Legislature again considering constitutional amendment for land conveyances [Record Journal]

Article as it appeared in the Record Journal

HARTFORD — Lawmakers are once again seeking a constitutional amendment to require public hearings and a super-majority on conveyances or transfers of state-owned land.

The bill received a majority vote in both the House and Senate last spring, but fell short of the two-thirds majority needed in the House to go to a statewide referendum this past November.

When that happens, proposed constitutional amendments need a simple majority from a second consecutive General Assembly, meaning approval of this year’s bill will allow the initiative to go to voters during the 2018 statewide elections.

Proponents say the protection is needed to provide more transparency on proposals to sell, convey, transfer, or otherwise dispose of state-owned land.

“Connecticut is a beautiful state,” Sen. Kevin Witkos, R-Canton, said in testimony submitted to the Government Administration and Elections Committee as part of a public hearing Monday. “But if that beauty is not protected, it will not last forever.”

The requirement for public hearings and a two-thirds majority on land conveyances would apply to legislative approvals, said Eric Hammerling, executive director of the Connect Park & Forest Association.

Hammerling, of Middlefield, said state agencies already have processes that ensure transparency when they trade or dispose of land within their jurisdiction, so they don’t need the requirement.

The legislature annually votes on a package of such transactions, commonly referred to as the land conveyance bill, and lawmakers from both parties seek to include parcels for their jurisdictions. Many of the parcels involved are small parcels that are included because they abut open space, municipally owned parks, or other facilities that benefit their districts.

Those who support the constitutional amendment said they are not looking to block such transactions, but instead want more transparency whenever lawmakers are looking to sell land for one-time revenue or give parcels to politically connected individuals.

“We typically have little warning on which parcels of state land are being proposed to be given away or when the public hearing will be scheduled,” Hammerling said, adding conservation activists need to “scramble” to identify which conveyances are of the greatest concern.

Proponents say the bill is needed to create more awareness of deals proposals like the Haddam land swap, which would have given 17 acres of open space along the Connecticut River to the owners of a catering hall.
The proposal was approved in 2011 but died amid legal complications the following year.

Opponents, including many who support the intent of the bill, raised concerns about adding an amendment to the constitution that they say would limit the legislature’s authority.

“This bill strips the power of local representation and allows interests outside the municipality to determine manipulate use of land,” Lori Hopkins-Cavanagh, of New London, said in testimony.
Efforts to reach lawmakers Thursday who voted against the bill last year were unsuccessful.

Supporters of the bill say it simply requires additional steps to dispose of or transfer state-owned land, but doesn’t prevent lawmakers from doing so.