Legislation By Court Ruling

To The Editor,

  Modification in the arena of proposed legislation is questioning the effectiveness of lawmakers’ ability to be pro-active in support of their constituents. Where tough decisions are needed or long-term planning is required that extends beyond the term limit of the legislator(s), the only way of forcing the issue of appropriate legislation seems to be constituent litigation against the town’s departments proposing the legislation.

On a smaller scale, Newtown residents are experiencing the same obstacles that tobacco and firearms manufacturers are currently facing – legislation by court ruling.

There are a number of recent and pending lawsuits challenging several of Newtown’s regulations enacted by our local town agencies. They are being challenged because of perceived flaws or obvious weaknesses in the laws.

The Aquifer Protection Plan, which was passed last summer, is currently under attack by litigation. If the regulation is found to be invalid, this could completely undermine, and might preclude, the proposed upzoning law from the Newtown P&Z (opposed by NPOA) which as been piggybacked off the Aquifer Protection Plan.

By proposing the upzoning, the P&Z intended to protect the residential water supply (which gets 100 percent support from NPOA) and to reduce housing densities in the designated areas. However, their proposal is incapable of meeting these objectives.

Almost the entire area subject to the upzoning is currently being occupied by existing homes. Thus, the P&Z is proposing higher standards that would only work where there is open and available land for new home construction.

In the P&Z designated lakeside areas, the only possibility for these homeowners to expand their living space is to build up; second floors or dormers. With a P&Z standing policy of rejecting variance requests on non-conforming lots, how is the upzoning going to help? Would you purchase an upzoned house knowing it could never be improved?

If the P&Z feels that the building of 70 or 80 more houses over the huge area of the aquifer posed a future threat to the aquifer, then what actions are they taking about the real problem of massive commercial industrial contamination of the aquifer that is happening right now?

Where is the “Planning” (from Planning and Zoning) that is addressing the remediation that is needed now to save our aquifer that will be destroyed in our lifetime if the existing pollution sites are ignored?

The term “sewer avoidance” which the P&Z has used is the key to saving the environment, except in reverse! Do the opposite, install sewers now! We are eventually going to pay for them – and the longer we wait, the higher the cost…

Why should we engage in counterproductive, expensive, and protracted litigation which only benefits the attorneys? Newtown residents, through their taxes, will be paying the defense attorneys’ costs! Instead of proposing laws that will end up in front of a judge for “final” resolution, lets work together to solve our problems without squandering precious tax dollars.

Barry J. Piesner

Chairman, Board of Directors, NPOA

38 Underhill Road, Sandy Hook                                 April 5, 2000