A crowd that appeared poised once again for a fight was stymied from expressing their opposition Thursday to a quarry proposal at the former Dow Chemical site off Route 12 in Gales Ferry when a public hearing lasted till past 11 p.m. with only project representatives speaking on the application.

But Gales Ferry residents will get their say, perhaps as early as Sept. 26 when the hearing is expected to resume at 6 p.m. at Ledyard Middle School.

Meanwhile, some big changes in the proposal and in the makeup of the opposition and even the decision makers was revealed during the five-hour hearing at Ledyard Middle School in front of the town’s Planning & Zoning Commission.

Paul Whitescarver, a commission member who is also executive director of the region’s economic development agency sECTer, has now recused himself from voting on the matter, while opponent David Harned announced that he has recently sold his home and moved out of Gales Ferry.

And Harry Heller, attorney for project developer Gales Ferry Intermodal, dropped perhaps the biggest bomb of the night when he announced the company had purchased 1721 Route 12, a property atop Mount Decatur, near where a historic War of 1812 fort is located.

That’s the property of Paul and Chrissy Cerveny, two people I visited nearly a year ago who had vocally opposed the project, worried about blasting that would disrupt their tranquility, the possible contamination of their well and, perhaps the largest issue, the silica dust they expected would be released during the quarrying and processing of rock.

When I looked up the warranty deed online, it said the property went for $981,200, approximately three times the assessed value.

“Decatur Mountain will be permanently disfigured and forever altered, despite its historical significance that should be preserved and not destroyed,” Paul Cerveny, a self-described “mountain man,” told the commission a few months ago during the first series of public hearings on the project. “If this project is approved, my family and I will seriously consider moving elsewhere.”

Apparently the Cervenys and Harneds, as well as others I may not have heard of, are voting against the project by selling their property as others will now have to pick up the fight. I am told that a nearby property at 3 River Drive also was purchased by Gales Ferry Intermodal, a report confirmed by searching land records online that showed the purchase price was $399,900.

If Thursday’s rather disappointing in-person showing of about 75 people is any indication, opponents may have to increase their presence at these hearings to have a shot against a well-organized and determined series of experts hired by Gales Ferry Intermodal, a division of Chapman Dredging & Marine Contracting Co. in Quincy, Mass.

But then again, residents have seen this show before (this was the second series of public hearings on the proposed quarry), and perhaps knew the first day of the hearings would be dominated by Heller’s parade of experts. Some may also have heard about an effort by resident Eric Treaster to get the P&Z commission to amend its regulations to ban quarries in town once and for all, and to limit the size of housing developments, proposals which took more than half of the evening to consider.

Treaster’s proposals were not backed by the Ledyard planning staff, which cited the need for aggregate from quarries to support the local and state economy. This seemed an odd thing to be included in a report from a land use group that is not composed of economic or business experts, but the general consensus is that Treaster’s zoning changes are likely dead on arrival.

Partly, the reason for this, as argued by attorney Heller, is that the town did a major overhaul of its zoning regulations just two years ago. He said businesses, residents and developers need regulations to remain stable over time to encourage economic activity that might be stifled if people feared new rules could be used in a “reactionary” manner to target specific projects.

Some residents at the meeting Thursday countered by saying they weren’t aware that regulation changes were on the table two years ago. Now that the impact of the changes have become all too real, they said it’s the perfect time to roll some of them back.

It’s not an unreasonable argument. The U.S. Constitution was amended to implement Prohibition, and when people realized the results of a nationwide ban on alcohol sales were more crime and violence, states quickly passed a repeal of the measure.

“When are residents motivated to change zoning regulations?” said one person who attended Thursday’s meeting, asking to remain anonymous. “When it appears someone is trying to stretch the regulations to a breaking point.”

The same attendee believes the P&Z commission has plenty of firepower in its regulations to shoot down the quarry application in any case, with or without the changes Treaster offered in his amendments.

As for the economic need for aggregate from quarries, he said he wouldn’t disagree.

“The world needs toxic waste dumps, too,” he said. “It’s all about where you put them.”

Lee Howard is The Day’s business editor. To reach him, email l.howard@theday.com.