Lawmakers have filed numerous bills to address the crumbling foundation crisis that is plaguing many homeowners in north-central and eastern Connecticut.
One such bill, filed by Rep. Kurt Vail, R-Stafford, has been controversial in the past and aims to place more responsibility on insurance companies.
The bill, which would force insurance companies to provide coverage for “peril of collapse,” barely made it out of the Insurance and Real Estate Committee last year with a 10-9 vote and was never called for a vote on the House floor.
Vail introduced the bill again this year with the same language and admits “it may be a little bit aggressive,” but his hope is to ensure insurance companies play a role in finding a solution.
“There’s a lot of moving parts to try to find a solution to this awful issue,” Vail said. “The insurance companies need to be part of the solution, and I haven’t been very satisfied with their participation up to this point.”
The Insurance and Real Estate Committee voted unanimously Thursday to send the matter to a public hearing. Members noted that while they voted in favor of sending 20 bills to public hearing, they might not necessarily be in favor of all the bills, which include the one addressing foundations.
“I’m delighted to see that there is support in the committee for it to go to public hearing,” committee member Rep. Thomas Delnicki, R-South Windsor, said. “It doesn’t mean that all of the committee members are supporting it, but at least it will give the people an opportunity to speak on the issue.”
A date for the public hearing has yet to be determined.
If the “peril of collapse” bill were to pass, it would not be retroactive and, therefore, would not benefit homeowners who currently have defective concrete foundations.
Sens. Catherine Osten, D-Sprague, Timothy D. Larson, D-East Hartford, Stephen T. Cassano, D-Manchester, and Tony Guglielmo, R-Stafford, also filed a bill that would also address the concrete issue.
It would establish required testing for concrete aggregate for use in residential and commercial buildings, and would require the installation of curtain drains around structures in high water table areas.
Part of a joint investigation conducted by the state determined the iron sulfide mineral pyrrhotite was a contributing factor in making a foundation crumble. Water coming into contact with the mineral was a key factor in deterioration, according to the study.
The senators’ proposal also would waive state and municipal building fees associated with the reconstruction of failing foundations, and expand consumer protection regulations to protect property owners from fraudulent activity during the reconstruction process.
Another bill that Larson and Osten announced at a press conference in November that would enable municipalities to issue bonds for foundation repairs or replacements has yet to be filed.
Larson has said the language still is being finalized to enable towns to either issue grants or loans in the voluntary program.
Additionally, Rep. Samuel Belsito, R-Tolland, filed a bill that would require concrete to be tested for pyrrhotite prior to being used for a foundation.
“There’s going to be a lot of things that have to happen for us to find a resolution for these homeowners,” Vail said. “My goal is that we have a solution by the end of session, that we don’t put this off another year.”
