On Friday evening, a story broke relating to turmoil within the Old Lyme WPCA. The CT Examiner, who has done the most reporting on sewers in town, carried a story entitled Old Lyme Flips on Sewers Spurring Resignations in Protest. Passions have run hot against the sewers among the Sound View residents and this is not a dynamic alien to our beach community.
In Federalist #10 (1787), James Madison addressed the Mischief of Factions, meaning when a group unites in a common interest adverse to the rights or permanent, aggregate interests of the community as a whole. Factions arise inevitably from human nature and the natural, unequal distribution of property and interests. Factions bring instability driven by selfish passions taking hold at the expense of the public good. The “mischief” of factions lies in their potential to subvert democratic governance, wherein a minority faction can tyrannize the majority through conspiracy or undue influence. The story about the Town of Old Lyme’s WPCA mentioned above brought this idea to mind over the weekend. OLSBA has not escaped similar dynamics over the past several years, perhaps manifesting in the serial resignations of our Association Presidents: Bryan Even, Diane Duhaime, and most recently, Paul Yellen.
We have a Consent Order from the State of Connecticut mandating that we address our community pollution problem stemming from outdated septic systems by installing sewers. This pollution threatens public health (e.g., via contaminated water sources), environmental integrity (e.g., algal blooms harming marine life), and economic value (e.g., property values, etc.). This sewer upgrade, while costly, represents the only effective and economic solution for the community’s long-term welfare.
To be clear, the costs of this project are substantial, and we acknowledge that affordability is a real and legitimate concern for many residents—particularly those on fixed incomes and longtime homeowners facing unexpected financial burdens. These concerns deserve to be heard and addressed in good faith. However, there is a meaningful difference between residents who share the community’s goals but need help managing the financial burden, and a smaller contingent that has channeled affordability concerns into organized obstruction. This latter group prioritizes avoiding or indefinitely delaying the project over finding workable solutions, even when delays increase the very costs they highlight. Their objections, obstructions, and tactics result in further delays that drive up expenses for all. This is not theory — this is experience. We have watched costs rise as time has passed.
A faction, united by a “common impulse of interest,” hopes to avoid the inevitable costs of the sewer system, as well as desperately needed road and storm drainage improvements. Their passion and cohesion allow them to amplify their voice disproportionately, as we have seen at the Town level, by organizing and taking control of the Water Pollution Control Authority (WPCA). The “mischief” manifests in how this faction’s resistance harms the “permanent and aggregate interests of the community.” The sewer system is a mandated public works project aimed at remedying a shared problem—pollution that affects all residents, wildlife, and future generations. By obstructing it, the faction imposes externalities: continued environmental degradation, potential health risks, and legal penalties for the Association if the state mandate is ignored. We cannot afford these additional, unnecessary costs being imposed by temporary, minority interests at the long-term expense of the majority.
Are we witnessing what Madison foretold, a self-interested minority that can paralyze decision-making? Madison feared that in compact communities, factions could “wrest” control via factious leaders or conspiracies, leading to “mutability in the public councils” and injustice. The faction’s tactics have already forced costly delays, threats by the State of imposing $25,000/day fines, and rumors of neighbor on neighbor lawsuits. This instability undermines the democratic process, even in our own association where the majority decisively endorsed the project through three separate votes in 2012 (135–30), 2025 (105–53), and 2026 (57–43).
In essence, this resistance isn’t mere NIMBYism (Not In My Backyard); it is textbook factional mischief, where private gain trumps communal necessity, risking the very stability Madison sought to safeguard in the Constitution. It underscores his timeless insight, that unchecked, such groups erode the social compact, turning shared challenges into prolonged conflicts.
We are called to honor the will of our membership. Our leadership must uphold the majority and restore stability. We should move forward now with a unified focus on executing this project efficiently to minimize costs, maximize subsidies, and dedicate ourselves to the permanent well-being of all residents and the generations that follow us at Old Lyme Shores.
Communication about this project must be more consistent and more substantive than it has been in the past. Perhaps in sharing more information, more frequently, with the membership we can establish a dialog. It is important that members feel that their concerns are truly being heard and incorporated into the actions and decision-making of our governing boards.
We will successfully complete this project and invite the cleanliness, excellence, and beautification that our Association deserves.
A Commitment to Our Neighbors: Addressing Genuine Hardship
Moving forward with resolve does not mean moving forward without compassion. We recognize that some of our neighbors face genuine financial hardship, and we refuse to let this project force any longtime resident from their home. To that end, the Association commits to actively pursuing every available avenue of relief.
This has included and will continue to include identifying and applying for state and federal grants designated for water infrastructure and pollution remediation;
- Working with the State of Connecticut, the Town of Old Lyme, Old Colony Beach Association, and Miami Beach Association, to structure benefit assessment payment plans that extend costs over manageable timeframes;
- Exploring eligibility for community development grants and loans, Connecticut’s Clean Water Fund, and any applicable hardship provisions under the state’s sewer assessment statutes; and
- Advocating for the establishment of a dedicated hardship fund—supported by a combination of public resources and community contributions—to assist residents who demonstrate genuine financial need.
I invite those interested to assist me in putting together a proposal for the Board of Governors to consider forming a Hardship Relief Committee to coordinate these efforts, serve as a resource for affected residents, and ensure that no one falls through the cracks. Our goal is clear: we complete this project together, and we do it in a way that reflects the character of this community—one that looks after its own.
John Cunningham
OLSBA President