Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Sale Veterans Cemetery topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Middletown council rejects sale of 91‑acre parcel proposed for veterans cemetery expansion after hours of public opposition
Summary
After more than two hours of public comment and council debate focused on deed restrictions, aquifer protection and lack of neighborhood notice, the Middletown Common Council voted 11–0 (one absence) to reject the proposed conveyance of a 91‑acre parcel to the State of Connecticut for expansion of the State Veterans Cemetery.
The Middletown Common Council on Nov. 12 rejected a proposed sale of roughly 91 acres of city land on Bowling/Bow Lane to the State of Connecticut for expansion of the State Veterans Cemetery after an extended public hearing and roll‑call vote.
During a packed hybrid hearing, residents and local groups overwhelmingly opposed the conveyance, raising concerns about deed restrictions that were placed on the land when it transferred to the city in 2005, the parcel’s location within an aquifer recharge area, and a lack of timely neighborhood notification. Ralph Wilson, a nearby property owner, told the council the deed contains restrictive covenants intended to keep the land for recreational and agricultural purposes and urged members to "deny the resolution and leave the parcel as it is." The clerk later summarized nine written letters, all in opposition.
State veterans officials and supporters urged the council to help keep the cemetery in Middletown. Commissioner Ron Welch, Connecticut Department of Veterans Affairs, said the VA requires an annex and that creating a new cemetery elsewhere would cost "at least $15,000,000," arguing the state has limited options for keeping veterans’ burials local. Deputy Commissioner Joe Dineo provided occupancy figures, saying the existing state cemetery performed about 273 in‑ground cremation burials last year and that "we have about 738 spaces left," estimating room for roughly "3 years and 3 months" for in‑ground cremations if current rates continue.
Council debate turned on legal and procedural questions about the advertised resolution and whether to vote it down as written or consider an amendment. General Counsel confirmed a motion to reject the advertised resolution was in order, and the council took a roll‑call vote that produced 11 votes in favor of rejecting the conveyance and one absence. Mayor Benjamin d. Florsheim announced the sale "is not approved this evening." The council did not adopt any conveyance documents at the meeting.
The council president and several members said they intend to continue dialog with residents and the Department of Veterans Affairs; some council members suggested forming a committee to identify alternative sites and work collaboratively with veterans' officials. The motion to reject the sale represents a procedural defeat for the specific conveyance presented to the council that night; the record shows ongoing work and follow‑up is expected rather than a permanent closure of the issue.
