Proposed Stormwater Discharge Bylaw Fails Following Heated Debate Over Property Rights
Key Points
- Aimed to prevent intentional water diversion onto neighboring lots
- Defeated following concerns over sump pump and gutter enforcement
- Opposed by the Advisory Board for being too "vague"
- Potential for legal disputes over "unnatural" water flow cited by residents
Article 28 proposed a new general bylaw to prohibit property owners from unnaturally diverting or discharging water in a way that causes flooding on neighboring properties or town roads. Board of Public Works Chair Diane Jordan presented the article, citing a specific instance where a resident's man-made berm caused a huge lake
to freeze on a neighbor's driveway, costing taxpayers $5,000 in road repairs. The Advisory Board, however, recommended against the article, calling the language subjective and vague.
The floor discussion was contentious as residents voiced fears about the bylaw's impact on standard home maintenance. Homeowners questioned if they would be fined for using sump pumps or if their gutters naturally overflowed during storms. I just feel like it's still too subjective,
said resident Mary Beth Conroy, noting that water naturally travels downhill to lower elevations. DPW Superintendent Sean Patterson defended the bylaw, arguing it was unfair for residents to intentionally divert water onto others, but many voters remained unconvinced that the town could fairly enforce the rule without significant litigation.
Motion: The board of public works moves that the town vote to amend the Marshfield Town Code Division 2 general bylaws chapter 250 streets and sidewalks by adding in a new proposed article 9. other prohibited discharge of water.
Vote: Failed