ROXBURY – Figuring out the ramifications of Tuesday’s defeat of a proposed federally mandated flood plain management ordinance is First Selectman John Sutton’s task this week.

By a 10-17 tally, voters at a special town meeting said they didn’t want to enact the new law.

Sutton said Tuesday that the flood plain ordinance and zoning maps would have updated Roxbury’s 1998 law to 2009 flood insurance standards as identified by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

The new ordinance also would have established a flood hazard development permit system and review procedure for development activities within the town’s designated flood hazard areas.

Sutton said late Wednesday afternoon that Roxbury must now rely on its flood plain management ordinance and maps from 1998.

“As far as I know, we have not taken any action to rescind that, so I don’t know how that affects what the new one says,” Sutton said.

He said the proposed new ordinance relied on aerial photographs of the town on which the proposed new flood plain zones were placed.

Prior to Tuesday’s meeting, Sutton said officials were unable to compare Roxbury’s old maps to the new map because the old maps were misplaced during last year’s move into the new Town Office.

Since then, two copies were found.

“Areas that the people were concerned about were zoned on the original maps around Roxbury Pond,” Sutton said. “People said (Tuesday night) that that area wasn’t zoned flood plain.”

“Well, on the original map done in 1985, it was listed as a flood plain. But unfortunately, we didn’t have that map to show folks the differences,” Sutton said.

He said the proposed new ordinance drew considerable discussion.

“I don’t want to characterize the whole thing, but one gentleman was worried about the houses being in the flood plain and being devalued as far as value goes,” Sutton said.

Another man objected to the $50 fee for a building permit within the flood zone as excessive. Others wanted to know what was driving the issue to a vote.

Sutton said he recommended that residents OK the zone as written and then make adjustments to the map as needed.

“My biggest concern is that there are eight people in this town with flood insurance and I don’t know how this affects them by not enacting it,” Sutton said.

He said that if a house within the flood plain is sold, the new buyer may not be able to get reasonably priced flood insurance if Roxbury doesn’t have an up-to-date flood plain management ordinance and maps in place.

That’s why he’s not sure whether Roxbury’s 1998 ordinance and maps will suffice.

“We’re going to make inquiries, of course, but the voters didn’t want it and we have to go with the will of the voters,” he said.

Animal control ordinance

By a 7-19 vote, a more stringent animal control ordinance also was defeated at the special town meeting.

Sutton said those objecting to it “thought it was a little bit obtrusive into people’s lives.”

The ordinance reduced the allowable leash length from 8 feet to 6 feet, and sought to deny ownership of dogs within town limits if they became a noise nuisance through barking or howling or if their behavior frightened people.

It also restricted single-family residents to no more than five dogs more than 6 years old. If they wanted more, they’d have to get a kennel license.

The new law also would have set strict limits on the length and gauge of chains used to tether dogs, would have addressed rabies issues, would have allowed seizure of dogs by an animal control officer without a court order and would have given the town the right to euthanize dogs found running at large if they weren’t claimed within six days.