Stonington - When confronted with controversy between regular visitors to the unofficial dog park in the borough and a neighboring homeowner, the town's Waterfront Commission decided Monday to stay at arm's length and let things work themselves out.

Nearly 50 people packed the Human Services Department meeting room to talk about what some referred to as the bullying behavior of the new borough homeowners adjacent to a park that dozens of locals said has become the area's unofficial dog park. The park is located on town-owned land next to the wastewater treatment facility.

The controversy escalated recently with homeowners taking photos of dog owners, yelling at park visitors and covering the shoreline rocks with a mix of paprika and dog repellent, residents say. There was also one report of the homeowner displaying a stun device and telling two children take their dog and leave the small beach area that appears at low tide.

The area is below a seawall at the home of Laura Ann Gabrysch and Frank Mastrapasqua and one of the few places to access the water. By state law, the beach that appears during low tide is public property.

Dog owner and borough resident Don Kluberdanz said the people who use the park are respectful, clean up after their dogs and have caused no harm. But in July, he said he was alone in the park with his dog when he was confronted not only by a "violators will be prosecuted," sign, but ordered by a man at 13 Front St. to keep his dog off the beach area. He noticed the orange powder covering the rocks and when he said he asked a woman what it was, the response was, "a rock wall."

After Monday's meeting, Kluberdanz said the commission had made the right decision by not trying to impose new rules or restriction on visitors, as some had suggested, but rather to let cooler heads prevail.

"I agree with them," he said. "Leave it the way it is."

Numerous residents spoke at Monday's meeting. The vast majority spoke of the park as a social meeting area for people and dogs. Some asked for the town to designate the park an official dog park, but most said they just wanted the intimidating behavior of the nearby resident to end.

Dori Abele, an adjacent homeowner, however, said the area was never designed to be a dog park and if it had been, there would at least be buffers between homes and the park.

Commission Chairman Sandy Grimes said there has been controversy in the past and he personally performed his own study, visiting the park multiple times a day for two weeks. The most dogs he found at the park at one time was 16, but said as numbers grew, people would leave. He said part of the solution was self-regulation.

"People should learn to live together," Grimes said. "I've never seen people abuse that place. When you make things official, you end up with more problems than you asked for."

First Selectman Edward Haberek Jr. said the park was in a commercial zone and could not be an official dog park without a lengthy process through planning and zoning. The area is a designated passive recreation area that allows for a range of uses.

"We're hoping that everyone can just get along," Haberek said.

g.smith@theday.com

Twitter: SmittyDay