Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fish Pier Lawsuit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fish Pier platform dispute leads to litigation and higher legal budget for Selectmen
Summary
A long-running dispute over a Fish Pier platform prompted public debate at Selectmen meetings and a lawsuit by Sunshine Seafood. The town increased its legal budget and discussed options including refunding $11,000 to resolve the claim; the Selectmen said access and safety drove their decisions.
A dispute over personal property and a loading platform at Stonington’s Fish Pier escalated into litigation and budget planning this winter, officials said.
The issue surfaced repeatedly at Selectmen and Harbor Committee meetings, where fishermen, dealers and other harbor users described competing needs for limited waterfront space. Supporters of the platform said it provides essential loading access; critics, including some Selectmen, said personal items parked at the pier impede truck access and create safety and navigation concerns. At several meetings stakeholders and residents urged the board to balance competing uses of the pier.
Town Manager Billings told the Selectmen that she had been served with a lawsuit from Sunshine Seafood related to votes and actions concerning the platform. During January budget deliberations the town discussed adding to the legal budget to respond to the claim; Selectman John Steed and TM Billings discussed a legal-cost estimate in the range of $25,000–$30,000 and raised the option of refunding Sunshine Seafood’s $11,000 as part of a potential resolution.
The dispute has produced differing accounts about prior votes and Harbor Committee minutes. At the March 1 meeting multiple harbor users including Hilton Turner, Jim Eaton and others debated the platform’s role; no immediate Selectmen vote removed the platform at that meeting. Participants described the challenge of accommodating up to 80 boats and multiple dealers while preserving safe navigation and access for trucks and hoists.
The board recorded motions to increase the legal line in its budget and directed the town manager to work with counsel. The addition to the legal budget was presented as a budget-line change rather than a settlement decision; any refund or settlement would require further authorization.
Votes and other formal actions tied to harbor operations and pier management — including motions authorizing studies, directing the town manager to pursue purchase-and-sale agreements on waterfront properties, and appointing a new harbormaster — were also recorded across meetings this winter and spring.
Next steps: the Selectmen said they will continue coordination with the Harbor Committee and with counsel; any settlement or return of funds would be decided in a future meeting or through the budget/town-meeting process.
