Sale of Loftus Wellfield fails to advance after tied vote amid deed-restriction and water-supply concerns

A motion to recommend that the town sell approximately 11.46 acres known as the Loftus Wellfield at 480 R Schuylville Road to a private buyer for $150,000 failed to advance after the Ledyard Town Council deadlocked 4-4 at its July 8, 2026 meeting.

The proposal prompted extended discussion about a deed restriction that limits the parcel's use, the history of the property as a municipal well field, and whether the town had explored alternatives such as removing the covenant or marketing the parcel publicly. Kevin Blacker, the prospective buyer, told the council he would be willing to document a permanent donation of the parcel's development rights to the Connecticut Farmland Trust if that helped preserve the land for agriculture.

Why it matters: Councilors and residents framed the question as more than a routine land sale. Some said the parcel represents a potential contingency water supply that could be reactivated if the town needed additional sources; others said selling the land to a local farmer and securing a farmland-preservation restriction would protect agricultural uses that the town values.

During debate, councilors and residents asked staff to verify whether any federal or state grant restrictions or HUD/bond terms attached to the original acquisition remain enforceable and whether finance or legal had fully closed out any prior grants. Concerns were also raised that the town may be undervaluing the land if deed restrictions were renegotiated with the Loftus family or if the town pursued a public bid process.

"I'm happy to include that commitment in whatever form the council is comfortable with," Kevin Blacker said, offering to have his attorney draft language to assure the town that the development rights would be transferred to a farmland preservation entity.

Opponents urged caution. One councilor noted that the wellfield had been an operational water source in the past and cautioned that transferring the land could remove a contingency the town might need if rates or service from the current supplier changed. Another councilor asked whether the town had attempted to seek a higher price or otherwise remove the covenant before pursuing a direct sale.

The clerk's roll call recorded four votes in favor and four opposed; the chair concluded there would be no action on the motion that night. Councilors said the result did not close off future consideration: several asked for additional legal and financial review, confirmation about planning-and-zoning referrals and any grant restrictions, and the opportunity for a public hearing so the buyer could present his proposal directly to residents.

Next steps: Council members asked staff to check grant conditions, confirm whether the deed restriction can be altered and under what terms, and ensure the item appears on Planning & Zoning and any required public-notice schedules. The buyer asked the council to allow a public hearing and pledged to put any farmland-preservation commitments in writing for legal review.

The meeting transcript shows the sale motion was introduced and discussed at length beginning with the motion to recommend sale at the agenda item and concluding with the tie vote; the council did not adopt the recommendation and the matter remains open for additional review and public input.