Ledyard — The 14 town residents sharing their opinions on a proposed short-term rental ordinance Wednesday evening mostly fell into two camps: Those who are in favor of having an ordinance but think this one overregulates, and those who like it as written.

The Ledyard Town Council held a public hearing, capped at one hour, on a measure to regulate Airbnbs and VRBOs. There was no vote taken, and Chairwoman Linda Davis said those who didn’t get a chance to speak could do so on Oct. 23.

Councilor Kevin Dombrowski explained that close to two years ago, members heard concerns about safety incidents and parking that stemmed from rentals in the Long Pond area. The council looked at what other towns were doing, asked for draft ordinances and ultimately put forth a draft from attorney Lloyd Langhammer and Planning Director Elizabeth Burdick.

The ordinance does not allow a residence to be used as a short-term rental for more than 21 days. It requires a permit — a person may have only one — that must be renewed every year. The draft application form shows a fee of $350 for a new application and $150 for a renewal.

“I think these fees are exorbitant, and we don’t provide $350 worth of service, and we may want to rethink that,” Mike Cherry said at the public hearing, having noted his interpretation that fees should be used just to cover the necessary administrative work.

The ordinance also requires owners to designate a local property representative, who shall be available 24/7 and respond within two hours to complaints.

Many residents previously had made their thoughts heard in front of the Town Council’s Land Use and Administration committees, and via email.

Just on Wednesday, Tylor Harlow sent in a petition, though not an official one, with 60 signatures that read, “It is our opinion that vacation rentals are good for our town and should not be regulated.”

One resident said complaints about loud parties and parking problems at Long Pond came in years ago, but he hasn’t heard new complaints during the process. But Pam Bartlett expressed that shedding a light on issues is why they stopped.

On Stonybrook Road, Julie Craig is not on Long Pond, but she said she has a similar situation to the issues seen there. She lamented that a neighbor’s Airbnb listing advertises that the house sleeps 20, a capacity concern the ordinance would address.

“Eighty percent of the time they will make noise during the day and get quiet around 10 o'clock at night,” Craig said. But the other 20 percent includes when she was wakened at 3 a.m. last February “to a choir of drunken men sitting in the hot tub, singing at the top of their lungs,” and loud music with inappropriate lyrics playing this past Fourth of July.

Craig stressed that she is in favor of short-term rentals but feels the occupancy restriction and noise clause of the ordinance ultimately will help the neighbor, owner and guest.

Another Gales Ferry resident said she’s close to opening an Airbnb and noted that because her property is 2.5 acres, she could park 20 cars or throw a party and “it wouldn’t disturb a soul.” She disagreed with the ordinance’s requirement of septic and smoke detector inspections.

Three others called the ordinance “overreaching,” said it’s “pushing it a little bit” and said it’s “really going overboard.”

Former Mayor John Rodolico called it a “compromise between those who would ban short-term rentals and those who want no regulations,” and since the ordinance has a sunset date of two years from enactment, the council could reconsider it at a later date.

The Southeastern Connecticut Council of Governments this month submitted a report on short-term rental regulation in Connecticut, laying out challenges and benefits to municipalities.

e.moser@theday.com