Concerned With Proper Procedure For Possible Water, Sewer Extension
To The Editor:
Do you remember how the town failed to follow state statute last year — the statute that governs the process for discontinuing a road — by failing to post a sign at both ends of the road? Well, history seems like it might be repeating itself. I tried to bring this to the town’s attention while there was still time to comply, and I was summarily dismissed.
The Water & Sewer Authority held a public hearing on October 10 on a developer’s application/request for a sewer extension to connect to the 117 proposed cluster homes at #20 Castle Hill Road. The WSA’s own regulations say that they may consider extending sewer service after “considering conformance with the town’s plan of development”. Further, Connecticut General Statute 8-24 (Municipal Planning Commissions) states that among other things, “No municipal agency or legislative body shall locate or extend public utilities and terminals for water, sewerage, light, power, transit and other purposes, until the proposal to take such action has been referred to the (Planning) commission for a report”. The WSA has not referred the developer’s application to extend sewer service to the Newtown Planning Commission for a review. When I pointed this out to the WSA at their public hearing, Fred Hurley, the Public Works Director, interrupted me, saying “We’ve been doing things the same way around here for 30 years, and we’re going to continue doing them that way.” I’ve consulted with other WSA’s in Connecticut, and they have confirmed that a referral to the Planning Commission is not optional.
The Legislative Council, Board of Selectmen and public are frustrated by the WSA’s budget/accounting irregularities that recently came to light, requiring them to borrow $240,000 from the town’s general fund … a result of a lack of town oversight and that “we’ve always done it that way” approach. Should the WSA continue to dismiss their own regulations and state statute, it will most certainly open them and the town up to litigation.
I’ve recommended that the Borough Zoning Commission consult their attorney to confirm whether or not approval of the special zoning exception application is a smart option given they are aware that the WSA’s approval of the sewer extension would be invalid without a referral to, and approval from the Newtown Planning Commission, and I thought it might be in the town’s best interest to sound the alarm by bringing this to the LC and BOS’ attention as well, and hope that someone will consult with the town attorney and inform the WSA that the Planning Commission referral is required, regardless of how they’ve operated in the past. The Plan of Conservation & Development exists for a reason.
Dave Ackert
Newtown
Potential administrative violations that would not have otherwise changed the end result. We’ll all be able to thank Dave and his friends at NCC when the 8-30G applications get rammed down our throats.
Ahhh.. So we should all just ignore statutes and regulations then, huh? Last time I looked, 8-30g is already getting rammed down our throats. Suppose we should just ignore that too….
I think you’re missing the broader point. Yes, statutes should be followed, but in this case it wouldn’t have altered the decision that would have been made. And, yes, 8-30G is getting rammed down our throats. But with regard to this particular application, it is not yet an 8-30G. However, I’m willing to bet that if this nimby nonsense continues it most surely will become one. Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t.
This guy is all about spending other people’s money. First a waste of time of a FOIA paper chase and now recommending the Borough Zoning Commission spend money on attorneys fees. Thankfully the webmaster of a Facebook group does not carry any weight with the Zoning Commission. I think I would support section 8 the whole 130 acres!
You do realize that what you are supporting is actually going to cost everyone money (except the developers) when our taxes increase because the cost of town services will increase more than the tax revenue that the projects you support will generate, don’t you?
The data is inconclusive, I have seen several studies that show both ways, the largest impact being the age of the residents. Regardless, we can not trample on the property owners’ rights because we are afraid of change. Yes, the owner of this property has rights just like you. Letting a facebook group create mountains of red tape needs to be stopped. So yes, even if it costs me more in taxes I support the rights of the individuals over the mob any day and twice on Sunday.