the proposed amendments

without seeing them. Councilor Ryan stated that they could not engineer these changes at a

Town Council meeting.

Chairman St. Vil stated that the proposed amendments were not engineering, noting that they

were clarifications to the existing Ordinance. He stated if Councilors did not feel comfortable

voting that they could “Abstain”, noting that they could not stop the vote. Councilor

Dombrowski stated that he could vote “No” explaining that the issue he had was that they were

making changes to a proposed Ordinance that was being discussed for the first time by the Town

Council; without providing any documentation prior to tonight’s meeting. Chairman St. Vil

stated the proposed clarifications were fairly benign to the original intent of the Ordinance. He

stated that he respected Councilor Dombrowski’s opinion; and he asked Councilor Buhle to

proceed.

v MOTION to amend the “An Ordinance Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics And

Ethics Commission” as presented in the draft dated September 10, 2025 as follows:

· Section 4, paragraph 3b, remove the phrase “spouse or minor child” and replace it with “or

immediate family of”.

· Section 4, paragraph 8, Town Employee definition will be modified to add the phrase,

“including outsourced administrative or executive professionals, including but not limited to

consultants and the Town Attorney”

· Section 5, paragraph 3, add the phrase, “unless the contract or purchase order is awarded

through the traditional bid or quote process and conflict is disclosed.”

· Section 5, paragraph 4, add the following sentence, “This provision does not apply to Town

employees or Board of Education employees providing recreational services including but not

limited to classes, coaching, camp counseling through Ledyard Parks and Recreation or

Ledyard Board of Education”.

· Section 7, paragraph 1b6, add the phrase “unless disclosed to the Ethics Commission.”

Moved by Councilor Buhle, seconded by Councilor Brunelle

Discussion: Chairman St. Vil that he expected that there would be some significant discussion

this evening. Therefore, he proposed that they start with an orderly fashion beginning with

Councilor Barnes so that everyone had a chance to present their initial opinion on the matter;

and then he would open the floor discussion for debate.

Councilor Buhle stated that she had a draft with the proposed changes and marked-up that she

would send to Administrative Assistant Roxanne Maher.

Councilor Barnes stated that he wanted to be clear, noting that in terms of having a Code of

Ethics that he thought that there was unanimous support by all Town Councilor Members that it

was something they need. He stated that he did not want anyone to see a vote whether it was

from him or another member of the Town Council and think that they were against the need for a

Code of Ethics. He stated that they absolutely needed it and that they should have had one

sometime ago; and that whatever happens that they would have a Code of Ethics in the future.

Councilor Barnes continued by addressing the proposed “An Ordinance Establishing a Code of

Ethics and Ethics Commission” in its entirety noting that he had three areas of concern; and one

concern that may make it possible not to proceed. He stated that some of Councilor Buhle’s

proposed amendments addressed some of his concerns; however, he stated that he wanted to

share what his concerns were before this evening. He stated by not seeing the proposed edits that

it was not possible for him to know that all of his concerns were raised:

· Public Hearing - September 24, 2025 - Councilor Barnes stated from the Public Hearing

there were a number of town officials that did not have a chance to review the proposed

Ordinance or participate in the discussion. He stated based on Councilor Buhle’s edits that it

sounded like for at least the Parks, Recreation & Senior Citizens they captured some of that.

Councilor Barnes questioned whether Councilor Buhle followed up with all of the town officials

that expressed concerns at the September 24, 2025 Public Hearing.

Councilor Buhle stated that she followed up with:

o Parks & Recreation Director Scott Johnson, Jr.

o Town Clerk Particia Riley - Councilor Buhle stated that she had a meeting on the calendar

with Town Clerk Patricia Riley; however, she stated Ms. Riley was not available that day

and they had to reschedule.

o Director of Human Resources Christine Dias - Councilor Buhle stated that she did not

follow-up with Ms. Dias. However, she stated that she thought the process made sense; and

it was her opinion that for any Ethics Complaints involving town employees that they be

handled by the Human Resources Department.

Councilor Barnes stated that his concern was that they incorporate the feedback from each of the

town officials. He thanked Councilor Buhle for one of the edits she suggested, noting that it at

least covered the Parks & Recreation. He stated that he believed there was a need to make sure

all town officials, at least from the Director level, had a chance to review the suggested edits and

to provide comments. However, he stated that they have not had that opportunity.

Councilor Barnes continued to note his concerns as follows:

· Exemptions for Certain Situations - Councilor Barnes stated it sounded like Councilor

Buhle captured the exemptions for the Parks & Recreation Activity Leagues with her proposed

edits this evening.

· Residents Feedback - Councilor Barnes noted all the detailed feedback from the residents,

stating that nearly all of the residents who were in-favor and opposed to the proposed Ordinance

commented that the proposed document needed substantial updates. He stated that Mr.

Schroeder may have provided the best example; and that he thought that Councilor Buhle may

have captured many of those.

· Town Charter - Councilor Barnes stated that his biggest concern regarding the proposed “An

Ordinance Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics and Ethics Commission” as written,

was that it was inconsistent with the Town Charter. He stated the Town Charter empowers the

Town Council for all Investigation Matters. He stated if the proposed Ordinance was to provide

a recommendation for the Town Council for further investigation; that they need to say that.

However, he stated as the proposed Ordinance was currently written the Ethics Commission was

the Investigative Authority; and he stated that could not be established in an Ordinance because

it was inconsistent with the Town Charter at this time.

Councilor Brunelle asked whether Councilor Buhle’s proposed changes could be printed and

passed out, so that everyone would have the chance to see them, noting that she did not have her

laptop this evening.

Councilor Brunelle commented on the following:

· Proposed Changes were Not Substantial - Councilor Brunelle stated that she agreed that the

proposed changes were for clarification to make the intent clear, stating that they were not

substantial changes.

· Existing Documentation and Procedures - Councilor Brunelle stated that they received

comments that they have things in place and they did not need the proposed Ordinance, because

they handled situations in the past without having this. She stated the two situations that

occurred in the past were Legal Matters. She stated that they were Illegal Embezzlements; and

that was not ethics. She stated if someone was embezzling money that they would not go to the

Ethics Commission, noting that they would call the police. Therefore, she stated that those two

circumstances do not really apply, because if it was a Legal Issue you would obviously follow

the legal course.

· Ethics Committee - Councilor Brunelle stated that she agreed with Councilors Barnes that

they needed to have an Ethics Committee.

Councilor Barnes corrected Councilor Brunelle stating that he wanted to be clear, that what he

said was that they needed a Code of Ethics. Councilor Brunelle stated that was fine.

Councilor Brunelle stated that she believed they needed to have an Ethics Committee; an this has

been being worked on for a very long time, months, and months, and months.

· Town Official Comments - Councilor Brunelle stated as far as town officials reviewing and

providing comments that she had a question for the Mayor. She stated that the Mayor knew that

they were working on this for months, and months, and months. She questioned whether the

Mayor ever contacted the town officials and let them know that this was happening so that they

had a chance see the reviews and comments, because they have been in the minutes and things

like that.

Mayor Allyn, III, stated that the Department Heads were made aware of the proposed “An

Ordinance Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics and Ethics Commission” the day

following the draft that was introduced on September 8, 2025; which was when they finally had

a working draft. Councilor Brunelle stated the Mayor did not let them know ahead of time.

Mayor Allyn stated prior to the September 8, 2025 draft that there had been several iterations,

therefore, he stated it would not have been helpful for the Department Heads to review the many

different changing drafts as the document was being developed. Councilor Brunelle stated that

their comments could have helped mold it in the future. She stated that she would have taken it

upon herself to let them know ahead of time, so that their comments could have come in ahead

of time before the irritations, so that it would have been more cohesive with their comments a

head of time. Mayor Allyn stated that it would have been equally important for this group to

reach out to those employees and communicate with them, noting that has been a huge problem.

Councilor Brunelle stated that was the Mayor’s role, noting that they were underneath him.

Councilor Barnes stated that he did not think Councilor Brunelle’s comment were appropriate.

Councilor Brunelle stated that she thought it was appropriate because he was putting blame on

us, when she did not think it was our responsibility for that as a Committee, as they were making

up a draft, stating that they cannot contact everybody in town. Mayor Allyn stated the

Administration Committee worked on the draft for 22-months.

Councilor Brunelle went on to state the reason she abstained from approving the Minutes this

evening was because the Minutes were not accurate. The Minutes did not capture her sentiments

and there were a lot of typos in the Minutes; and she did not want to make a fuss, and that was

why she abstained. Councilor Barnes stated that Councilor Brunelle should have voted “No”.

Councilor Brunelle stated it was her choice to abstain, so that it was on the record, because she

thought that some of the stuff that was printed in the Minutes misinterpreted what she said; and

her intention.

Councilor Brunelle stated for example one of them was that she addressed the “Question why

some people were saying that she did not understand why some people could be against such a

thing” and she stated “That was a naïve question because there has been tons of reasons why

people have said they have been against it; and that I understand and I listen to them; and at the

same token you cannot sit there and say I don’t understand why anyone would be for it, because

there has been a lot of comments and statements why they were for it. So you have to look at

both sides, you have to see the Pro’s and Con’s and you have to say what is the best route for

the town” . So that was the reason she abstained because she did not feel that it correctly

portrayed what she said at the meeting and there was no video; so she could not go back to

verify. So with that being said, she felt that this was very important; she believed they have been

working on it for a very long time; and she believed that it should be pushed forward.

**POST MEETING NOTE: The following Minutes were listed for approval this evening:

· Special Town Council Meeting Minutes - September 10, 2025 Executive Session - No

dialogue was recorded;

· Regular Town Council Meeting Minutes - September 10, 2025 - only discussion regarding

the proposed Ethics Ordinance was to set a Public Hearing Date;

· Public Hearing Minutes - September 24, 2025 Councilor Brunelle was not present

Councilor Ryan stated that he thought Councilor Brunlle’s comments toward the Mayor were

accusatory and rude. Councilor Brunelle stated that she was sure he did. But he that Councilor

Ryan has said a lot of rude things to her in the past and written, so its Touche’. Councilor Ryan

stated that he was referring to the comments Councilor Brunelle said to the Mayor. She stated

that it was also rude when everybody was saying that they did it wrong; it was the same thing

back.

Council Ryan stated that he did not support the proposed Ordinance under Agenda Item #6 for

the following reasons:

• The draft that was before Town Council includes additional language that has not been

reviewed by the Town Attorney; due to the sensitive nature of this proposed Ordinance, the

Town Attorney should review the final draft and provide their opinion to the Town Council to

consider.

• The current draft ignores previous recommendations made by the Town Attorney, an

individual who was paid to protect the town from liability.

• The development of this draft proposal did not involve the Town Clerk, although he

understands that Councilor Buhle did try to schedule meetings; as well as the Human Resources

Director and other stakeholders, noting that he understood that Councilor Buhle was able to talk

with the Parks and Recreation Director Scott Johnson, Jr., and yet the proposed Ordinance

invokes additional responsibility on the Town Clerk’s Office not accounted for currently, in

terms of resources. Additionally, at a prior Administration Committee meeting (September 8,

2025), the Town Clerk also outlined some execution concerns. The Town Clerk should be given

the opportunity to review the document and provide input on impacts to their department for the

Town Council to consider.

• As noted by the Mayor and the town’s Human Resources Director, the proposed draft was in

conflict with the town’s collective bargaining agreements.

• This proposed draft was in conflict with the Town Charter; and that he would expand on this

later in his comments.

Councilor Ryan stated that based on just the above reasons, that this draft was not ready for

Town Council consideration, and it feels like it is being rushed over the finish line for reasons

that he could not comprehend. He noted a comment was made at a prior Administrative

Committee meeting regarding a concern about “perfect getting in the way of good”. He stated

that was a phrase that should be used with caution, and while he would agree with that sentiment

in certain circumstances, an Ordinance that opens the town up to additional legal liability and

has the potential to personally and professionally affect individuals was not one of those

circumstances.

Councilor Ryan went on to state, Additionally, what has not been made clear to him was what

problem this was addressing. He stated that they were potentially exposing the town to

significant additional expenses - at least $20,000 in additional annual legal expenses according

to the town attorney - and for what purpose. He stated there were multitudes of existing

documents that ensure ethical conduct by employees was enforced, including:

• CT General Statute 7-148h - Outlines ethical conduct rules for officials and the ability for a

municipality to bestow the power to investigate allegations to a body.

• Chapter III, Section 9 of the Town Charter - Provides the Town Council with the power of

investigation, and therefore, invokes the powers/provisions inherent in CGS 7-148. He noted that

this power cannot be explicitly delegated; and, per Section 4 of the Town Charter, the Town

Council cannot create an ordinance that was inconsistent with the provisions of the Town

Charter. As such, there was an inherent disconnect between the Town Charter and the proposed

Ordinance.

• Town of Ledyard Fraud Policy - Outlines multiple examples that constitute employee fraud.

• Town of Ledyard Employee Handbook - Outlines detailed examples of behavior considered

unethical, including nepotism and multiple examples of conflicts of interests.

Councilor Ryan stated that given the aforementioned, that he questioned why the town needed

anything else - especially something potentially contradictory to existing town documents as

noted above - to handle the exceedingly rare instances the town has had regarding ethical

misconduct by employees. Rare instances, that he would note, have been successfully handled

using existing policies and procedures.

Councilor Ryan went on to state that what was especially worrisome was what this proposed

Ordinance implied - that the Town Council does not have the capacity to use the powers

bestowed to them by the Town Charter to objectively act in the best interests of the town. He

stated that he would remind everyone that they were elected to do just that - put the town first,

ahead of any personal, partisan or special interests.

Councilor Ryan stated that he wanted to clarify that he was not debating the need to enforce

ethical behavior, noting that he was simply pointing out that they have procedures and policies

currently in place that are time tested and proven to work.

Councilor Ryan stated that if there was an interest in creating a Code of Ethics, or updating an

existing document, to act as a comprehensive ethics reference, and would perhaps expand on

some of the definitions already provided, that he would support that effort, provided all the

necessary stakeholders were involved in developing it from the beginning, which has not been

the case with what was before them, as they have seen. He stated to be clear, that would be

absent the establishment of an Ethics Commission, for reasons he stated previously.

Councilor Ryan stated in the end, if the Town Council was going to pass an Ordinance with the

power to change people’s lives and obligate additional town resources and taxpayer money, that

it needed to perfect - not just “good enough”. He stated the proposed Ordinance, which was in

conflict with their Town Charter, should go back to Committee for additional work.

Councilor Saccone provided the following comments:

· Town Charter - Councilor Saccone questioned when the Town Attorney reviewed the

proposed “An Ordinance Establishing a Code of Ethics and Ethics Commission” whether he

found any conflict with the Town Charter.

Councilor Buhle stated the draft Ordinance that Town Attorney Matt Ritter returned to her also

included an Ethics Commission investigation. She stated that she would imagine that their Town

Attorney, that was representing them, would not provide language that was in conflict with the

Town Charter, or that he would not provide them with a draft Ordinance that does not comply

with the Town Charter. Councilor Saccone noted that he would agree with Councilor Buhle’s

comment.

· Need for an Ethics Commission- Councilor Saccone stated he has lived in town 37 years

and that he has seen illegal things happen in town and the people were punished for what they

did. He stated the proposed Ordinance would not have stopped those people from stealing town

funds. However, he stated that the proposed Ordinance brings to light that their elected officials

and their employees are ethical.

· Draft Ordinance - Councilor Saccone stated that he supported the proposed “An Ordinance

Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics and Ethics Commission”. He stated that he

reviewed Ethics Ordinances from three other towns noting that he did not like some of the things

that were in the Town of Waterford’s Ethics Ordinance as it delt with how their Representative

Town Meeting (RTM) people could do things. However, he stated that he agreed with the rest of

Waterford’s Ordinance, noting that it brougth to light what their needs would be as a town as

well. He stated that he has read over the proposed “An Ordinance Establishing a Town of

Ledyard Code of Ethics and Ethics Commission” numerous times.

· Good Enough versus Perfect - Councilor Saccone stated that the United States Government

had laws that go on the books that were never perfect. He commented that he was not saying the

proposed “An Ordinance Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics and Ethics

Commission” needed a correction. However, he stated should they find years down the road that

there were things they needed to add or subtract to enhance any law or regulations, that they

could do that, noting that they see it happen every day in the laws that were written across the

country.

Councilor Saccone stated that he was in-favor of the proposed “An Ordinance Establishing a

Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics and Ethics Commission” and that he would vote “Yes”.

Councilor Dombrowski stated that some of the things they talked about tonight regarding an

Ethics Commission he brought up when they first began discussing the subject such as:

· Conflict with Town Charter - Councilor Dombrowski stated during their early discussions

regarding establishing an Ethics Commission that he said that he thought they needed to have a

Charter Revision first.

· Code of Ethics - Ethics Commission - Councilor Dombrowski stated the Code of Ethics and

Ethics Commission needed to be separate; for the same reasons others have presented this

evening. He stated that they could take the Code of Ethics out of the proposed Ordinance and

adopt it as a Policy Document, explaining that could be done without a Public Hearing.

Councilor Dombrowski stated could a Code of Ethics and Ethics Commission be put together in

one document “Yes”. Should they be in one document “No”.

· Substantive Changes- Councilor Dombrowski stated although some have said the proposed

changes Councilor Buhle presented were to provide clarification; and they were not substantive,

that he thought some of them could be substantive enough, to require a new Public Hearing.

· Attorney Legal Review - Councilor Dombrowski stated the draft Ordinance dated September

10, 2025 that was presented at the September 24, 2025 Public Hearing; and the proposed

changes presented this evening have not gone back to the Town Attorney for a legal review; after

the Administration Committee added some portions back into the proposed Ordinance that were

specifically struck out by the Town Attorney. He stated that he thought they were putting

themselves in a position for liabilities because they added language in without getting the

appropriate level of legal review.

Councilor Dombrowski stated that he did not think the draft “An Ordinance Establishing a Town

of Ledyard Code of Ethics and Ethics Commission” was ready; noting that he has been saying

this right along.

Councilor Buhle provide the following comments:

· Changes from Town Attorney Draft dated 7/14/2025 - Councilor Buhle stated that she

wanted to be clear that the only significant change to the Town Attorney’s July 14, 2025 draft

Ordinance and the draft that was before them this evening, was to Section 6 with regard to

Disclosure for Public Officials and those Working in the Town. She stated as she has said in

all of her previous comments that the bulk of the telephone conversation that she and the Town

Attorney had regarding the proposed “An Ordinance Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of

Ethics and Ethics Commission” was regarding Section 6. She stated that the Town Attorney

advised her multiple times that it was admissible and legal and they could keep it. She stated that

she responded to the Town Attorney stating “Yes that was an important part of the draft

Ordinance to her and that she wanted to keep it; and that she wanted that in there”. She stated

the Town Attorney said “You can have that…. That was fine”; and then the Town Attorney

returned the draft Ordinance without it; and with no explanation as to why it was removed. She

stated that was extremely frustrating to her; because being told “Yes, it was legal and

admissible” , noting that the Town Attorney said “It may deter people from running from office;

and it was going to deter your volunteers”. Councilor Buhle stated that she said “It was only

going to apply to elected officials” and that the Town Attorney said “Oh, okay, you can have

that ”; and she said “Okay”.

Councilor Buhle stated that was the only portion of that she would say was relevant. She stated

the Town Attorney’s reassurance it was legal and acceptable; but the Town Attorney removed it.

Councilor Dombrowski stated that unfortunately for the public record the only draft he had

before him this evening was the Town Attorney’s redline draft Ordinance; and not the

conversation between Councilor Buhle the Town Attorney. Councilor Buhle stated that she

understands; and that she learned that she would not have telephone conversations with

attorneys.

Chairman St. Vil questioned whether Councilor Dombrowski was doubting Councilor Buhle’s

statements or her interpretation of her conversation with the Town Attorney. Councilor

Dombrowski stated that he did not have anything to back-it up; stating that he was not doubting

the conversation Councilor Buhle had with the Town Attorney; and he was not doubting what

she believed; or what she was saying was not correct. However, he stated the problem was that

the interpretation the Town Attorney provided back to Councilor Buhle struck that language out.

Councilor Ryan questioned whether the draft Ordinance that Councilor Buhle was referring to

was reviewed by the Town Attorney. Councilor Buhle responded stating “No”. Councilor Barnes

questioned whether a review by the Town Attorney was possible and he questioned the reason

they would not do that. Councilor Buhle that she did not feel that any of the changes were so

substantial that they changed the document. Councilor Ryan questioned whether the version of

the Ordinance that Councilor Buhle was making amendments to this evening had been sent to

the Town Attorney for his review, noting that there has been plenty of time to pass that version

through the Town Attorney. Councilor Buhle replied stating “That it has not”; noting that the

Town Attorney took almost 4-weeks to return the previous draft. Councilor Ryan stated had they

given the Town Attorney the updated version then, that they could have come back and had a

Special Meeting to talk about this after they gave it another legal review; especially for an

ordinance, noting that it was law. Councilor Buhle stated that she understood; and that she did

not think that any of the changes from the Town Attorney’s advisory draft were substantial

enough to warrant another legal review at this time. Councilor Ryan stated that he did not

understand the reason they would not let the Town Attorney make that determination; noting that

was what an Attorney does. Councilor Buhle stated sure. Councilor Ryan stated that Councilor

Buhle was not an Attorney. Councilor Buhle stated that she was not; and she stated that every

change that was made to the Attorney’s advisory draft Ordinance was verified through the

Connecticut General Statues; and they were in several other towns’ ordinances. Therefore, she

stated that she was not concerned, noting that furthermore; there was a Severability provision in

there, so if something was not valid that it did not invalidate the entire draft. She stated that she

did not think that they have presented an illegal draft with unenforceable expectations.

Councilor Barnes stated that they have expressed concerns that the proposed “An Ordinance

Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics and Ethics Commission” may be inconsistent

with the Town Charter. He stated that he did not refute that the prior comments did not include

that. However, he stated given the concern that was first shared by the Mayor that they ought to

ask the Town Attorney, given the totality of all the revisions, whether this draft was proper. He

also stated that they owed an ask as to whether it was inconsistent with the Town Charter as they

interpret it to be a concern. Councilor Buhle stated that she thought Councilor Barnes had a fair

question. But as she mentioned, and she was going to blunt, if everybody wanted to say they

have already spent $4,000 on the Attorney Review, why would the Attorney return a draft that

was inconsistent with the Town Charter; and if he did why they would pay $4,000 for an

Attorney to review something and give them back something that was inconsistent with their

Town Charter. Councilor Barnes noted that the Town Attorney removed language; Councilor

Buhle interjected stating that the Town Attorney did and the Town Council would determine the

consequence. Therefore, she stated that the Town Council was not going to vote to enforce a

penalty that would break a labor law, that breaks an agreement, or that violated the laws, because

the Ethics Commission does not determine the penalty associated with the violation. Councilor

Ryan stated the Town Council should not have to make that decision, noting that they should not

have anything in-place that could put them in a position, where they were violating a Collective

Bargaining Agreement; or anything like that. Councilor Buhle stated that they should be able to

terminate employees who were unethical, but not subject to a Bargaining Agreement. Councilor

Ryan stated that they were now using a Commission that had the power to change people’s lives.

Councilor Buhle stated that the Town Council was making that choice, not the Ethics

Commission. Councilor Ryan stated that the Ethics Commission was providing an Advisory

Opinion to the Town Council. Councilor Buhle stated “Yes” the Ethics Commission was

providing an Advisory Opinion about the Investigation. Councilor Ryan asked whether

Councilor Bule thought that the Town Council would go against the Ethics Commission’s

Advisory Opinion. Councilor Buhle stated that she did not think the Town Council would

choose consequences that would put the town in legal jeopardy; stating that she thought that this

was the primary focus. She stated that it would require a Super Majority of the Ethics

Commission after the Investigation and Hearing. Councilor Ryan stated that he thought that they

were getting into the weeds of the operations of the Ethics Commission. Chairman St. Vil stated

that he thought getting into the weeds was good. Councilor Ryan stated getting back to one of

his original statements this evening, which was that they should not be engineering the proposed

Ordinance at a full Town Council meeting.

Chairman St. Vil stated that he did not think that they were engineering the proposed draft “An

Ordinance Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics and Ethics Commission” noting that

the draft was done. He stated that the draft Ordinance has been available for everyone to read;

and for the folks that have read the proposal that theywould be aware of what Councilor Buhle

was saying this evening. Councilor Ryan stated that they have not had the draft Councilor Buhle

was presenting this evening to read. Chairman St. Vil stated the final draft Ordinance was

published on September 10, 2025; which was about a month ago. Councilor Barnes stated the

draft with the amendments Councilor Buhle presented this evening have not been made available

for folks to read. Chairman St. Vil stated the proposed amendments to the draft Ordinance do

nothing but provide clarification, noting what they were talking about were substantive things

that were embedded within the proposed Ordinance. Councilor Ryan stated the final version

dated September 10, 2025; as Chairman St. Vil said, has not gone through a final Town

Attorney’s review. Chairman St. Vil stated that the proposed Ordinance has had a final Attorney

review. Councilor R

Councilor Ryan stated the statement Chairman St. Vil made about the Mayor Allyn, Jr., should

be struck from the record. Chairman St. Vil stated that it should not be struck from the record,

because he could produce the record. Councilor Barnes provided clarification noting the letter

Chairman St. Vil was referring to was from Mayor Allyn, Jr. from 2007. Councilor Ryan stated

that the letter was not from anybody in the room this evening; and it was not from anybody

currently employed by the town.

Councilor Ryan stated what he was trying to get across this evening was that certain members of

the Town Council were rushing to approve the proposed Ordinance. Chairman St. Vil stated that

Councilor Ryan’s comment was an unsubstantiated statement. Councilor Brunelle stated that she

would say the opposite, that you guys were stalling. Councilor Ryan stated that they were not

stalling, that they actually wanted the proposed draft Ordinance to be reviewed by the people it

should be reviewed by. He questioned whether Councilor Brunelle had an idea of what the

proposal was going to cost the Town Clerk. Councilor Brunelle questioned whether Councilor

Ryan knew how much it was going to cost to have another review by the Town Attorney, when it

has already had a review. Councilor Ryan questioned whether Councilor Brunelle could answer

a question without asking another question. Councilor Brunelle stated that she could, but that

Councilor Ryan just did it too.

Councilor Ryan stated that they do not know the full impact of what this proposed draft

Ordinance was going to do. He stated that they have not had final reviews on this, and they have

had ample time to have final reviews. He stated the timing was conspicuous for trying to push

this across the line, three quarters baked, noting that the proposed Ordinance was not ready to be

passed. He stated that he wanted to clarify, stating that he was not saying that they were going to

kill it; that he was saying that it should go back to Committee to be reworked, to have the right

stakeholders involved, and to have a final legal review; and then bring it back to the Town

Council. He stated that they should take away all of the reason that this should not be passed.

Chairman St. Vil stated people that have something to fear would always have a reason.

Councilor Ryan stated now Chairman St. Vil was making unsubstantiated statements.

Councilor Buhle stated that she was going to repeat her earlier comment, noting that this was her

strongest statement and what she feels was absolutely the most important thing. She stated they

went through several meetings over, and over, and that she, Councilor Dombrowski, and

Councilor Brunelle all submitted their own drafts to Administrative Assistant Roxanne Maher,

who worked tirelessly to compile the things that they focused on into one draft to send the Town

Attorney. She stated that she would be frank, that every single town that has an Ethics

Commission or Ordinance, had significant Town Clerk involvement, noting that was a part of

their job. Councilor Ryan thanked Councilor Buhle stated that she just proved his point.

Councilor Buhle stated that she was not dismissing that; and that was the reason that she tried to

meet with the Town Clerk. Councilor Ryan questioned when Councilor Buhle asked the Town

Clerk to meet. Councilor Buhle stated that she sent the Town Clerk an email the night of the

Public Hearing (September 29, 2025); and they set a meeting date for October 7, 2025; and on

October 6, 2025 the Town Clerk rescheduled the meeting. Councilor Buhle stated that she

respected boundaries and that she understood that the Town Clerk had things going on and that

was fine; and they rescheduled a date to meet. Councilor Ryan stated that Councilor Buhle was

still proving his point that the proposed Ordinance was not reviewed by the right people.

Councilor Buhle stated that what she was telling them was that the Town Clerk’s input was

important, but that her duties and job of the proposed Ordinance would not be eliminated no

matter how many times she asked the Town Clerk for her opinion, noting that had to be a part of

the Town Clerk’s job. Councilor Ryan stated that they did not have the person whose job was

going to be the most directly affected involved in the development of this document during the

last two-years. Councilor Buhle these items were on the Agenda for a year; and she knew that

Mayor Allyn knew the proposed Ordinance was going to the Town Attorney. She that she could

not tell town employees what to do; as she had been asked not to, when she asked for the Town

Charter to be updated on the website. She stated that she was not going to step in and overstep,

she was not the liaison between the town employees, stating that was not her job.

Chairman St. Vil stated let’s have a meaningful discussion. He stated that Councilor Ryan was

making his point clear, that there was inadequate review of the proposed Ordinance, unless he

had a different point. He stated in summary that was the point that Councilor Ryan was trying to

make; and that Councilor Buhle was trying to refute that. Councilor Ryan stated that was not his

point. He stated that he already made his points; and that he did not want Chairman St. Vil to

paraphrase what his points were. Chairman St. Vil stated that he wanted to make sure that his

fellow Councilors have the opportunity to express their thoughts. He asked that if he

summarized Councilor Ryan comments incorrectly that would ask Councilor Ryan to correct

him. He asked whether Councilor Buhle had anything to add. Councilor Buhle responded that

she had nothing to add, but that Councilor Garcia-Irizarry has not spoken yet.

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry commented on the following:

· Town Charter - Power of Investigation- Councilor Garcia-Irizarry noted as an example that

if there was a Planning & Zoning Commission violation; or Inland Wetlands and Water Courses

Commission violation that those investigation would be done by Planning & Zoning

Commission or the Inland Wetlands and Water Courses Commission. However, stated if the

Town Council was the only one that was allowed to do an investigation, why these violations

were being delegated to those Commissioners.

Councilor Dombrowski addressed Councilor Garcia-Irizarry’s examples of the Planning &

Zoning investigations for a violation; and the Inland Wetland and Watercourses investigations

for violations, and he explained that because they were land use matters that the State Statute

strips that authority from the Town Council. He noted that State Statutes specifically state that

once the Town Council established an Independent Zoning or Planning Commission that the

Town Council could have zero input or influence on those matters.

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry stated that basically then they were in violation of the Town Charter.

Councilor Dombrowski stated that it was not a violation of the Town Charter, explaining that

they have to considered Connecticut State Statue Section 128 “Municipal Powers Act” which

was calls out the specific sections for the duties of the Town Council and local Town

Government; versus Section 8 of the General Statutes which talks about what Land Use Matters

were. He stated that those powers were initiated by different sections of the State Statutes.

Councilor Garcia-Irizary stated that the Town Charter does not specifically say what kinds of

investigations the Town Council was allowed to do, and what kind they were not allowed to do.

Councilor Dombrowski stated that it does specify that the Municipal Powers Act was what

grants the Town Council its authority.

· Past Fraud Matters- Councilor Garcia-Irizarry questioned who did the past investigations.

Mayor Allyn stated that the Town Attorney and Forensic Auditor conducted the investigations.

Councilor Dombrowski stated that they were hired by the Town Council.

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry stated for the past issues, that the Town Council asked somebody

outside of them to do the investigation; and to then report back to them. She state that it would

be the same as the Ethics Commission doing the investigation, and then reporting to the Town

Council. She stated that they do that for many things. She stated that there were a lot of different

investigations going on here in the town, that were not done by the Town Council, for obvious

reasons, noting that does not seem to conflict with the Town Charter.

· Costs for Ethics Commission - Councilor Garcia-Irizarry stated that she wanted to address

the concerns that many people had regarding the cost of having an Ethics Commission. She stated

that she did go to the budget of the Preston and Norwich to see what they were spending for their

Ethics Commission. She stated this year Preston allocated about $600 for the Ethics Commission;

and Norwich allocated $500 in their budget for the Ethics Commission.

Councilor Ryan questioned whether those town’s budgets were for the Ethics Commission’s

operation of the Commission; or for the pursuit of the legal issues. He stated those budget

amounts sounded to him like the costs for printing paper and other operational costs.

Councilor Barnes stated that he wanted to refer back to something that happened in the past. He

stated when they cherry pick and look at a budget line item, that sometimes they draw inaccurate

conclusions. He noted that during the Fiscal Year 2025/2026 Budget process in looking at

certain employees in other towns budgets and making a judgement to only find out later that

town’s budget for that particular role was actually also added with another line item. He stated

that he was not suggesting that the research was not valid, but that simply looking at the budget

and seeing a line item does not assure them that the cost of that was solely in that line item. He

stated that information could only come from a conversation with the Finance Department from

that town to confirm that there were not other costs that they would not have otherwise seen, that

were associated with that activity.

Councilor Dombrowski stated that some towns, including Ledyard, sometimes have a line item

in the budget that has a token amount to hold the line item, so that funding could be transferred

in from other places to pay for those expenses, if needed. He stated without looking at their

overall Legal Budget that they have spent in previous years on Ethics, that they could not just

look at the line item to figure out what those costs were.

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry stated her point was that for every Commission and Committee they

have in this town, that a certain amount of money has been assigned to each one of them; and if

they had a legal issue that they would have to use the Town Attorney. She stated basically the

Ethics Commission would look for an Advisory Opinion from the Town Attorney. She stated it

was not like the Ethics Commission would have to do everything every step of the way, with the

Town Attorney holding their hand. She stated the Ethics Commission would have a procedure to

follow and once they get into a certain position, if they need it, that they ask for the Legal

Advisory Opinion. She stated they were not obligated to ask the Town Attorney for an Advisory

Opinion, if they do not need it. She stated that there could be legal costs, and she noted as an

example that the town was going to have pay a bunch of money to the Lawyers because the

company was not doing their job; noting that they could not have predicted that. She stated her

point was that they could have a year with no Ethics Complaints and have no legal fees; and

maybe the next year they have some legal fees. She stated the Town Attorney did not have to

hold the Ethics Commissions hand every step of the way until the end. She stated that it would

only be at a certain step when the Ethics Commission asked for the Legal Advisory Opinion. She

stated that she understood that people have a concern about the legal costs, noting that it was a

valid concern, but that she was really not concerned. She stated that she trusted their employees,

she trusted their town officials, and she did not foresee a big amount of Complaints coming into

the Ethics Commission because she trusted that everyone was ethical. But as Councilor Buhle

has said in the past “Just because we do not need something right now does not mean that it was

not useful. The best time to have it was when they do not need it; and it was better to have

something and not need it; than to need something and not have it.” Councilor Garcia-Irizarry

went on to state that she was not concerned about going through a lot of costs. She stated that

everyone here was very dedicated and that was the same with their employees, so she was not

worried.

Councilor Buhle stated that this was the last time she was going to say this. To settle the Town

Charter portion of this document that they either have to accept that the Town Attorney sent

them a document that was in conflict with their Town Charter; and if the Town Attorney sent

them a draft Ordinance that was in conflict with their Town Charter that she would question why

they sent it for an Attorney review. She stated in the draft Ordinance that the Town Attorney

proposed the entire portion for the Commission, the Hearing, the Investigation, all of it was the

Attorney’s words. She stated if the draft the Town Attorney sent them was not in conflict with

the Town Charter, then it was not in conflict with the Town Charter; and she was not concerned

about it.

Councilor Barnes stated after two years of work and the discussion regarding “What was an

Investigation” noting that Councilor Garcia-Irizarry made some good points, in that there were

some things that they may do that were considered an investigation that were consistent with the

Town Charter. He stated why they would not use this opportunity to say “Town Attorney, thank

you for all the work to date. We are pleased to share our final version. We would ask for your

concurrence on it; and we would ask to clarify questions we have around the Town Charter, and

whether Section 9 was in conflict with this.” Councilor Barnes stated that it was a simple ask, it

was a final review; and they would get statement to put on the record as a legal opinion to that

point. He stated outside of that they were basing it on conjecture. He stated that they had many

engineers and professionals in other areas amongst them, noting that none of them were

attorneys. He stated even if he was an attorney that in his role on the Town Council, he would

have to report himself to the Ethics Commission, because he could not make a judgement given

the seat he was in. He stated why after two-years they would not ask the Town Attorney was

ridiculous to him. He stated that they could schedule a Special Town Council meeting the very

next day to vote, however, he stated that they should not take a vote without having feedback

from the Town Attorney on the final draft of the Ordinance and regarding the question whether it

was inconsistent with the Town Charter.

Councilor Ryan stated he listened to Councilor Garcia-Irizarry comments and that he agreed

with her in that he hoped that there was never a need to address any ethics issues within the

town. He stated with that being said, that perhaps they could look at Councilor Garcia-Irrizary’s

statement in a different way. He stated if she implicitly trusted the town employees, and she

believed they were going to do the right thing then what the Town currently had in-place seemed

to be working. He stated to be clear that with the proposed Ordinance that they were opening a

door for additional attorney fees that they cannot predict. He stated he understood that for Land

Use issues they have had to approve additional funds that they could not have predicted; which

was the reason they have a token amount in the budget line, noting that every year he asks why

they cannot predict these costs better. He stated Councilor Garcia-Irizarry may be right, that one

year the legal fees for the Ethics Commission may be zero; but that the next year the legal fees

may blow them out of the water, noting that they may even need to do some level of assessment

or budget transfer. He stated that it would depend on what happens and what their funds would

cover. He stated that this was a concern for him because they do not know; and they were

creating another avenue for another unknown in their budget.

Councilor Ryan concluded his comments by stating the vote that was being taken tonight was on

a proposed Ordinance that has not had a final review by the Town Attorney, had not had a final

review by the Human Resources Director, and had not had a final review by the Town Clerk, but

has had the benefit of being reviewed by the Parks & Recreation Director; and that he thought

that Councilor Buhle addressed his concerns. Councilor Buhle stated that she did. Councilor

Ryan stated that it was still troublesome to him that the other individuals that would be directly

affected by this proposed Ordinance have not been considered. He stated to Councilor Barnes

point, that the Town Attorney has not had a chance to do a final review, and to answer the

questions that have been brought up.

Councilor Dombrowski stated that he wanted to close with a final comment, noting that they

have had some strong disagreement and healthy dialogue this evening. He thanked everyone who

worked hard on the proposed “An Ordinance Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics

and Ethics Commission”. He stated whether he agreed with the proposal or not, that it was

immaterial, noting the hard work that the Administration Committee did to put the proposal

forward, and the work that the full Town Council has done in reviewing, commenting, and for

the thought behind their discussion. Therefore, he stated that he wanted to thank everyone.

Councilor Garica-Irizarry stated that they could have the Town Attorney look at the proposed

Ordinance and give him a deadline to return his comments back to the Town Council by a

certain date.

Chairman St. Vil stated that Councilor Buhle laid out the process that was used, which included

the support of the members of the Administration Committee and others to develop the proposed

draft Ordinance, which was inclusive of a substantial legal review; noting that the end the

product, was presented before the Town Council this evening. He stated as Councilor Buhle has

stated, that it has been piece meal, noting a portion was documented via email stating this what

they concurred with, and a portion was verbal - “You can have this if you want it”. He stated

nonetheless, the aggregate has been reviewed, not together, but that the aggregate has been

reviewed.

Chairman St. Vil continued by outlining the process for the town to adopt an Ordinance as

follows:

· If the Town Council chooses to vote on the Ordinance, and the proposed Ordinance fails it

ends - Chairman St. Vil stated that he would call for a vote this evening.

· If the Town Council approved the proposed Ordinance, the document has to be certified

within seven (7) days; and presented to the Mayor.

· If the Mayor was concerned with the Town Council’s due diligence; and a legal review, the

Mayor could have a legal review done. Chairman St. Vil stated the legal review does not

have to be done by the Town Council, noting that he was confident with the draft Ordinance,

and that it did not need that extra layer. He stated when he votes that he would be voting with

a good conscious that their legal aspects were covered, not only by the written verbiage of

the Town Charter, but by the verbiage within the document. He stated that he thought that

the question of a legal review was being framed as if it was not done, and it has been done,

or it could never be. He stated that was not a true statement. He stated the Mayor could do a

legal review; and if the Mayor was not confident with the proposed Ordinance that he does

not have to certify the document. If the Mayor does not certify the Ordinance it would come

back to the Town Council.

· The Town Council would get to vote on the Ordinance again, should they vote on it this

evening and it passes.

Chairman St. Vil stated that they have to reflect on the process that was followed that was

comprised of work beginning in July, 2024 through today. Not only that process, but the process

their predecessors started back in 2007; where someone said “I think this is a good idea, lets take

a look at it”; and the input they have received and the due diligence that has been done.

Councilor Bule stated that she had one last comment, noting that her thought regarding an

additional legal review was requested, that all they were striking were specific things that were

in conflict with State Statute and the Town Charter, that was it.

Chairman St. Vil stated that this was where collectively they have to debate, and they have to be

fair. He questioned whether Councilor Buhle was saying that the competing opinion was

whether there were further changes that should happen now. Councilor Buhle stated that she was

saying that she believed everything that was in this draft Ordinance was legal and meets the

legal requirements. She stated that there were changes to condense; and that she did not think

that changes should be proposed for the sake of condensation; whereas the legal review from the

Town Attorney should be “Does this pass the legal test - Yes or No”. She stated if the answer

was “Yes” there should be no question or worry.

Chairman St. Vil stated he was not asking for a legal review; and he was not sending the

proposed Ordinance back to the Administration Committee for a legal review. He stated what he

was saying was that the Mayor has the right to ask for a legal review. He stated the Mayor would

do as he sees fit, which was under his purview. He stated he was checking with Councilor Buhle,

as the author of the proposed “An Ordinance Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics

and Ethics Commission”, to confirm that she did not have any concerns. Councilor Buhle stated

that she did not have any concerns regarding the proposed Ordinance.

Chairman St. Vil stated that he appreciated everyone’s comments, he appreciated the debate, and

he appreciated the discussion. He stated most of all that he appreciated the input from their

residents and from their department heads that they heard at their last meeting, both those who

were in the room; and the ones who were not in the room. He stated the ones who were not in

the room were just as opinionated. He stated that some of the comments he heard was the

frustration with what was going on in the Federal Government and the stalemates that were

happening; and the lack of progress that was happening. He stated that there was a perception

that Municipal Governance was in a similar stalemate where they cannot make progress and they

cannot make decisions; and they cannot improve their community.

Chairman St. Vil stated it was his opinion that the only thing the proposed Ordinance does was

ensure folks conduct themselves in an ethical way; and it uses the right embedded in the Town

Charter to have a standalone Commission on an investigatory basis to determine what was

potentially ethical or was potentially not ethical. He stated that it would take a super majority by

the Ethics Commission for anyone’s lives to be impacted. He stated that it was either you were

for it; or you were not it.

Chairman St. Vil called for a Vote on the Amendments as presented earlier this evening, noted

again below:

v MOTION to amend the “An Ordinance Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics And

Ethics Commission” as follows:

Section 4, paragraph 3b, remove the phrase “spouse or minor child” and replace it

with “or immediate family of”.

· Section 4, paragraph 8, Town Employee definition will be modified to add the phrase,

“including outsourced administrative or executive professionals, including but not limited

to consultants and the Town Attorney”

· Section 5, paragraph 3, add the phrase, “unless the contract or purchase order is awarded

through the traditional bid or quote process and conflict is disclosed.”

· Section 5, paragraph 4, add the following sentence, “This provision does not apply to Town

employees or Board of Education employees providing recreational services including but

not limited to classes, coaching, camp counseling through Ledyard Parks and Recreation

or Ledyard Board of Education”.

· Section 7, paragraph 1b6, add the phrase “unless disclosed to the Ethics Commission.”

Moved by Councilor Buhle, seconded by Councilor Brunelle

Discussion: (see above)

VOTE: 5 - 3 Approved and so declared (Barnes, Dombrowski, Ryan not in favor)

Chairman St. Vil called for a Vote on the

Main Motion as amended this evening as noted below:

MOTION to adopt a proposed “An Ordinance Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics

and Ethics Commission” as presented in the draft dated September 10, October 8, .2025.

Moved by Councilor Buhle, seconded by Councilor Brunelle

Discussion: Councilor Barnes thanked Chairman St. Vil for providing the process assuming the

proposed Ordinance passed this evening; and he questioned whether there was a certain

timeline for the Mayor’s review. Chairman St. Vil noted that the Town Charter; Chapter III;

Section 12, provided the process noting the following:

· 7- Days for the Town Council to certify the Ordinance and forward to the Mayor.

· 5-Days for the Mayor to Approve or Disapprove the Ordinance.

If the Mayor does not sign or veto’s the Ordinance:

· 14-Days after the Mayor veto’s the Ordinance the Town Council can approve the Ordinance

by a super majority (6 Affirmative votes).

Chairman St. Vil stated that the Town Charter does not state calendar days or business days.

Mayor Allyn, III, stated that he would be seeking a legal review of the “An Ordinance

Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code of Ethics and Ethics Commission” as presented in the

draft dated October 8, 2025. Therefore, he asked that he be provided with the a red line

document identifying all additions and deletions that were made to the Town Attorney’s July 14,

2025 red lined draft; including the amendments that were voted on tonight; noting that would

make it easier for the Town Attorney to review.

Councilor Ryan stated that he takes issue with Chairman St. Vil’s comment that “You are either

for it; or your not for it”. He stated that it was not whether they were for it; or not for it,

explaining that there were concerns about the proposed “An Ordinance Establishing a Town of

Ledyard Code of Ethics and Ethics Commission” that have not been addressed. He stated he

wanted to be clear, that although he was not going to speak for anybody, that he would like to

think that everybody on this Town Council had a preference to enforce ethical behavior. He

stated it was his opinion that there was no room for unethical behavior in any role in life. He

stated it was just about the way they were going about putting the proposed Ordinance in-place.

He stated in this case there were specific concerns that he outlined; and they have not been

addressed. He stated referencing what others have said; that they have had years to address those

concerns; and years to involve the right stakeholders from the very beginning. He stated that

apparently there was due diligence done to identify what other municipalities have done with

regard to the effects of having an Ethics Commission; and who it involved in terms of

department heads; and it was known that their department heads were not involved even after

the due diligence was done. He stated it did not seem like it was a big ask to make sure the

department heads who have not been met with have the benefit to work with the Administration

Committee to come up with a final draft; and that final draft be reviewed by the Town Attorney,

prior to the Ordinance going to the Mayor. He stated at this point it felt like it was a throw over

the wall, and let the Mayor handle it.

Chairman St. Vil stated that it was tough to lead, and it was tough to get involved with

something that you may not be cognizant of; but your aware of. He stated by process Councilor

Ryan’s concerns have been addressed and adjudicated, however, not in his favor. He stated

because Councilor Ryan’s concerns were not addressed to his satisfaction, that Councilor Ryan

was assuming that they have not been addressed, noting that if it was not an accurate statement.

He stated that this was the same thing that was going on in the Federal Government. He stated

what was going on in the Federal Government was; “If you do not agree with me then I am not

moving forward”. He stated “Let’s move forward”. Councilor Ryan stated those were inaccurate

statements. He stated that his concerns have not been addressed in a factual manner, period-full

stop.

Councilor Buhle stated the job of the Town Clerk as listed in the proposed Ordinance was the

job of the Town Clerk listed in every other town’s ordinance. Councilor Ryan questioned why

Councilor Buhle did not involve the Town Clerk when they started drafting the document.

Councilor Buhle stated that involving the Town Clerk would not have changed the proposed

Ordinance. Councilor Ryan questioned whether Councilor Buhle thought that if the Town Clerk

had known that the proposed Ordinance was coming that she would have wanted to account for

that in her budget. Councilor Brunelle questioned whether that was their responsibility.

Councilor Dombrowski stated that it was the Administration Committee’s was to involve all

stakeholders. He stated, we as the Administration Committee, failed to get all of the

stakeholders, as far as Human Resources, Town Clerk, and Parks & Recreation, involved in the

discussion early on in the process. Chairman St. Vil stated that he did not think Councilor

Dombrowki’s statement was accurate, because those individuals presented at the September 24,

2025 Public Hearing, and provided their input, which was addressed. Councilor Ryan stated that

their input was not addressed.

Councilor Buhle stated that she could not change the procedural portions of the proposed

Ordinance that included the Town Clerk because the Town Clerk was the body that gives an

Oath in their town. She went on to note that the Town Clerk’s primary concern was what

happens in her absence when she may be on vacation, or she was not available to accept an

Ethics Complaint. Councilor Buhle stated she discussed this with the Town Attorney and that in

the absence of the Town Clerk that the Assistant Clerk was the Acting Town Clerk the same

way that she would sign a marriage license or another document. She noted that she and the

Town Clerk discussed that in person either after the Administration Committee’s September 10,

2025; meeting or after the September 24, 2025 Public Hearing at which the Town Clerk spoke,

noting that this addressed the Town Clerk’s biggest concern, which were about not being

available. Councilor Buhle stated that the Town Clerk stated that one of her primary concerns

was not being able to take time off; or not being available to accept an Ethics Complaint being a

problem. Therefore, she stated that portion of it was addressed. She went on to state that the

Town Clerk suggested changing the document from being submitted “Under Oath” to a

“Notary”. Councilor Buhle stated let’s be honest, signing something with a Notary, was just

saying I’m the one who signed it, it was not signing it Under Oath; and they did not have the

same meaning. She stated an Oath was more important for the situation that it was, and which

applied to 19 people in the town. She stated that she did not think that this was a significant

burden, in the same way the Town Council gets Sworn -In Under Oath when they were elected,

and things like that. She stated that she was telling them that the Town Clerk’s concerns have

been addressed in-part. Councilor Buhle stated that there were parts of it that she could not

quickly delegate to another person or completely change. She stated the documentation that

includes the Town Clerk, as the Body, was the language from the Town Attorney, which tells

her that the Town Clerk was the appropriate person to handle the Ethics Complaints; and the

duties and processes. She stated that she understands the Town Clerk’s concern, however, those

would still be the Town Clerk’s job regardless. Councilor Ryan noted that they knew all along

that the Town Clerk was going to have additional responsibilities if the

This was Approved and so declared.

APPROVED AND SO DECLARED

Jessica Buhle

RESULT:

MOVER:

April Brunelle

SECONDER:

Brunelle, Buhle, Garcia-Irizarry, Saccone, and St. Vil

Barnes, Dombrowski, and Ryan

Parad

AYE:

NAY:

EXCUSED:

Chairman St. Vil noted that Iten #7 was not necessary this evening.

MOTION to set a Public Hearing (Hybrid Format - Video Conference and In-Person) Public

Hearing date to be held on October 22, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. to be held in Council Chambers, Town

Hall Annex, 741 Colonel Ledyard Highway, Ledyard, Connecticut, to receive comments and

recommendations regarding a proposed “An Ordinance Establishing a Town of Ledyard Code Of

Ethics And Ethics Commission” ..

NO ACTION

RESULT:

MOTION to grant a bid waiver to P & H Construction & Septic Services LLC, of Uncasville,

Connecticut, in the amount of $29,700 due to receiving fewer than the required three bids in

response to Bid #072-PI-35 (Septic System 70 Christy Hill Road) in accordance with Ordinance

#200-001 (rev 1) “An Ordinance for Purchasing”. ..end

Moved by Councilor Buhle, seconded by Councilor Saccone

Discussion: Mayor Allyn, III explained that the Town has been involved in the Small Cities

Program Income Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program for over a decade. He noted that the Housing

Rehabilitation Loan Program was a Revolving Loan Program that was funded by the State and

partially funded by American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Funds. He stated the program provides no

interest loans to residents who qualified for certain/serious home repairs such as the replacement of

a furnace, new roof, septic system, etc. He stated the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program was not

for people to beautify their homes or put granite countertops in their kitchen. He stated as

Homeowners pay their loans back the town could then loan the money to another qualifying family.

Mayor Allyn went on to explain that the Septic System at 70 Christy Hill Road, Gales Ferry, failed

and needed to be replaced; and he noted that the homeowner/applicant has qualified for the Housing

Rehabilitation Loan Program. He stated because the Housing Rehabilitation Loan Program Funding

was being used the town was required to follow its’s purchasing procedures as provided in

Ordinance #200-001 (rev. 1) “An Ordinance for Purchasing; which required the solicitation of bids

for the work. He stated because of the location was a challenging site in terms of the where the

septic system was, noting that that they have to pump it up hill; stating that may have been a reason

only one Bid was received. He stated that he checked with the local septic system installers, and

they were aware of the Request for Proposals. He stated that because only one bid was received, a

Bid Waiver has been requested.

Councilor Barnes questioned whether 70 Christy Hill Road was a town-owned property. Mayor

Allyn stated it was a privately owned property; and he explained that the Housing Rehabilitation

Loan Program was a Zero Interest Loan Program for privately owned homes, that met the required

income guidelines, and had a need for a critical improvement. He stated the Loan was required to be

paid back to the town if the property owner refinances the home, sells or transfers the home.

Councilor Garcia-Irizarry stated last year there was a couple who appealed to the Finance

Committee because they had previously qualified and received funding from Housing Rehabilitation

Loan Program; and they were refinancing their home; so they were looking to defer paying back the

Housing Rehabilitation Loan.

Mayor Allyn stated that Councilor Garcia-Irizarry was correct, noting in 2017 a couple received

about $32,820.40+ funding from the Housing Rehabilitation Revolving Loan Program to make

improvements at their home on Highlands Drive. He stated because they were refinancing their

home that they were seeking a “Subordinate Agreement” to defer the paying back the 0% interest

Housing Rehabilitation Loan to the town. However, he stated because they were refinancing their

home, which was one of the terms for the Loan to be repaid to the town, at their January 17, 2024

meeting Finance Committee denied the request. He stated the Loan was paid back to the town

which then provided funding that the town could loan to another qualifying family.

VOTE: 8 - 0 Approved and so declared

APPROVED AND SO DECLARED

Jessica Buhle

RESULT:

MOVER:

Tony Saccone

SECONDER:

Barnes, Brunelle, Buhle, Dombrowski, Garcia-Irizarry, Ryan, Saccone, and

St. Vil

AYE: