Brides: New rules devastate plans for perfect day

LITTLE COMPTON — Less than a month after the Jan. 6 adoption of new town sound and entertainment ordinances, Carolyn's Sakonnet Vineyard was back in front of the Town Council Thursday, Feb. 4, asking for waivers of the ordinances for eight weddings that it said "were booked prior to the enactment" of the rules.

Council President Bob Mushen and councilor Gary Mataronas were absent at Thursday's meeting. An audience of 25-30 citizens were present, most opposing the waivers.

Also present were Cindy A. Soccio, the mother of one of the grooms (Evan Soccio) and Evan's bride-to-be, Kaitlin Falls, whose wedding was booked at the vineyard for July 9. Both Ms. Soccio and Ms. Falls spoke in favor of the waivers.

"The new ordinance gives the council the right to grant exemptions," said Leonard Lopes, attorney for the vineyard. "All we're asking is one hour, one hour is all we're seeking." He did not ask for waivers of any of the other provisions of the ordinances.

Mr. Lopes was referring to the ordinance-mandated 9 p.m. cut-off for "outdoor entertainment," that he was seeking be waived — in other words extended, — until 10 p.m.. The implication was that wedding receptions and live band music booked for the celebrations, would be allowed to play until 10 p.m. if the waivers were granted.

The ordinance says that "for good cause shown," the Council may "at its discretion, waive any requirement of this ordinance. "

After nearly an hour of heated discussion, the three council members present (Paul Golembeske, Fred Bodington, and Charles Appleton) voted 2-1 (Mr. Bodington voted no) to postpone any decision until the full council could be present at its next meeting on March 10.

As Mr. Lopes began to speak, voices in the audience could be heard. "You don't live here, we do," said someone. "There are only so many weekends this summer," and "this is just the beginning."

"You agreed," someone else said. The reference was to an agreement with the town, signed Nov. 30 by a representative of the vineyard, that said that the vineyard, in exchange for being given a four-month extension of its old entertainment license from the end of November, and during the time the new ordinances were being adopted by the council, would agree to be "bound by the provisions of those amended ordinances upon approval."

The dates when weddings have been booked, and for which the vineyard is seeking cut-off time waivers, are: May 20, June 25, July 2, 9, and 29, September 3 and 10, and October 8.

The debate

"What is the point of writing an ordinance and the first thing that happens is a waiver for eight events?” asked Miriam Clifford. "There's a reason for having the ordinance. They have to obey the ordinance just as we do … Variances are special, not seasonal."

"We've never had our peace and tranquility disturbed the way we have by the vineyard," said a woman who lives on Burchard Avenue, east across the reservoir from the vineyard. "I'm sorry if I don't feel bad for people whose wedding has to stop an hour earlier than they want."

"I'm asking you to uphold the ordinance for the people of the town," said another woman (not all who spoke went to the podium or identified themselves).

"A big corporation belongs in the city. It doesn't belong here," said Brian Eliason. "The waiver shouldn't happen. If you give them preferential treatment, you have to give everyone preferential treatment.

Ms. Soccio, the mother of a groom whose wedding is July 9, said "we'd like to share in the beauty of this town," and "if we could go along until 10, we'd certainly abide by the other requirements of the ordinance." She said she hadn’t been aware of the new ordinances.

"I think they should take it up with the Sakonnet Vineyard, and let them resolve it," said Ms. Clifford.

"This is a contractual issue, not a town issue. The vineyard should reimburse these people," said Amy Veri, a vineyard neighbor.

"I have sympathy for everyone, said Councilor Paul Golembeski who, as council vice president, was chairing the meeting in Mr. Mushen's absence.

Then, addressing Mr, Lopes, Mr. Golembeski said, "this would have been a lot easier if you'd brought this up when we were discussing adopting the ordinances. You put us in an extremely awkward spot."

"These couples are innocent victims," said Mr. Lopes. "People have spent tens of thousands of dollars to have their wedding."

"This is the vineyard's fault," said Councilor Bodington. "These are people who booked weddings before we adopted the ordinance."

Letters from brides

In his Feb. 1 letter requesting the waivers, Mr, Lopes attached eight letters he said he'd received from brides, grooms and families, all asking for extended hours for entertainment, and expressing disappointment with the new ordinances.

Bride-to-be Caroline noted the many guests scheduled to attend, the vendors involved, and "the artist who has custom made our watercolor invitations with a 4 p.m start time."

"I could not be more stressed about planning my wedding. It has turned into a logistical nightmare," she said. "My family has made a huge financial commitment to the vineyard and to a number of homeowners in Little Compton."

Another couple said, "We have picked our vendors and paid deposits according to our wedding budget and have accrued expenses totaling nearly 60K for our 150 guests."

"We have rented the Stone House, also in Little Compton, for our accomodations for our wedding part and closest friends and family," they said.

Another couple said they'd contracted with the vineyard "almost a year ago, and to date have spent over $10,000, and sent out invitations."

Another wrote, "This single policy affects so many people, yet the people of Little Compton seem not to care. It hurts business in Little Compton, it devastates every couple that had their perfect day planned for this summer."