Home » Areawide »Business » Currently Reading:

Legislation would allow developers to use state-protected land

May 12, 2011 Areawide, Business No Comments
“East Haddam has been very actively looking for open space and my feeling is people considering making a deal with us will now ask themselves, ‘How long is it going to take for you to sell it to someone else?’” - East Haddam Selectman Emmett Lyman  Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons Free Use

“East Haddam has been very actively looking for open space and my feeling is people considering making a deal with us will now ask themselves, ‘How long is it going to take for you to sell it to someone else?’” - East Haddam Selectman Emmett Lyman Photo source: Wikimedia Commons Free Use

Editor’s note: While this controversy has focused on the two towns most immediately affected by the proposed legislation (Haddam and East Haddam), I believe this issue is of interest to anyone in the state who is involved with conservation and preservation of open space, farmlands, nature preserves, etc. since SB 1196 will apply not just to this particular 17-acre parcel but to any state-protected property. That is why I am posting this story on all of our news sites. The bill is currently going before the House and Senate. If you have concerns, or if you would like to support this bill, now would be the time to contact your local representatives. This story also contains links to the two Web sites for the opponents and the developers and their supporters.  Letters to the Editor on this subject can be emailed to editor@htnp.com (Posted May 12, 2011)

While he initially felt some economic benefit could come of a controversial proposal to use state-protected property in Haddam for development, East Haddam First Selectman Mark Walter has now joined fellow selectmen in sending a letter to the state to oppose the plan.

Walter said in an interview today that he originally favored the idea as “trying to support a regional focus on tourism.”

The state-protected land is in the Tylerville section of Haddam near the Connecticut River. Private developers Riverhouse Properties want to develop the land for a hotel or inn, shops, entertainment and other amenities.

They have proposed a land swap that would give Haddam 87 acres of woods in the Higganum section of town, adjacent to Cockaponset State Forest.

Just before the East Haddam Board of Selectmen’s meeting last week, that evening Walter had said, “At this point, I am starting to get the facts and understand how all this works… there’s a lot of misinformation out there… the main reason I am supportive of the Haddam selectman [First Selectman DeStefano, who favors the swap] is because we want to promote economic development in that corridor.”

“How it gets done is where it gets complicated, because it could set a precedence… it is of interest to both towns – to the whole state, really – because it’s being done through legislation,” he said.

Today, Walter said discussion at the selectmen’s meeting persuaded him that the legislation could have long-term negative impact on negotiations with property owners considering donating or selling their land for conservation purposes.

“As we have looked more and more into this, I have become uncomfortable with this use of state land,” Walter said.

The proposal has had strong support from State Sen. Eileen Daily – as it has in past years when it was unsuccessfully proposed – but it has ignited a firestorm of protest from many of her constituents.

Despite those protests, the bill is making progress. As of today, Senate Bill 1196 has already received unanimous approval from the Legislature’s Finance Committee and so, is set to go before the House and Senate.

Not compelling enough

In an interview last week, East Haddam Selectman Peter Govert said he introduced the motion to write the letter opposing Senate Bill 1196.

“First and foremost, I believe it will have a chilling effect on land conservation and preservation when it comes to donors,” he said.

He noted that at a Democratic Town Committee meeting attended by Sen. Daily, he heard an East Haddam resident who had recently sold a sizeable piece of land for conservation say that if this land swap had occurred before the sale, she would have decided to sell the land to a developer “and get more money.”

Govert also recalled that this “land conveyance bill” was vetoed by former Gov. M. Jodi Rell twice in the past. “This would be the third time they are trying to get it passed,” he said.

As for sending a letter to the Legislature, Govert said, “We thought we’d send a very clear message that we don’t support it.”

He added that the decision was not entered into lightly.

“We didn’t rush into this position… We talked about this at previous (Board of Selectmen) meetings. We discussed the pro’s and con’s. We saw the Powerpoint presentation by Riverhouse Development (March 10). We’ve looked at the (Stop the Swap) Web site,” Govert said.

Whether or not the plans he’s seen are realistic is another one of his concerns, Govert said: “We aren’t convinced by the state or by the developers that they have a viable plan. There are a lot of unanswered questions. Who pays for sewage? What about drinking water? Where’s the traffic plan?”

Govert also has some concerns about a part of the bill that includes 2.7 acres owned by Goodspeed. “It’s near the parking lot that the town (East Haddam) owns, by the river,” he said. The Town of East Haddam has an easement on that property for use of the boat launch.

He added that while Sen. Daily has said this property has been removed from the bill, “the last time I looked on the (legislative) Web site, it was still there.”

Opening a door

Walter also expressed concern that if this legislation passes, it could encourage other proposals that could be more difficult to stop.

For example, he recalled a proposal by the Audubon Society to sell a piece of land known as the Harlow Haagenson Preserve off of Creek Road.

The proposal led to the formation of a Friends of Haagenson to stop the sale, and former State Atty. Gen. Richard Blumenthal also stepped in, Walter said.

“Now, there are rumblings that the Audubon may try again to sell it,” Walter said.

He also pointed to the town’s acquisition of 280 acres known as the Shagrue property that ended up being resolved in court as an example of how complicated land negotiations can be.

Two sisters shared ownership – one owned five-sixths of the land and another one-sixth – and the court had to settle which part of the farm would constitute the one-sixth that was retained by one sister, Walter said. “This was because the (preserved) land had to stay in active farm use.”

“So, it’s never easy… and this bill could set a precedence that would make it even more difficult,” Walter said.

A viable plan?

East Haddam Selectman Emmett Lyman also expressed serious concern about the legislation opening the door to similar deals and the effect that could have on future negotiations.

Lyman noted he served on the town’s Planning and Zoning Commission and the Open Space Commission, “and I am very aware of how difficult it is to convince people to turn land over to the town or state.”

“One thing you’re always up against is a developer standing there with a checkbook in his back pocket,” Lyman said.

What gives the town, state agency or conservation group some kind of edge is a “special trust” that the property – and perhaps family memories connected to that land – will be protected from development, he said.

If this land conveyance bill is approved, “what we’re doing is violating that trust,” he said.

“East Haddam has been very actively looking for open space and my feeling is people considering making a deal with us will now ask themselves, ‘How long is it going to take for you to sell it to someone else?’”

He noted that in one instance, it took the town 10 years to negotiate with owners of a farm property. “That isn’t uncommon at all. It’s often a long and very fragile process,” he said.

Lyman said he’s also surprised at how little the State has offered to convince residents this land swap would be a good thing. “I expected the State to come forth with really compelling arguments why this would be good for tourism, for the economy… they didn’t. In the past, they (the proponents) have just slid it past us – and that makes people uncomfortable,” Lyman said.

He added that he, himself, has 40 acres of land near Six Flags in Suffield and if this legislation passes, he would personally feel worried about selling or donating his property for conservation.

He also has simple ethical issues with the proposal, he said. “This is conservation money that comes from you and me and other taxpayers,” Lyman said.

He added, “Do I think economic development is important in the lower Connecticut River Valley? Could we use some help? Yes. But let’s do it in a very public way. And I just don’t think the case has been made… it has to be public and it has to be compelling because you’re betraying a trust.”

Originally posted in East Haddam Today on May 11, 2011; site walk poster added May 12


Related links:

Web site for proponents of the land swap http://www.haddamlandswap.com/

Sharp debate over land swap proposal, NPR http://www.yourpublicmedia.org/content/wnpr/sharp-debate-over-land-swap-proposal

Have a news item or event you’d like posted on this news site? Simply send your information to editor@htnp.com and include your town in the subject line of your email. Please also include a phone number where you can be reached if there are questions. To keep up-to-date on local news, like us (HTNP) on Facebook and follow us on Twitter!

Currently there are "no comments" on this Article:

  1. Brenda Sullivan | HTNP.com Editor says:

    I have received a Letter to the Editor from the developer and will post that shortly…have been struggling with computer issues these last two days. Also, because this was brought up on the East Haddam Today site, I would like to clarify that the crossed fingers is not to imply that the First Selectman was being dishonest when he changed his opinion of the project. The image refers to promising to preserve land from a donor and then selling or deeding it (or swapping) to a developer – reflecting Selectman Lyman’s comments that there is a “special trust” between a person donating or selling land for preservation and the town or agency receiving the land.

  2. StarveTheBeast says:

    It sounds to me the following:

    Person 1: “Hi. I’ve got some land to donate to you if you keep it a forest. Would you like it?”

    State: “Sure, thanks.”

    Developer 1: “Hey, that’s some nice land you’ve got next to my property. I’d sure like to own it to develop it.”

    State: “Urm… What are you going to give me for it if I give it to you?”

    Developer 1: “How about this other property next to some state-owned property?”

    If this over-simplification is close enough to reality, then I say this land swap shouldn’t occur. I’m tired of the state’s main excuse to violate it’s own laws is because of money. Lest we forget the infamous “eminent domain” fiasco of recent years where, if a developer wants your land, all they need to do is call it a blight and convince the town how much more revenue it could generate.

    Also, to address the concerns of “One More Thing” – I’m tired of people always feeling that they need to present differing views in cases of fact. Example – “We landed on the moon. See? Astronaut on moon, planting the flag.” “No, we didn’t land on the moon. How can the flag wave if there is no air on the moon?” In this case, presenting a differing view is wrong because there is no valid differing view. The second side has no facts to back up their claim and if they asked “What’s up with the flag?” They would have been met with “Because the flag is a special flag with springs and rods in it because, as a space agency, we already knew there wouldn’t be any air on the moon,” thus nullifying that question completely.

    In short, when media outlets present facts, they don’t need to invite behaviorally-challenged individuals to present oppositional viewpoints that have no basis of fact just so that the media outlets can appear to be “fair” or “unbiased.”

  3. One More Thing says:

    Your story is completely biased. There is no differing view. You are doing your readers a great disservice.

  4. Not Correct says:

    Sorry ,your information is not correct. There is precedence for such a swap. I live in Haddam and this will be a great benefit for my town. I am sorry you have it all wrong. Also, the state gains a net 70 acres of pristine land in exchange for what is essentially a former DOT sand mine. I think it is important to give your readers the truth, don’t you?

Comment on this Article:



Windham and Storrs microgrid power projects could get additional funding


Press Release Gov. Dannel P. Malloy announced Oct. 30 that nine towns that are part of a pilot microgrid program, including Windham and Storrs, are eligible for additional funding. The …

In Mansfield, Get a jump on toy shopping

Over the Rainbow Toys in the East Brook Mall on the Mansfield/Willimantic town line is closing its doors at 5 p.m. on Saturday, Nov. 2, according to an e-blast sent to its customers today.

And between now and Nov. 2, shoppers will receive a 30 percent discount on all in-stock merchandise at the mall location – excluding Lego and Bruder toys.

UConn President responds to accusations school failed to act on sexual assault complaints

UConn President Susan Hebst. File photo.

There are circumstances under which the university should notify a student that another student who may have been suspended or expelled from campus will be returning, if they are returning. It is my understanding that this notification did not take place in a case that occurred three years ago and it should have. This process was corrected. – UConn President Susan Herbst

January  2015
  1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31