Two sets of residents have spent the better part of three years fighting each other over whether one set of families can build a walking path across wetlands from their houses to Onset Bay.

Now, an amendment to the Wareham Wetlands Protection bylaw to make it comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act will go before Town Meeting. The amendment was inspired by, and will have a major effect on, this land dispute.

Three years ago, three families who own property on Winship Avenue bought land to create a walking path for their families, which include a disabled veteran, to Onset Bay. On Dec. 27, 2011, the plan was initially approved by the town Conservation Commission. The families were allowed to alter the “No Activity Zones” within the wetlands.

After approval, the Clemmeys, who also own property on Winship Avenue, appealed the approval to the state Department of Environmental Protection. After studying the project, the department allowed the path to be built and allowed the use of golf carts on the path.

The Clemmeys then brought the case to the Plymouth County Superior Court. On June 27, 2013, the Court sent the case to the Conservation Commission, which again approved the project. Then on May 21, of this year, the Superior Court ruled that the bylaw prohibits the project because a walking path to the beach isn’t expressly stated as one of the exceptions to allowable alterations in the “No Activity Zone.”

One of the families who want to build the path demanded an amendment to the bylaw, alleging that it violates the Americans with Disabilities Act in its current form.

But the Clemmeys attorney, Adam Brodsky, claims that the ADA is not applicable to bylaws regulating the use of wetlands on private property. He said even if the bylaw was ammended, the project still wouldn’t be able to go forward.

He claims the effort is a “smokescreen attempt to circumvent the Superior Court judgement.”

Voters at Town Meeting will only vote on the ADA compliance amendment. They will not vote on any specific wetlands projects. But no matter what the vote is, it seems as if this dispute will rage on.