Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutIWA/CC/Tulja Complaint CID,* IN• �$ kSF�TO AVOS aGOr December 23,1986 CoRAIA;' Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Dear Commission Members; Please find enclosed correspondence to Mr. Sartor, regarding Mr. Tulajas very inappropriate behavior at the December 8,1986 commission meeting. I request my letter be placed as an exhibit to be read in full and also placed into the minutes of the January 12,1987 commission meeting. Very truly yours, �b Julie A. Raymo 133 Stanley Drive South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 December 22,1986 Richard j. Sartor, Town Manager Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Re: Mr. Tulaja Inland Wetland Commission Member Dear Mr. Sartor; On December 8,1986 I attended an Inland Wetland Commission meeting regarding two applications on the agenda. I felt that as a resident and property owner I had aright to voice my legitimate concerns regarding those items. I After I presented my opinions, asked my questions and conclued my presentations, I was verbally attacked by Mr. Tulaja. This commision member had the audacity to ask me for my qualifications, my educational level and if I was a geologist. I found this line of questioning inappropriate and unbecoming of a commission member who is supposedly representing the public at large, whose main concern should have been wetland preservation and conservation, not to critique a citizens qualifications to speak. If Mr. Tulaja finds my legitimate concerns and opinions and my constitutional 1 right to express those concerns and opinions offensive, then possibly his appointment should be terminated. At the very least, .I expect a written apology for his very inappropriate behavior, a verbal apology at the next commission meeting scheduled for January 12,1987, and I request, if Mr Tulaja is to remain on the commission he be required to review and educate himself with respect to his duties and responsibilities as an appointed member of the Inland Wetland Commission. Thank: You for your anticipated co-operation in this matter. Very truly yours, Julie A. Raymond 133 Stanley Drive South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 CC:Richard Ryan, Deputy Mayor I Town Council .Kevin Renne, Chairman IWCC j , j ` December 26,1986 ' Stanley J. Pack, Commissioner Department of Environmental Protection Room 117, State Office Building Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Re: Inland Wetland / Conservation Commission Town of South Windsor Dear Commissioner Pack; I respectfully request the Department of Environmental Protection to actively investigate the Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission of the Town of South Windsor. Please find enclosed documentation with respect to my request. Also, be advised my conclusions have been based solely on my limited exposure to this commission. It is my understanding that this commission was established to protect and preserve the wetlands and watercourses from random and unnecess a by activity involving obstruction, construction, alteratioon oorses Pollution ofting thesell wetlands. To assist the Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission to perform these mandated duties; regulations and Statutes have been provided. It is the duty and responsibility of the IWCC to adhere to these Regulations and Statutes in order to achieve a knowledgeable, intelligent and objective conclusion on each of the applications before them. Unfortunately, it has become evident to me, that this Commission may have lost } sight of these duties and responsibilities not only to the town at large, but to the wetlands and environment they are duty bound to protect. I believe certain members of this Commission have emotion and by their own words and actions allowed Personalities to rule, instead of Regulations and Statutes, thereby eroding the public trust and creating an atmosphere of I and_special considerations not available to eve Preferential treatment _town. It is for these reasons I am requesting � individual citizen ogaf this this matter. Your immediate investi Lion into } As further developments occur, I will Kee j P You-informed. Thank you for your anticapated co-operation. ? Very truly yours, Julie A. Raymond . 133 Stanley Drive South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 644-8398 Encl: Exhibits A thru J CC:Doug Kooper, DEP Karl Wagner, CEQ Richard Ryan, Deputy Mayor Members of the Town Council Richard Sartor, T wn Members of the In�andN%lrand Commission i 1. Accepting Incomplete Applications specifically incomplete items # 3 and # 7 I Exhibit`A - Applications Exhibit B - Town Regulations - Information Required on an Application. 2. Improper Placement of Items on the Agenda Allowing items to be placed under New Applications when no application exsists Exhibit G - Agenda October 27,1986 Exhibit D - Agenda - October 20,1986 Exhibit E - Minutes - October 27,1986 - Pages 8 and 9 2A. Allowing Discussion on " non-applications," then considering it an infor- mational hearing. Exhibit C Agenda - October 27,1986 Exhibit D - Agenda October 20,1986 i Exhibit E - Minutes - October 27,1986 - Pages 8 and 9 f 3. Commission members asking for a favorable response from the IWCC without listening to citizens concerns and most importantly without a Formal Application to satisfy all Town Regulations and State Regulations Therefore, not only setting a very dangerous precedent by asking for this special consideration and also. attempting. to affect a vote on an application not yet before them. Exhibit F - Minutes - October 27,1986 Exhibit G Town Charter - C1001.B 3A. Commission members have been leaving an on going meeting to speak personally with upcoming applicants on the Agenda create ng treatment and special consideration.— an atmosphere of preferential 3B. By leaving a Meeting while Applications are being presented, I believe these Commission Members can not make a fair, objective and educated decision when they are not there to become fully informed of all the facts regarding the welands they are obligated to protect. Therefore, it is my opinion, they are evading their responsibilities and duties as appointed members of the Inland Wetland/donservation Commission. 4. Verbally Harassing Concerned Citizens who have legitimate opinions and comments. Exhibit H - Letter to Richard J. Sartor, Town Manager Minutes unavailable from December 8,1986 meeting, transcripts are at Town Hall. 4A. Allowing emotion and personality to interfer with an applications merit, instead of Regulations that would allow for an objective decision with respect to the enviornmental impact of the proposed activity. i ' 5. Accepting Antigue_d Information/Maps as factual documentation. On October 27,1986 contours and grades where questioned by commission members and residents yet no updated information was requested. The maps and grading topos where done in1982 - prior to any development. Presently development is approx. 9% complete. Exhibit E -Minutes - October 27,1986 - Page 9I- par 4 Minutes unavailable from December 8,1986 meeting, transcripts are at Town Hall Y page 2 of. 2 5A. Extending Applications without Requiring the Applicant to fully update the information, nor requesting a verbal update by the developer to be placed in the minutes, thus creating possible hardships to the environment and to potential property owners. Exhibit J - Minutes - September 8,1986 -Page 9 - Permit Extention 7 item 2 Exhibit F - Minutes - October 27,1986 - Page 10 - Exhibit I - Town Regulations 6.13 and 6.15 6. Accepting Plan Revisions to existing Applications which exceed the scope of e original app 1 I.on. Minutes unavailable from December 8,1986 meeting, transcripts are at Town Hall Exhibit F - Minutes - October 27,1986 - Page 10 I I i STATE OF CONNECTICUT COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Kevin Rennie, Chairman APR 27 1987 South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 South Windsor INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY/ CONSERVATION COMMISSION Dear Mr. Rennie: As you. know, the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) was asked to investigate the actions of the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency, pursuant to our responsibility under Section 22a-13 of the Connecticut General Statutes. While neither the CEQ nor any other agency is empowered to overturn any local decisions, the CEQ can recommend to the Department of Environmental Protection that it utilize its authority to revoke a municipal wetlands agency's authority if the situation warrants. You will be interested to know that the CEQ finds no reason to recommend any state action against the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency. To the contrary, it appears that your agency, faced with the requests of a landowner who desired more usable land than what was permitted by your agency, acted conscientiously to uphold the intent of the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act. Your commission's decision to seek advice from the DEP and Soil Conser- vation Service in the future on this difficult case is commendable. I am enclosing a copy of my letter to the complainant, which outlines our findings. I believe it is self explanatory. However, please feel free to call me at 566-3510 if you have any questions. Sincerely, A� _ Karl J. Wagener Executive Director Enclosure: PHONE 566-3510 ' STATE OFFICE BUILDING • HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06115 An Equal Opportunity Employer STATE OF CONNECTICUT _T COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY April 23, 1,W Julie A. Raymond 133 Stanley Drive South Windsor, CT 06074 Dear Mrs. Raymond: The Council on Environmental Quality's investigation of• your complaints regarding the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Commission has been slowed a bit by a heavy workload in the past two months. As I indicated during our recent phone conversation, however, we have reviewed each of your complaints thoroughly. What follows is a summary of your complaints, and the Council's determination on each. 1. Accepting Incomplete Applications. The applications in question were never actually accepted -y"the commission. Also, while it is true that the applications as filed did not contain all of the information that is legally required, it is important to realize that applicants often submit incomplete applications; it is up to the commission to require additional information as appropriate. 2. Improper Placement of Items on the Agenda. It is common practice for commissions to hear the puns o applicants fore formal applications are filed or accepted. In some towns this is called the informal agenda. As long as no votes are taken, and the preliminary discussion is not viewed as a substitute for formal hearings and deliberations, no environmental harm is done. It.would be improper for a commission to vote on an item not on the agenda, but to place an item on the agenda for informal discussion, with no voting, is not improper.1 According to a 1986 survey of wetlands- commiss ons:; 95% of towns report that applicants consult with the commissions before applying formally. 2A. Allowing Discussion on "Non-applications." See Number 2, above. 3. Commission members asking for a favorable response without a formal application. Not i eal behavior--,­b�utsTric-e the application was not approved, one could not accuse the commission of being prejudiced in favor of the application. This type of behavior might be the type of issue discussed in a judicial appeal of a decision, but cannot be construed by this Council to be an indicator of poor performance by the commission. 3A. Commission members leaving meetings to speak AAliupcoming applicants.Not illegal, to my T&o—wledge. PHONE 566-3510 STATE OFFICE BUILDING • HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06115 An Equal Opportunity Employer 4. Verbally Harassing Concerned Citizens. After talking with you and reviewing tie transcripts o of he Decem ear ,N86 meeting, I can only conclude that the commission and its chairman did their best to protect your right to speak. The unfriendly remarks of a single commission member are not an issue for this Council. 4A. Allowing emotion and personility to interfere. There would never be any means to evaluate t1I—is complaint on an objective sis. 5. Acce ting antiquated information/maps. As in number 1, the commission never accepted this i�rmation. 5A. Extending applications without u to of information. There are no requirements—egarding ii. ormation submittedr permit extensions. 6. Accepting Plan Revisions. Same as Numbers 1 and 5: Plans were not accepted. In summary, I must conclude that, notwithstanding your dissatisfaction with what you perceive as an unsatisfactory attitude of the commission toward wetlands protection, the commission acted conscientiously in not accepting the plans of a developer to fill wetlands. The potential problem was caused not by the commission, but by a landowner trying to squeeze more usable land from a wdtlands area. As land values continue to escalate, you will see proposals from some landowners for projects having tremendous environmental impacts. At $100,000 per building lot, it will become worthwhile to attempt anything. It will require the vigilance of concerned citizens and conscientious work by local commissions to protect our wetlands in the face of unprecedented economic pressure. Although the Council finds no reason to recommend any state action against the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Commission, I do appreciate your efforts to carefully document all of your complaints. Rarely do we receive such clearly- outlined complaints. Although the South Windsor wetlands commission appears to be doing its job very well, there are commissions in other towns that could benefit from the scrutiny of environmentally concerned citizens. Individuals are extremely important in the overall effort to protect wetlands. Sincerely, Karl J. Wagener�/ Executive Director STATE OF CONNECTICUT � +F DEPARTMENT 'OF PROTECTION " 1 v February 10, 1987 }� Council on Environmental Quality F� 165 Capitol Avenue 198? State Office Building iN SoUt Hartford, Connecticut 06106 co s RV T��osdsor Attn: Karl Wagner ,o�coft f RE: Julie Raymond Complaint South Windsor, CT. Dear Mr. Wagner: Commissioner Pac referred your inquiry relative to the above to me. I have had discussions with the complainant and with members of the South Windsor Wetlands Agency. I have offered the services of the Wetlands Management Section in dealing with this problem if the local agency wishes. The Commission was involves in an administrative proceeding at the time of the complaint; and Mrs. Raymond had ample opportunity to participate at the municipal level . Based upon our knowledge of the situation we do not feel that there are sufficient grounds for our intervention in this matter at this time. I will keep you posted on further developments on this case. If you wish to review our file materials on the subject feel free to.contact me. Sin rely, ok Doug oope TV Principal Environ. Analyst Water Resources Unit DC:jc cc: South Windsor Inland _Wetl.ands Agency i Phone: 165 Capitol Avenue Hartford, Connecticut 06106 An Equal Opportunity Employer