Norwalk Council prepares message for Malloy: No way

NORWALK, Conn. – Some Norwalk Common Council members are making a move to prevent what one member predicted would be a “disaster” for the city.

Planning Committee members voted unanimously Thursday evening to send a resolution drafted by vacationing Councilman David McCarthy (R-District E) to the full Council for a vote Tuesday. The resolution calls for the withdrawal of House Bill No. 6851, An Act Establishing The Connecticut Transit Corridor Development Authority.

Planning Committee Chairman Doug Hempstead (R-At Large) said he was appalled by HB 6851, an initiative of the Malloy administration. The bill intends to create an authority that would have broad powers over large tracts of land – including homes and businesses – within a half-mile radius of transit stations. The authority would have the power to govern all development in those areas, and could take by eminent domain any land or buildings it deemed necessary to pursue the state’s transit plans.

“What we have here … is a grab of local authority,” Hempstead said, explaining that the state could take 5 square miles of Norwalk – the areas around the South Norwalk, East Norwalk and Rowayton train stations, as well as around the Wheels bus station and the Merritt 7 stop on the Danbury line.

“It would be one thing to ask the state for help but what they are saying is they are appointing a board, appointed by the governor, appointed by the state legislature, nobody is elected to this board at all,” Hempstead said. “I really resent the local power grab that’s going on with this, trying to interfere. Maybe some other cities need help. I think Norwalk over the years has done a pretty damn good job with trying to make our transportation center better and enhanced, and enhance the areas.”

“You are talking about displacing more people now,” Councilwoman Sharon Stewart (D-At Large) said. “Like they did with the Reed Putnam properties, they snatched their property from them and gave them peanuts. They couldn’t find anywhere else to live with that little amount of money. Most of them migrated south … and they lost businesses and a whole bunch of stuff, so I see a disaster happening if we don’t oppose this, a major disaster in four different pivotal areas of our town.”

The resolution ends with this passage:

“We the Common Council of the City of Norwalk call upon our State Senator, Robert Duff, and our delegation in the Connecticut State House of Representatives  to immediately oppose GB 6851, and for our Governor, Dannel Malloy, to withdraw his bill, since this proposed legislation goes against all the principles of property rights of our State and Country and threatens to violate or usurp the particular property rights of the Citizens of Norwalk who live and or own property within the scope of areas proposed for takings under such bill.”

The only discussion involved Councilman Bruce Kimmel (D-At Large) urging a tightening up of the resolution, although he agreed with others that McCarthy had done a great job. He suggested taking out any reference to the Constitution because those issues are complicated.

Committee members added their own names as sponsors of the resolution and said they could tinker with it during their Monday caucuses.

Councilman John Kydes (D-District C) suggested contacting the surrounding municipalities and working with them on the issue. “I am sure there are a lot of governing bodies looking at this and having the same concerns we are,” Kydes said.

Third Taxing District Commissioner Deb Goldstein spoke to the committee at the beginning of the meeting.

“While the intentions behind the bill may be sound, the impact on Norwalk, especially for the citizens in the two taxing districts that serve the Metro North stations, is immeasurable,” Goldstein said. “Norwalk has a history of partnership with the state on transit projects that are sufficiently funded. There is no reason why the state cannot accomplish its goals in the same fashion going forward.”

State Sen. Bob Duff (D-25) was one of the introducers of the bill. Duff explained to NancyOnNorwalk this week that he introduced it as a courtesy to Gov. Dannel Malloy, as is standard practice for leaders of the legislature. It did not constitute an endorsement, he said.

“I was glad to at least see state Sen. Duff become defensive and at least explain,” Kimmel said. “…which I hope is a great sign.”

Mayor Harry Rilling also spoke out strongly against the bill Tuesday.

“While I realize this is just the initial proposal and what comes out of committee is usually tweaked many times over, this still concerns me greatly,” he said. “State control of all property within a half mile of our train stations is unacceptable. If my calculations are correct, that would result in Norwalk losing control of approximately 502 acres at each location.

“Moreover,” he said, “the current owners of property within those areas would be subjected to eminent domain proceedings at the whim of the state and no developers would be foolish enough to invest in the area. I’m still unable to determine the logic behind this proposal but on the surface, this is not a good bill and I would hope it does not receive the support of our legislatures.”

There were questions about eminent domain.

The state has the power of eminent domain, Redevelopment Agency Executive Director Tim Sheehan said. “It would ultimately become an authority and the authority would be established by the state. Just like the state confers the power of eminent domain on a municipality, it would confer it on the authority,” he said.

“We should just resign as the Common Council,” Kimmel joked.

“I don’t want it to get anywhere near passing,” Stewart said. “We need to let our representatives know how we feel so they won’t vote for this nonsense.”