As speculation builds around the town-owned Gilbert & Bennett School property in Georgetown, town officials have been slow to publicly clarify the status of a proposal from Wilton-based Twelve Gods Brewery — even as the company has begun promoting the site on social media and residents raise concerns about behind-the-scenes negotiations.
First Selectman Toni Boucher maintains that no official offer has been made by the brewery team to purchase the G&B site. However, Twelve Gods Brewery posted a video on its Instragram account on Jan. 8 with footage of the property, stating “Something great is coming,” and one of the principals told GOOD Morning Wilton that “there is a proposal on the table for the town to consider.”
That was 12 days before any town officials even hinted at the possibility when they held the first discussion of the proposal in a closed-door executive session that initially lacked proper notice of all those invited into the room.
On Monday, Feb. 2, at least one Board of Selectmen member made an effort to start a public discussion of whether the town is even onboard with the sale of the property, with the brewery company at this point hoping to buy and refurbish it.
Some residents are definitely not onboard and have expressed concern about what they feel has been a behind-the-scenes deal being orchestrated by Boucher.
At its Jan. 20 meeting the BOS held a private discussion in executive session with both representatives of the brewery and members of the Wilton Land Trust, which has put forward a plan to purchase the adjacent property in order to create an open space and activity area.
In a rare show of united opposition, the other four BOS members refused to second Boucher’s motion to go into executive session until after it was made clear that the discussion would involve Gilbert & Bennett.
Boucher amended her motion to specify that the discussion would involve the Gilbert & Bennett property, and the board moved into executive session. However, the selectmen soon realized Boucher had invited six additional participants — three from Twelve Gods Brewery and three from the Wilton Land Trust — without properly noticing their appearance, prompting the board to return briefly to open session to identify them by name before resuming the closed-door meeting.
Boucher told GOOD Morning Wilton afterward that it was a technical mistake that was corrected when it was realized what had happened.
During the Monday, Feb. 2 BOS meeting, Second Selectman Ross Tartell said the closed discussion with the brewery and WLT “was great,” noting that while the public may be thinking the issue of selling the property is moving forward, in his estimation it is not.
Selectman David Tatkow made a motion to add reports from two local historians to the BOS agenda on Feb. 2 in order to hear details about the Gilbert & Bennett School prior to a report from town attorney Doug LoMonte, who was on the agenda to talk about the legalities of a town property sale.
Boucher, however, cited an “incredibly packed” agenda and suggested adding it to the next scheduled regular meeting two weeks later. The selectmen compromised by deciding they would hold a Special Meeting before to include discussion specifically about the property.
“Right now there has been no decision about moving anything forward until we have this public discussion … I’m thinking this will be a very, very long discussion,” Boucher said.
Selectman Rich McCarty said he favored hearing details about the legal road prior to a discussion about what people wanted, but emphasized a desire to get public input.
“We need to be open and transparent, and hear all opinions in town as to what the right course is and as to what the people of the town are seeking to achieve,” McCarty said.
Selectman Matt Raimondi conceded that there might not be time to get into a more detailed discussion at this meeting, but spoke in favor of hearing from historians and others regarding the property.
“I think there’s probably some benefit to having that discussion,” he said regarding a BOS conversation on the topic, which he said would at least offer the public a chance to hear where each BOS member stood individually on the question.
“I’m also hearing from friends and neighbors that there hasn’t been a public discussion about this and it’s been in the news for six months,” Raimondi said.
How-To Instructions for Town-Owned Property Sales
LoMonte gave a short presentation on what he believes is the proper chain of events for sale of a town property, which would begin with a BOS recommendation for a sale. This recommendation would be followed with a required public hearing, notices in the newspaper, and physical sign postings at the property.
A Town Meeting vote would technically not be required either unless the sale of the property exceeded 1% of the town’s operating budget, or if at least two members of the BOS insisted that it be held for a vote.
He said that the sale would have to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission, but noted its rejection of the sale would not necessarily prevent it from going through.
Asked about the need for executive session discussions on the matter, LoMonte said they were “appropriate when there are contract negotiations that might affect the price.”
With regard to the interests of those parties that met with the BOS in executive session, no dollar amounts have supposedly been discussed, according to participants.
LoMonte said that if it’s selling a property, the Town is required to put out a Request for Proposals (RFP) in the public domain. Once the Board of Selectmen approves a sale — or voters do so at a Town Meeting — the town is legally required to select a buyer from among the three highest bidders through the RFP process.
“The RFP is mandatory … The Board of Selectmen can recommend conditions to the sale,” LoMonte said. “The Special Town Meeting can also recommend conditions to the sale. All of those can be inserted into the RFP.”
Raimondi raised the question of, in essence, donating the property to a nonprofit group. LoMonte said that the best procedure would be to sell it the property for one dollar.
Raimondi asked what would happen if the town also received three other bids from developers for higher amounts. LoMonte said the town would be legally obligated to sell to one of those three, as they would represent the three highest bids.
“The wording of the RFP will be critical,” LoMonte said.
While the Twelve Gods Brewery has stated it wants to purchase the school itself located at 49 New St., there are two adjacent residential properties to the south — 31 New St. and 872 Danbury Rd. (a.k.a. 7 New St.) — that the Town owns and that the Wilton Land Trust is talking about turning into open space with trails and possible activities. While there’s been an implication that the two groups are working in tandem, it’s unclear exactly what the relationship is with regard to the plans.
Boucher had an appraisal of all the properties — known to Town officials as the “Georgetown Cluster” — as a group, and a Sept. 17, 2025, report lists the total value of the 8.5-acre parcel as $3,825,000.
The Town of Wilton’s Assessor’s Database lists an appraised value for the G&B property at $4,819,300 (land at $2,243,900; buildings at $2,544,200; and outbuildings at $31,200). The database shows appraised values at $678,100 for 31 New St. and $501,300 for 872 Danbury Rd. Combined appraised value for all three properties, according to the Town of Wilton Assessor, would be $5,998,700 — $2,173,700 more than the outside report Boucher obtained.
While LoMonte said that Boucher and the BOS can talk publicly about any offer that has been made to the town regarding a town property, he didn’t think it wise to adopt a firm policy on how to handle inquiries with regard to public notice any time the town is approached.
Asked when he felt was the “tipping point” with regard to when Boucher or the BOS should make a behind-the-scenes discussion public, LoMonte said it could be when an actual offer is made.
“I think, practically speaking, at some point the first selectman says, ‘You seem to be interested. Would you like to make an offer?’ … There’s nothing set in stone, so this is just my opinion. There’s nothing in the ordinance. There’s nothing in the [Town] Charter. There’s nothing in the statutes that addresses this,” LoMonte said.
Boucher said she would like to see not only a discussion about the guidelines governing sale of town properties discussed at the BOS’s next meeting, but also the specific offer that has apparently been presented to them.
The Instagram post at the Twelve Gods Brewery account includes video of the G&B School building with the phrase “Something great is coming” and shots of the property with the phrase “Some ideas need a great space.”
Demetris Papanikolaou, one of the principals with Twelve God Brewery who took part in the executive session meeting with the BOS, called the Instagram post “just typical social media engagement to create a little excitement — nothing more.”
“I’ll reiterate what we have stated before,” he said. “There is a proposal on the table for the town to consider.”
Editor’s note: The story was updated after publication to clarify timing of two points: that First Selectman Boucher told GMW it was a technical mistake that guests’ names were omitted from the executive session notice after the Jan. 20 meeting; and that Second Selectman Tartell commented about the closed session during the Feb. 2 BOS meeting.
When tenants were evicted from the Gilbert and Bennett Schoolhouse a year ago last August, they were told that the building needed something over $3 million in repairs to simply make the building habitable. I find it hard to believe a brewery is going to come up with that kind of money, not to mention the additional cost of at least the land it sits on if not all the periphery property that are part of the entire parcel. Can someone explain how that works?
The article above is a helpful example of what many residents have been trying to describe: Wilton currently has a reactive process rather than a strategic one when it comes to major Town assets like the Gilbert & Bennett Cluster.
Whether a brewery proposal is a good idea or not isn’t really the issue. The larger concern is the sequence. At the February 2 BOS meeting, the process described involved private parties bringing forward ideas, the Board evaluating those individual proposals, and then potentially moving toward Town Meeting. That approach starts with someone else’s concept and asks the Town to react, rather than beginning with a clearly articulated vision.
A more effective approach would start by defining what Wilton wants this historic property to become. The Board of Selectmen should first articulate strategic goals grounded in historic preservation, community priorities, and long-term public benefit, and then issue a public request for proposals aligned with that vision. Without upfront criteria, radically different proposals cannot be fairly compared, and public confidence inevitably suffers.
Residents were told in December that nothing was “on the table,” even as appraisals had already been commissioned, and subsequent executive session discussions added to the sense that decisions were moving ahead without a clear public framework. The meeting described above reinforces why many are calling for an Open Process: define the objectives first and evaluate ideas second.
While it may be admirable, in a sense, for the Selectmen to take a proprietary approach to Town property, these assets ultimately belong to the citizens of Wilton, not to any individual officeholder. That reality demands a process that is strategic, transparent, and inclusive from the outset rather than reactive to whichever proposal happens to appear first.
(A petition calling for Common-Sense Planning and Transparent Spending in Wilton is available at Change.org: https://c.org/Kkd7bkk4Qq)
Although the article on the Gilbert & Bennett School property is detailed and well-sourced, it falls short of being fair and balanced in its framing.
While the article acknowledges that no formal offer has been made, no vote taken, no RFP issued, and no decision reached, its repeated emphasis on “behind-the-scenes negotiations,” social media speculation, and a corrected procedural notice error conveys an impression of impropriety that the reported facts do not support. Readers are led toward suspicion even as the article itself documents that established legal and procedural norms were followed.
As Town Counsel clearly explained, exploratory discussions and executive sessions are lawful, common, and often necessary when municipalities assess interest in town-owned property. Treating early-stage information gathering as inherently suspect—rather than as a routine and responsible part of governance—distorts the process and misinforms the public.
The article also places outsized weight on a private party’s Instagram post, something entirely outside the town’s control, while giving comparatively little emphasis to the clear statements by multiple Board of Selectmen members that the matter is not moving forward without full public discussion. That imbalance matters.
Public scrutiny is healthy, and transparency is essential. But responsible reporting should distinguish between investigation and implication, between optics and substance, and between preliminary inquiry and actual decision-making. This article blurs those lines.
Wilton residents deserve coverage that informs without inflaming and that challenges officials when warranted—without implying misconduct where none has been demonstrated.
Respectfully,
Peter Wrampe