Recent Updates

Summary of Opposition Status

• 1/13/25 our Appeal hearing was held in New Britain Superior Court before the Honorable Judge Matthew Budzik. Arguments were presented by attorneys from SCNETI, the Town of Fairfield, the City of Bridgeport, Southport Congregational Church, and BJ's Wholesale. Judge Budzik   has 120 to issue his decision and we are hopeful for a favorable outcome.  See the 1/16/25 First Selectman's update for additional details about the hearing.

• 6/11/24 Governor Lamont signed Substitute House Bill No. 5507, Public Act No. 24-144 into law - see Legislation - Public Act No. 24-144 for more details about this legislation

• Other recent updates:

  • 12/5/24 CT DEEP held Public Meeting on their DRAFT Siting Council Report - see Events page for more info

  • 12/3/24 CT DEEP posted their DRAFT Report that includes recommendations for the composition and practices of the Siting Council

Legislation - Public Act No. 24-144 

HB5507 AN ACT CONCERNING STATE AGENCY AND COURT PROCEEDINGS RELATING TO ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION LINES (replaced by Public Act No. 24-144) - after passing in both the House and the Senate, Governor Lamont signed this bill into law on 6/11/24! This legislation is aimed at addressing some of the many deficiencies and unfair practices we encountered during the Docket #516 proceedings.  This legislation marks a significant step towards prioritizing our communities, environment, and personal property rights, and it underscores our commitment to a fairer, more transparent process that truly serves the best interests of the state of CT. Key reforms in this bill include:

• • Clearer Notice Requirements: Residents are now entitled to definitive and transparent notifications about project designs and their impacts on abutters, preventing utilities from downplaying significant consequences like property seizure, health and safety risks, and visual blight. 

  • Consideration of Economic Impacts: Applicants will be required to submit more robust and transparent financial analysis for their proposal and for alternatives. In addition, greater weight is now given to the fiscal impact of proposed projects on municipalities, ensuring economic consequences like diminished property values and local tax revenue are not ignored. 

  • Access to Independent Experts: Communities now have access to independent experts, enabling them to challenge utilities’ technical claims with fact-based counterarguments.

  • Automatic Intervenor Status: Impacted residents and businesses are automatically granted intervenor status, ensuring their voices are heard in the decision-making process.

  • Improved Compensation Standards: Property owners are now entitled to fairer compensation, with greater protections and considerations for environmental justice communities disproportionately affected by utility projects.

  • Municipal Cost Recovery: Municipalities that win appeals can recoup their legal fees, reducing the financial burden of challenging unjust decisions. 

  • Reclassification of Land-Taking Projects: Any project involving land acquisition must now be classified as a modification rather than a rebuild, requiring a more stringent review.

  • Enforceable Penalties for Non-Compliance: Utilities can now face penalties for failing to meet the requirements established under the new legislation, ensuring accountability and adherence to the law.

This bill will be beneficial to our entire state, but it will be particularly impactful to Fairfield and Bridgeport in the event of a favorable outcome from our Superior Court appeal - if UI is mandated to restart the process with a fresh application to the Siting Council, any legislative reforms enacted will be applicable.

Docket #516 Decision

On 2/16/24, The Siting Council released their FINAL Decision and Order and the Council voted to approve the application but split the proposal in UI's application such that the segment from Ash Creek through Bridgeport will be submitted as a separate petition while the segment from Sasco Creek to Ash Creek will involve an alternative route loosely defined by the Siting Council as being situated on the north side of the railroad tracks.  Until UI is able to create an engineered design for this new alternative route, the impacts to our community will remain unclear, but it is likely that this route will involve easements affecting some Fairfield property owners on the north side of the railroad tracks.

During the last week of March, the Town of Fairfield, the City of Bridgeport, BJ's Wholesale Club and SCNETI all filed appeals in Superior Court against the Siting Council's decision. SCNETI and the Town of Fairfield primarily assert the following two arguments:

1. The Siting Council violated its statutory obligation to balance the need for reliable, cost-effective utility services with the need to protect the ecology and environment of the state. Since the northbound route has not yet been designed, it is unclear what the impacts of that plan will be and therefore, it impossible for the council to engage in this required balancing.

2. The Siting Council violated due process as none of the affected parties (including neighbors on the north side of the railroad tracks) had any notice of the approved plan, and therefore were deprived of the ability to exercise their right to contest this potential route.