Erosion of the Public Trust

Once again the State of Connecticut is attempting to overreach its authority by literally taking private property from citizens because the State believes it is “protecting” residents from potentially rising tides. 

For some, living on the Connecticut shoreline is a choice.  But for many others their shoreline home has been passed down from generation to generation and it is their primary residence. 

In either case under the Constitution, which protects all of us from the illegal intrusion of government, the State of Connecticut’s attempt to “take” property under the guise of a rising sea level is at best misleading and at worst an oppressive use of state power.

HB 5128, An Act Concerning Certain Revisions to the Coastal Zone Management Statutes is a bill that is being considered by the legislature. Quite simply this is an attack on East Haven and the Connecticut Shoreline as a whole.  This bill aims to create a new policy that would include:

• • preventing homes from being built within range of yet to be determined new high tides
  • preventing rebuilding after severe storm damage and or erosion
  • establishing a process for property owner retreat in affected areas

The state has no right to make you retreat from your property. But the language in this proposed bill does exactly that.  It is the most dangerous legislative language I have seen in years.

According to the bill, the State’s goal would be to encourage a fair and orderly legal process to foster strategic retreat of property ownership, over a period of several decades, for coastal lands that have a likelihood of being lost due to erosion and coastal lands that contain structures that are subject to repetitive damage

This bill will do more damage to our shoreline coastal communities than Tropical Storm Irene did.  This new language gives greater authority to the state government to force residents out of waterfront property. 

It is not up to the State Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP) to dictate which families and businesses stay and which go because they are in a potentially affected area.  It’s wrong.

Currently, there is an existing legal framework through eminent domain to take private property for legitimate purposes. One need not be reminded of the very emotional fight in New London years ago in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood. One would have to only ask Suzette Kelo how “fair and orderly” she feels the legal process operated in forcing her to cede ownership of her home for a project that has gone nowhere.

The truth of matter one must go back to the hurricane of 1938 to find a comparable storm- almost 75 years ago.  We have had more earthquakes in Connecticut than hurricanes.   This storm has only served as a tool for those who believe no one has the right to live on the shoreline.  They are using this one storm to advance their own self serving agenda.

Individual property ownership is a keystone to our country which is rooted in our Constitution. The State’s power of eminent domain is one of the harshest proceedings known to the law and therefore to exert such power based upon speculation and possibilities — under the guise of protecting us from ourselves is dangerous. 

If we allow this bill to advance and become law, then the State will have created a new criteria to seize people’s property. This power could ultimately be used in other geographical areas of the State for other reasons. 

The only erosion we should be worried about is that of the public trust in a legislature that would pass this dangerous policy.