Here’s an apolitical attempt to outline the history of the Wayne Cooke Hilltop Orchard property.

I’ve attempted to carefully document the Hilltop Orchards history using AI – without political bias.

Here are the results:

The Cooke family ownership of Hilltop Orchards in Branford, Connecticut, spans roughly 140 years, initiated by Samuel Griffing Cooke in the 19th century and managed across multiple generations before closing the retail landmark in 2004 and navigating subsequent land and tax battles. [1, 2, 3]

Founding and Early Ownership

• Samuel Griffing Cooke (1835–1915): Purchased the 148-acre Griffing farm at East Main Street and Leetes Island Road, starting the fruit-growing enterprise that became Hilltop Orchards.
• 1868: Samuel married Cornelia Augusta Palmer, and they raised five children on the property. [2]

Later Generations and Business Closure

• Nelson B. Cooke: A UConn horticulture graduate (class of 1939) who owned and operated the farm alongside family members. [3]
• Wayne Cooke: Represented a later generation (operating alongside family partnerships) and managed the roadside store known for its apple globe and pies. [1, 4]
• December 2004: Hilltop Orchards closed its retail operations on East Main Street for good after nearly 140 years in business, with the family retaining a portion of the remaining acreage. [1, 5]

Tax Disputes and Later Legal Battles

• 2009–2011: The town revoked the property’s agricultural tax classification, causing annual taxes on family partnership parcels to jump from $17,000 to over $85,000, triggering prolonged legal and public protests led by Wayne Cooke. [4, 6]
• 2010–2011: Settlements and selectmen votes partially restored agricultural status to specific parcels (such as 573 E. Main St.) conditional on active farming. [4, 7]
• 2015–2024: Wayne Cooke pursued further litigation against town officials regarding a stalled $5 million land development proposal for Costco, resulting in a jury damage award in early 2024. https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/Is-Branford-forcing-Wayne-Cooke-s-Hilltop-11558481.php
• https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/Hilltop-Orchards-now-part-of-past-11650030.php
• https://www.wsclancy.com/obituaries/Nelson-B-Cooke?obId=2088788
• https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/Branford-Cooke-family-settle-tax-dispute-11600526.php
• http://207.210.128.35/archives758/files/original/5da80b1411d9ed3d1a2b5bda038a7074.pdf
• https://patch.com/connecticut/branford/cooke-takes-billboard-clad-trailor-out-of-service-indefinitly

What were specific parcels of land involved in the Cooke family tax agreements?

The tax agreements and reclassification disputes between the Wayne Cooke family partnerships and the town of Branford involved four non-contiguous parcels of land that historically made up the “farm unit” of Hilltop Orchards. [1]

When the town revoked the farm status under the Public Act 490 program, the total tax bill across these combined properties skyrocketed from roughly $17,000 to over $85,000 annually. The specific parcels addressed in the subsequent Board of Assessment Appeals rulings and court settlements include: [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

The Two Larger Parcels (The Core Dispute)

• 573 East Main Street: A 21-acre parcel located south of Route 1 (identified in town property records as Assessor’s Map J04, Block 002, Lot 0001). Under a 2010 stipulated court agreement, the town agreed to restore its farmland tax classification, conditional upon the family actively farming the land and keeping the ownership structure intact. [2, 3, 6]
• 616 East Main Street: A 16.91-acre parcel located north of Route 1, which contained Wayne Cooke’s residential home. The initial 2010 agreement reclassified this section as commercial property, though later omnibus legal resolutions in 2014 allowed it to tentatively regain farmland tax status for back taxes. [2, 3]

The Two Smaller Parcels

• 61 East Main Street: A smaller piece of land separated from the primary orchard grounds. The Board of Assessment Appeals initially voted to preserve or restore its agricultural farm status during the early 2009 disputes. [1]
• Thimble Island Road (Red Hill Road area): An outlying agricultural parcel tied to the family partnership’s farm unit. Along with the 61 E. Main St. location, this parcel was initially protected by early assessment board decisions, but it faced rolling declassifications and reinstatements before finally being resolved under back-tax reclassifications in late 2014. [1, 3]
• 1. https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/ct-superior-court/1506328.html
• 2. https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/Battle-rages-on-Hilltop-Orchards-tax-bill-11640455.php
• 3. https://patch.com/connecticut/branford/branford-settles-wayne-cooke-slander-suit-500000-0
• 4. https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/Branford-Cooke-family-settle-tax-dispute-11600526.php
• 5. https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/Branford-s-Wayne-Cooke-files-lawsuits-against-11465335.php

The 16.91-acre parcel at 616 East Main Street (the site containing the historic Cooke residence) was fundamentally shaped by its transition into an IG-2 (General Industrial) Zone and its role in major, highly contested commercial development proposals. [1, 2, 3]

The major commercial zoning milestones and changes affecting this specific parcel include:

Industrial Upzoning (IG-2 Designation)

• The Baseline Shift: The 16.91-acre lot at 616 East Main Street was grouped alongside adjacent Cooke family properties (including 596 East Main) to form a contiguous 20.4-acre block zoned explicitly as IG-2 (General Industrial). [1, 3]
• Permitted Uses: This specific commercial zoning stripped the land of its exclusive agricultural/residential parameters and legally unlocked the footprint for high-density commercial applications, including medical facilities, warehouses, laboratories, and manufacturing hubs. [1]

The Stalled Costco Master Plan

• The Proposal: The property sat directly across Route 1 from a multi-parcel tract spanning over 44 acres that was targeted for a massive commercial retail development. [4]
• Planned Infrastructure: Under the conceptual master plan, the commercial upzoning was intended to support a 158,070-square-foot Costco wholesale club and accessory gas station. This development would have necessitated a new commercial access road intersecting the surrounding infrastructure at I-95’s Exit 56. [4]
• The Fallout: Protracted delays, shifting town mandates, and legal standoffs regarding the scope of the commercial master plan ultimately caused the Costco project to fall through, giving rise to Wayne Cooke’s long-running civil rights litigation against town officials over structural roadblocks.

The Recent Rehabilitation Hospital Pivot (2025–2026)

• Special Exception Requests: With the Costco project defunct, the Cooke family and its associated entities (including NFW Associates) leveraged the commercial IG-2 zoning to pivot the land toward high-density healthcare infrastructure.
• The Project Scope: Under applications submitted to the Branford Planning & Zoning Commission, the family proposed a $69.5 million, 54,765-square-foot inpatient rehabilitation hospital spanning 596, 612, and 616 East Main Street.
• Approvals: The project cleared critical environmental and commercial hurdles, including a unanimous 6-0 approval from the Branford Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency to manage site grading, utilities, and stormwater drainage for the facility. [1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8]

.

• 1. https://www.branford-ct.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_06042026-3735
• 2. https://www.branford-ct.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_07232026-3839
• 3. https://geentygroup.com/properties/240-Land-596-616-East-Main-Street-Branford-Connecticut-06405-USD6-018-000/
• 4. https://geentygroup.com/properties/240-Land-596-616-East-Main-Street-Branford-Connecticut-06405-USD6-018-000/
• 5. https://www.nhregister.com/news/article/branford-rehab-hospital-hearing-encompass-health-22320878.php
• 6. https://www.branford-ct.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_03122026-3347
• 7. https://www.branford-ct.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Minutes/_03262026-3462

History of 569 and 573 East Main leading to BJ’s proposal.

The property at 573 East Main Street—historically the 21-acre agricultural core of the Cooke family’s Hilltop Orchards south of Route 1—serves as the primary link between the family’s past land battles and a massive commercial development centered around a BJ’s Wholesale Club. [1, 2]

The historical timeline and development pivot of the 573 East Main Street parcel includes:

The Agricultural Tax Battle

• The Reclassification Dispute: In 2009, the town revoked the property’s Public Act 490 agricultural status, triggering years of legal battles led by Wayne Cooke.
• The 2010 Restored Status: Under a 2010 stipulated court agreement, the town agreed to restore 573 East Main Street’s farmland tax classification, conditional on active farming. This agreement protected the 21-acre parcel while surrounding properties began shifting toward commercial zoning.

The Failed Costco Era (2015–2017)

• The Original Proposal: In February 2015, plans were filed to transform 573 East Main Street and adjacent properties into a large-scale commercial hub anchored by a 158,000-square-foot Costco Wholesale store. [3]
• Environmental Opposition: The proposal faced severe public and regulatory backlash, including intense Inland Wetlands Commission hearings where residents raised concerns regarding watershed damage and a proposed gas station near the wetlands. [4]
• Project Collapse & Lawsuit: Stalled by town mandates, Costco withdrew its plans in 2017. Wayne Cooke subsequently sued the town, claiming planning officials intentionally sabotaged a $5 million land sale to Costco. In March 2024, a Superior Court judge awarded Cooke $202,000 in damages. [5]

The BJ’s Wholesale Club Proposal

• A New Master Plan: A developer filed formal applications with the Branford Planning and Zoning Commission to revive the defunct Costco site. The new master plan seeks to develop the vacant acreage spanning 569 and 573 East Main Street.
• The BJ’s Footprint: The new proposal features a 106,700-square-foot BJ’s Wholesale Club with an attached liquor store.
• Expanded Commercial Infrastructure: To complement the warehouse club, the developer’s layout introduces an 8-pump (16-car) BJ’s Gas Station along East Industrial Road. It also specifies a 7,000-square-foot sit-down restaurant, two 2,800-square-foot fast-food buildings with drive-thrus, and a 16,000-square-foot retail strip plaza at the corner of Leetes Island Road and East Main Street.
• Next Steps: Because the local commission does not convene in August, the earliest formal independent evaluation of the BJ’s master plan is slated for the September 3, 2026 commission agenda. [2, 5, 6, 7]

1. https://www.nhregister.com/business/article/Opposition-to-Branford-Costco-plan-cites-11336928.php
2. https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/bjs-wholesale-club-planned-branford-100000710.html
3. https://www.greenwichtime.com/business/article/bjs-wholesale-club-branford-costco-site-proposal-22359363.php
4. https://www.facebook.com/theconnecticutscoop/photos/new-brooklyn-scoopa-new-tenant-is-coming-to-the-former-ford-dealership-in-brookl/997307289539056/
5. https://www.facebook.com/theconnecticutscoop/posts/new-branford-scoop%EF%B8%8Fa-new-retail-development-with-a-bjs-wholesale-club-is-being-p/1102778408991943/
6. https://patch.com/connecticut/branford/massive-commercial-development-eyed-branford
7. https://www.nhregister.com/business/article/bjs-wholesale-club-branford-costco-site-proposal-22359363.php

Traffic and infrastructure changes planned for the East Industrial Road intersection

The traffic and infrastructure upgrades planned around the East Industrial Road intersection (near I-95’s Exit 56) are a mix of town-initiated road reconstruction and developer-driven site modifications meant to accommodate the massive commercial traffic from the proposed BJ’s Wholesale Club retail development. [1, 2, 3]

The primary changes planned for the immediate area include:

1. Full-Depth Road Reconstruction (Town Project)

•  
• Rebuilding the Road: The town of Branford is currently executing a full-depth, ground-up reconstruction of East Industrial Road. [4, 5]
• Drainage and Streetscape: The project involves replacing the entire sub-surface stormwater drainage system and installing modern sidewalks to improve pedestrian connectivity. [5]
• Traffic Flow: To minimize disruptions during peak hours, heavy construction is restricted Monday through Friday between 7:00 AM–9:00 AM and 3:00 PM–6:00 PM. The active traffic detours are scheduled to remain in place through October. [5, 6]
•  

2. Dedicated Exit 56 Ramps & Signal Modifications (Developer Proposal)

• Direct Highway Access: Under the overarching master layout for the site, developers plan to construct a direct access drive linking East Industrial Road to the I-95 Southbound Exit 56 ramps. This is engineered to siphon heavy highway traffic directly into the commercial zone before it conflicts with local roads. [2]
• Traffic Signal Upgrades: The massive spike in volume will require a modification of the existing traffic signals at the East Industrial Road intersection. The developer proposes upgrading the hardware and modifying signal timing to coordinate with peak warehouse-club shopping hours. [2, 6]
•  

3. Separation of Fuel and Retail Traffic

 

Gas Station Placement: The developer, Sound Development Group LLC, intentionally split the vehicle layout. The main 106,700-square-foot BJ’s store fronts East Main Street, while the high-turnover 8-pump (16-car) BJ’s Gas Station is positioned directly along East Industrial Road.

Mitigating Congestion: By moving the fueling center to East Industrial Road, the design aims to prevent fuel-line backups from spilling over and gridlocking the main corner intersection at East Main Street and Leetes Island Road, which local leaders note already suffers from severe traffic congestion. [1, 7, 8, 9, 10]

1. https://patch.com/connecticut/branford/massive-commercial-development-eyed-branford

2. https://www.nhregister.com/business/article/Opposition-to-Branford-Costco-plan-cites-1133692   3.https://www.instagram.com/p/DbLWeSMju2l/8.php

4. https://www.nhregister.com/business/article/bjs-wholesale-club-branford-costco-site-proposal-22359363.php

5. https://www.theconnecticutscoop.com/all-new-haven-county-posts/branford-scoop-bjs-wholesale-club-retail-development-proposed-for-previously-proposed-costco-site

6. https://www.branford-ct.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2503

7. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DZvUmpTIq17/

8. https://www.nhregister.com/connecticut/article/Costco-submits-plan-to-build-near-Branford-s-11355281.php

9. https://www.facebook.com/steven.mazzacane/posts/to-understand-why-first-selectman-josh-brooks-public-statements-about-the-bjs-pr/10246232808418359/

Update: 02-14-2025

Attorneys for the town of Branford have retrieved the attached letter dated April 28, 2024 confirming that Gary Zielinski successfully completed the Tree Warden School in 2017 – over 8 years ago and only now revealed.

We’ve also retrieved this 11-09-2022 email from Eversource. It was sent by Gary Zielinski after my wife’s 09-06-2022 almost fatal tree accident. He refused to respond to our emails or phone calls. The contents illustrate his total lack of managerial or technical acumen necessary to be tree warden. He took no other action to protect Leetes Island Road drivers from another disaster.

Note the email was sent to June Moulis of Lucas Trees, who then forwards it to Eversource.

The town is required by ordinance to hire a professional arborist “in waiting” for just this situation. June Moulis of Lucas Trees is under contract with Eversource and is not under contract to the town.

The trees were finally removed 2 years later by Eversource. Read below.

Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2022 8:35:10 PM (UTC)
Sent: Wed, 9 Nov 2022 8:35:01 PM (UTC)
Subject: Fwd: [EXTERNAL]Leaning trees on Leetes Island Rd
From: June Moulis
To: Mcleod, Dale B ;
EVERSOURCE IT NOTICE – EXTERNAL EMAIL SENDER **** Don’t be quick to click! ****
Do not click on links or attachments if sender is unknown or if the email is unexpected from someone you
know, and never provide a user ID or password. Report suspicious emails by selecting ‘Report Phish’ or
forwarding to SPAMFEEDBACK@EVERSOURCE.COM for analysis by our cyber security team.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Get Outlook for Android
From: Gary Zielinski
Sent: Wednesday, November 9, 2022 9:31:50 AM
To: June Moulis
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Leaning trees on Leetes Island Rd
June
Could you please check on these trees located at 261 Leetes Island Rd. They are leaning and look like they can
impact power lines across the street.
Let me know what you think
Thank you
Gary

Around 10:40 AM, Tuesday July 30, 2024 our generator kicked in due to an Eversource power outage. All the usual events took place – downed internet, tv, and AC – then the generator decoupled from the grid and 10 minutes later we were back up and running. We’re lucky to have a generator.

After September 6, 2022 when a tree fell on our car while Jane was driving south on Leetes Island Road, I investigated Branford’s forest management practices and discovered that there are none. Branford does not even have a state licensed tree warden – a fact that First Selectman Cosgrove denies but refuses to come up with proof.

In an attempt to confirm the rumor that the July 30th tree that disrupted our power was near the Leetes Island Road location of my wife’s accident. I extracted the nearby Eversource utility pole number from the police report and contacted Eversource. For the record, it is Eversource pole #44736 and on 9-6-2022 it was struck by the same tree that struck our car.

Eversource arborist Dale McLeod confirmed the location of both trees just south of Flat Rock Road along Leetes Island Road and that the area was a “mess”. See below.

Branford’s Tree Warden website hasn’t updated the Eversource vegetation plan since January, 2018. And it does not name a tree warden.

Mr. McLoud reported that he was working with Branford’s tree warden, not knowing that he does not have a state license as a tree warden.

This is the region of consideration looking north along Leetes Island road and just south of Flat Rock Road.

On March 21, 2023 I sent the following letter to the Board of Selectman. Also see https://vimeopro.com/branfordtv/branford-town-meetings/video/815164310

Mr. James Cosgrove, Branford First Selectman

Branford Board of Selectman

Branford, CT 06405

Dear Mr. Cosgrove and Board of Selectman:

As you are aware, the RTM recently revised the town code that governs the duties of the town tree warden. This revision was in response to a September 6, 2022 accident when my wife experienced a near fatal encounter with a falling tree while driving south on Leetes Island Road.

It has been revealed that the town has not had a state certified tree warden for almost three years, as required by both state statutes, and previous and revised versions of the town code.

After September 6, our repeated attempts to contact either the town public works director or the town tree warden (one and the same) failed. The revised town code now requires that the town tree warden respond to taxpayer tree-related requests.

As of September 6, and as of this writing, the town tree warden webpage does not list the name or e-mail address of a state certified tree warden or anyone acting in that capacity.

It’s for these reasons that I’m appealing directly to the Board.

It should also be noted that a freedom of information act (FOIA) request revealed the outrageous fact that the town public works administration has no record of the post-accident cleanup on September 6, 2022, even given the severity of the near-fatal event involving a roadside tree.

We wonder if other similar events have not been recorded by Branford public works. We hope that the new tree warden will keep publicly accessible records.

Finally, we are concerned that the group of roadside trees that contained the tree that fell on our car continue to present a danger to Leetes Island Road drivers. We believe they are rooted in private, downward sloping soil next to the town right of way. According to the police report, these trees are across Leetes Island Road from Eversource utility pole number 44736, which was damaged by the same tree that struck my wife’s car.

According to Sec, 16-10 A and C of the revised town code, the tree warden has the town and state authority to remove private roadside trees that present a threat to public safety.

Given the town does not have a state certified tree warden, we suggest the deployment of on-call arborists to evaluate the public safety risk before prevalent recent windstorms weaken these trees further.

Jerry Shaw

Here’s a video of the BOS meeting: https://vimeopro.com/branfordtv/branford-town-meetings/video/815164310

Mr. Cosgrove has seen fit to ignore both the warning about failing trees along Leetes Island Road and the tree warden provisions of the revised town code.

Branford needs a competent forest manager now before someone gets killed.

Jerry Shaw 8/2/24

Update: 8/24/2024: I’ve been in contact with two Eversource professional arborists, Dale McLeod, and Sean Redding and the Eversource manager of CT Vegetation Management, Jenna Turner. They confirmed that some of these trees were on private property next to the one that fell on Jane’s car in 2022.

Here’s the one sentence response from Jenna that will make your day:

“We have removed one tree on Leetes Island Rd, the one that had caused the recent outage near Flat Rock Rd. Last week I reviewed the area with a Lucas Tree Work Planner and she is now getting permission to remove ten priority trees along Leetes island Rd and RT 146. We have permission to remove four trees at this point. Work will start once we hear back from all property owners and a review with the town tree warden is completed.”

Every time I look out our windows onto Thimble Islands Road, I see our and our neighbor’s white picket fences. Sort of Tom Sawyer-ish. Before vinyl fences, we had ours painted by a school kid, just like Tom.

Taking a safe walk across the road to visit the fence is the subject of this piece. Add to that motivation, two near encounters with speeding cars while using the Church crosswalk with my mobility scooter last August.

Neither the Stony Creek Association nor the Town of Branford, nor Public Works, nor the Town Engineer have seen fit to conduct a traffic study along Thimble Islands Road – the road that borders our picket fence. This, in spite of the obvious hazards that resurface every year, particularly during June, July and August.

One example of local questionable judgement is refusal by the SCA to consider temporary removeable speed bumps, even one positioned just before/after the Church crosswalk, and installed just during the tourist months.

Speed is the one constant prevailing daily threat to pedestrians crossing parts of TIR at crucial places, not just during the tourist season.

I call it the Thimble Islands Speedway. And not just on Memorial Day. You’ll see why below.

As a retired technologist, I gathered tools together to collect data, first to establish a baseline for further study during the busy months, and later to determine volume, median and average statistical data to justify policy changes designed to enhance public safety. At the very least, speed limit enforcement, and compliance with state and federal parking and pedestrian safety laws.

Everything I’ve used so far in the way of speed detection can be pointed out of our window and purchased by other homeowners who want to repeat this process in their neighborhood. I’ll only show the latest results from the middle of March. All of what I show was taken with a laptop and a webcam with commercial software. I cannot record license plate numbers, nor do I intend to.

Let me be blunt. This data will be used to support further action if needed.

Plot A:

Here’s an example from 3/20/2024, between 2:00 and 5:00 pm when there was about 150 cars traveling north and south in front of our house. See the picket fence across the way.

Plot B

A plot of the speed of about 150 cars in and out of a region in front of our house on 03/20/2024 during the above afternoon. Note speeds over our current 25 mph speed limit.

Plot C

A scatter plot of the above data. Note speeds over our current 25 mph speed limit.

Conclusion – A March Snapshot

These statistics are Stony Creek drivers (not tourists) and their servicing personnel in the middle of March.

A substantial number of cars exceed 30 MPH with 7 cars traveling faster than 35 MPH and one at 42. Here are the statistics for those so minded: Average speed: 24.785 mph, median speed: 25.01 mph, i.e. half the cars clocked above the posted 25 mph speed limit.

It is my belief that one or two delivery trucks exceeded my software’s capability to clock their speed due to video frame rate limitations.

A few suggestions.

1. The Association has not created a public forum on this topic. It should consider doing so.
2. If it’s not obvious, parked cars at the entrance to crosswalks block line-of-sight for kids, mothers with strollers and wheel chair users. State law dictates 25′ parking setbacks. We’ve been violating this state law for years because complying subtracts from available parking for Islanders and businesses.

This is not generally an issue in non-tourist months, but speed is. As is obvious, 40 mph speed can kill pedestrians in Stony Creek’s crosswalks, with or without parking setbacks.

Without 25 ft. parking setbacks from crosswalks, the probability of death or injury goes up significantly at 25 mph. That’s less than 3 human reaction times, if the driver is paying attention and half that at 40 mph.

3. The Association is obligated to deploy all reasonable measures to enforce public safety laws. The Association does not monitor parking setbacks from crosswalks, nor does it intend to pay for a parking enforcement officer to enforce parking or speed rules during tourist season, though I haven’t seen the latest SCA minutes. Installation of ADA sidewalk cutouts (with the nice little rubber mats) does not come with parking prohibition setbacks near crosswalks – they must be painted and enforced. See an existing recently installed ADA sidewalk cutout below.

4. The above data suggests a 20 mph Thimble Island Road speed zone starting south of Sachem Road, which would include the major commercial hot-spot in the Creek, Madera Park and the Stony Creek Beach.

5. As a low-key visual deterrent, new happy face solar speed signs ( non-recording without LPR) should be placed at two or more sites along TIR, including one for the above 20mph zone. An electronic speed sign has been suggested for the Amtrak underpass alert system, which is now years late due to the tardiness of Public Works.

Respectfully submitted,

Jerry Shaw, Stony Creek

by Jerry Shaw December 1, 2023.

Update: August 19, 2024

1 Dead, 1 Missing During Historic Flood, More Storms, Flooding Expected Monday. 10 in. of rain in a few hours near Southbury along I-84..

https://patch.com/connecticut/branford/s/iynhr/ct-weather-2-missing-during-historic-flood-more-storms-monday?utm_source=alert-breakingnews&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alert&user_email=f281f735a6c82692160d057b3b31c9917dc49a7f7fd833accd0b1ecb7a4ea9bf&user_email_md5=3dd1f885c00b2ebae519221f5186dd2b&lctg=520d5e331e240a9c3f2b4a66

Quotes from from Jan Ellen Spiegel of The CT Mirror, and The New York Times.

Jan Ellen wrote “Last summer made it clear that flooding is one of the greatest risks the Northeast faces from climate change. Warm air and oceans, along with sea level rise, mean more intense storms and floods — this summer, the summer of 2021 and likely summers in the future. The Fifth National Climate Assessment, released earlier this month, specifically noted extreme precipitation and flooding as a key climate change issue for the Northeast.” The New York Times did express some muted optimism in reporting on this assessment, but for flooding in the Northeast, not so much.

1) https://ctmirror.org/2023/10/08/ct-stormwater-flooding-climate-change-drainage-manual/

2) https://ctmirror.org/2023/11/05/ct-shoreline-flooding-climate-change/

3) https://ctmirror.org/2023/11/17/ct-flooding-climate-change/

4) https://ctmirror.org/2023/11/30/ct-climate-change-flooding-local-solutions/?utm_source=Connecticut+Mirror+Mailing+List&utm_campaign=803c26d799-CT+Mirror+Morning+Briefing&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_571d22f8e4-803c26d799-68478433&mc_cid=803c26d799&mc_eid=de2dcee2f8

In this day of 5 inches per hour, so-called 100-year tropical rainstorms, it should shock all of us that Branford’s Flood and Erosion Control Board hasn’t met since 2018, has no designated chair and no replacements for two diseased members.

With all other town boards, the selectmen are obligated to fill vacancies.

Not the Flood and Erosion Control Board.

In addition, in Branford Town Code, Chapter 161, approved by the RTM in 2014, the Flood Control Board’s responsibilities are empowered by the same Section 7-148(c)(7) of the Connecticut General Statutes that allows towns to remove stray dogs from their streets.

The state legislature, in 2022, revised Sec. 25-84 that specifies that town ordinances may create municipal flood prevention, climate resilience and erosion control boards, except that in towns having a population of less than fifty thousand, the selectmen may be empowered by such ordinance to act as such flood prevention, climate resilience and erosion control board. 

The above referenced legislation allows the following board duties: “Such board shall have authority, within the limits of appropriations from time to time made by the municipality or municipalities, as applicable, to plan, lay out, acquire, construct, reconstruct, repair, maintain, supervise, operate and manage a flood prevention, climate resilience and erosion control system.”

Given the synergy between the above boards, I’m advocating for the creation of a combined flood prevention, climate resilience and erosion control board with the above joint powers in an advisory and partnership role with the Board of Selectmen and the Town Engineer. This entity would replace the current Coastal Vulnerability Ad-Hoc Working Group.

Boards with citizen membership provide public access to the deliberative process, resolution of taxpayer complaints and the pursuit of projects for the public good.

It’s time for both the RTM and the current administration to correct this outrageous situation before the next storm flood season.