Expecting a resolution, supporters of Wilton Youth Football\u2019s application to renovate Middlebrook Field\u2019s natural grass to artificial turf attended the Planning and Zoning Commission\u2019s meeting on Sept. 28, but left in disappointment when deliberations were continued once more.The commissioners in favor of approving the application could not persuade those who stood against it to change their opinions.A straw poll resulted in a straight split, with the majority teetering on the undecided Vice Chairman Sally Poundstone\u2019s swing vote.Chairman Chris Hulse and Commissioners Lori Bufano, Peter Shiue and Bas Nabulsi said that they were inclined to approve the proposal, while Secretary Doris Knapp and Commissioners Franklin Wong, John Comiskey and Joe Fiteni expressed the opposite.The main problem they could not reconcile was the lighting scheme, presented by Andrew Dyjak with Musco Lighting during the third and last stage of the public hearing for Wilton Youth Football\u2019sapplication.The disapproving commissioners held that the lights, which Dyjak explained would feature a degree of \u201cuplighting,\u201d did not comply with section 29-9.E.2.a. of the town zoning regulations, which specifies that \u201call exterior lighting shall be so designed that the filaments, light sources, reflectors or lenses are shielded with opaque material such that the light will be directed down and shall not be visible beyond the boundaries of the lot on which the lights shall be located.\u201dHulse asked Town Planner Bob Nerney if there was any way around thatparticular regulation.\u201cThe commission authors these regulations, and you have the ability to interpret these regulations,\u201dreplied Nerney.Knapp, however, saw no \u201cwiggle-room\u201d within the language of the section.\u201cWith all due respect, Bob, I don\u2019t see how anything that says \u2018light shall be directed down\u2019 can be interpreted to \u2018light can be directed up,\u2019\u201d she said.\u201cIt clearly violates what our regulations say about the lighting,\u201d said Fiteni, who added that the latest lighting proposal was brought up too late in the hearing process to be thoroughly discussed.\u201cWe introduced, at the third part of the public hearing, a whole new lighting scheme ... I have a real problem with that,\u201d he said.At one point in the deliberations, Hulse and Fiteni raised their voices in contention when Fiteni accused Hulse of \u201csteering\u201d the process.The question was raised as to the possibility of temporary lights instead of the noncompliant scheme proposed by Dyjak, and in response to issues voiced by Comiskey, Hulse said, \u201cWe already know you don\u2019t support it, so what we\u2019re looking for is for those of us who want to support it...,\u201d before being cut off by Fiteni.\u201cWait a minute, Chris, I\u2019m having a problem here,\u201d Fiteni said.\u201cHold on,\u201d Hulse said.\u201cI\u2019m having a problem. No. I\u2019m going on record. I\u2019m having a problem. You\u2019re steering this thing,\u201d Fiteni said.\u201cI\u2019m not. Joe, Joe...\u201d\u201cYes you are.\u201d\u201cJoe, we went around the room, and we voted.\u201d\u201cYeah, but every time somebody objects, you back that person [into a corner] and start questioning their motives.\u201d\u201cI\u2019m not questioning their motives.\u201d\u201cYou are.\u201d\u201cI\u2019ve clarified what temporary lighting is.\u201d\u201cYou are. I\u2019m sorry.\u201d\u201cJoe, I\u2019ve clarified what temporary lighting is \u2014 very simple.\u201d\u201cAnd every other time somebody has objected you go back and I\u2019m having a real problem [with this].\u201d\u201cJoe, it looks as if we have a majority here...\u201d\u201cThat\u2019s fine, but don\u2019t...\u201d\u201cWhat I\u2019m trying to do is basically answer the questions so we don\u2019t have to stand another six weeks and put these people back out to come back in another two years with another hundred thousand dollars in legal fees. We have a right to do what\u2019s right for the town.\u201d\u201cI agree.\u201d\u201cIt\u2019s not just me, Joe; it\u2019s the Board of Selectmen; it\u2019s the chairman of the school board and everyone else in the town...\u201d\u201cNo. No. No. I\u2019m sorry.\u201d\u201cWith what?\u201d\u201cThis is a Planning and Zoning decision. Just because they support it doesn\u2019t mean we have to support everything they do.\u201d\u201cThat\u2019s fine, and I\u2019m not recommending that; I\u2019m not saying that. I\u2019m saying the town overwhelmingly supports it, based on what I\u2019ve seen in this hearing, and from these testimonies, so I\u2019m going on that. That\u2019s who I serve.\u201d\u201cThat\u2019s who we all serve. And there were people that came in here and objected, and had genuine objections to other people\u2019s opinions. And I think we cannot ignore those and constantly go back to the Board of Selectmen and the principal of the school and all theseother people.\u201d\u201cI\u2019ll let you speak for as long as you want and get this out,\u201d Hulse said, \u201cbecause the thing is: we have something that we\u2019re trying to basically find a way to make happen, OK? And it sounds like, as we\u2019ve gone around the room here, there are enough of us that want to make it happen, and so what we\u2019re trying to do is find a way forward.\u201dAfter further debating the application, deliberations were continued to Oct. 13, and the commission requested that Nerney approach the town\u2019s legal counsel and inquire as to what options are available for potentially approving the field without approving thelighting scheme.