By Dawn De Busk

Staff Writer

NAPLES — At some weddings, seating is either on the groom’s side or seating is on the bride’s side.

There is a choice of where to sit. And, a person can only sit on one side.  

At the Primary Polls in June, there will two choices on the ballot: the citizen’s petition ordinance and the town’s ordinance. These are two different ordinances governing the same thing: paid-for events such as weddings, anniversaries, retirement parties and family reunions held in a barn on rural property.

People can only vote for one ordinance. 

Both ordinances will allow a landowner to build or renovate a barn on the property, and to rent out the structure for events. Essentially, both ordinances would allow property-owners to operate this type of business with restrictions but the details differ.  

On Monday night, the public hearing was held for both ordinances as well as about nine other proposed ordinance amendments. The public hearing was held prior to the Naples Board of Selectmen meeting in the gymnasium in order to accommodate a bigger audience. 

Essentially, two residents James Willworth and Betsey Enright, consulted with an attorney and came up with a citizen’s petition referendum — an ordinance which would allow events barns in the Rural and Residential Districts. 

Willworth and Enright got the required 198 signatures of registered voters, which is 10 percent of the voter turnout during the most recent gubernatorial election, according to Naples Town Manager John Hawley.  

At the same time, the town is crafting an ordinance to allow events barns to exist in zones other than commercial. 

Basically, Town Planner Ben Smith, of North Star Planning, will write the language based on public input and board comments. 

Therefore, one more public hearing will be held for the town’s proposed ordinance. 

Chairman Jim Grattelo explained why the town couldn’t change the language on the ordinance that originated from Naples residents.

“We can’t change this because it is a citizen’s petition. The vote itself cannot be delayed. The citizen’s petition referendum is going to be on the ballot for June 14,” Grattelo said. 

“We just received an opinion from legal counsel that states that we still have time to come up with the proposed language to compete with this item,” he said. 

Probably about a dozen people spoke on the proposed ordinance.  

Planning Board member Larry Anton was dead set against it.

“This is the worst proposal I’ve seen in 30 years,” Anton began. “Anyone who is an attendee can stay the night that means we are allowing 199 people occupancy for the night: tents, motor homes. Imagine having 199 people staying there overnight after drinking and partying and no security.” 

An audience member who did not identify himself before speaking questioned the requirement of 30 acres or more for an Events Barn to exist.   

“Why is it limited to 30 acres? If you make it 30 acres, and don’t allow people that have less acres. What is the reason? To restrict the people in the rural zone that don’t have 30 acres from making profit on these 84 parties a year,” he said. “The owner-operator needs to live there. Are they going to keep this in control? Who is going to be responsibility if the owner is not there?” 

“There are a lot of things that I don’t agree with, and it feels like it is getting forced down my throat,” the person said. “I totally disagree with making money in rural area instead of the commercial area.”

Carrie Wentworth, of Lambs Mills Road, said she was involved in the citizen’s petition. She had 83 acres and wanted to be able to use her land for an events barn. More than a year ago, she asked the town to create an ordinance that would allow this use.  

“In order for us to compromise, there needs to be a dialogue between us and the Ordinance Review Committee,” she said. 

Therewere other people who mentioned the town was slow to get an ordinance together, or their ideas didn’t feel included in the ordinance that was being work-shopped by the town. 

Wentworth addressed some of the previous comments and questions. 

“As far as the acreage, they [potential customers] cannot come and have a wedding barn on two acres. Whywould you want to do with that,” she asked. “As far as 199 people [the cap on the number of guests] staying the night, that isn’t going to happen. We would like to build a barn for the bride and groom and a few guestsin the wedding party,” she said. “Fireworks— we have no problem with not having fireworks. We have dogs. We don’t want that. Living on site — we live on site and we will be there. We don’t want people coming and trashing our property. We will be onsite at all times.”

Martina Witts, who served on the ORC and also the planning board, shared her thoughts via Zoom.  

“Everybody needs to understand— this would affect the entire rural zone. This change the rules of what can be in the rural zone. That is what makes it so complicated. It isn’t just about an individual,” she said. 

The ORC and the planning board have spent months trying to come up with a thoughtful and thorough ordinance, she said. 

“This is a big deal. This petition has to be on the warrant. I would urge the citizens when they vote, that the town is trying to come up with an ordinancethat is fair to everybody,” Witts said.