🔒UI considers legal options after Siting Council rejects monopole project

Utility company United Illuminating issued a blistering response Friday after the Connecticut Siting Council voted to reject the utility's controversial Fairfield to Congress Railroad Transmission Line, accusing council members of an "arbitrary and capricious" reversal and threatening legal action. "We are stunned by the change in the Siting Council's decision today with no explanation," said Sarah Wall Fliotsos, UI spokesperson. She noted that before voting to reject the application Thursday, the council had reviewed a draft order approving the project without voicing any concerns. The council has already confirmed there is a public need for the transmission project. "The public deserves to know what caused three members to change their votes and if they were improperly pressured, and we are exploring all legal options that can be taken in response to this arbitrary and capricious vote," Wall Fliotsos said. She added that UI remains committed to completing critical infrastructure improvements for customers: "UI will continue to work to ensure that critical reliability and resiliency projects are completed at the lowest cost possible for our customers." The unexpected 5-3 vote to deny the project was a victory for local opponents who have fought for years against UI's plan to erect steel monopoles up to 195 feet tall along the south side of Metro-North railroad tracks through residential and commercial areas in both communities. The decision marks the latest turn in a contentious process marked by multiple reversals. The council had rejected the proposed overhead route on three previous occasions before reversing course in a September straw vote with a 6-2 vote in favor. Thursday's final vote swung back to rejection.

Little discussion before vote

Council members offered little explanation for why they changed their positions. Brian Golembiewski was the only member to speak before the vote, saying he continued to support the north-side alternative route the council had previously developed — a plan that was overturned by a judge in New Britain Superior Court in April. The lack of explanation infuriated UI, which has been seeking approval for the $300 million project for more than two years. Municipal officials have accused UI of being unwilling to negotiate during meetings and to discuss potential alternatives. "UI has refused to participate in any constructive conversation, despite the clear and loud dissent from our residents," Bridgeport Mayor Joseph Ganim said before the vote. "The proposed project as is, will cause irreparable harm to our neighborhoods, especially our religious and historic institutions, while preventing economic development." Municipal leaders from Bridgeport and Fairfield on Thursday asked the council for a six-month delay, which the council rejected. The council had agreed to a similar delay request in September at Gov. Ned Lamont's urging. Much of the opposition centered on the visual and community impact of the proposed transmission line. UI's 7.3-mile route would relocate the line to the south side of the railroad tracks, cutting through parts of Bridgeport's South End near several churches, the historic Freeman Houses and other landmarks. Also, an easement UI sought would pass directly over the sanctuary, basketball court and playground of Shiloh Baptist Church, an 85-year-old Bridgeport congregation. Opponents have repeatedly pushed for the transmission line to be buried underground, but UI has argued that would add up to $500 million to the project's existing $300 million price tag. The project has faced a complex path through the regulatory and court systems. The Siting Council initially approved an alternative north-side design last year, but that decision was overturned in April by Judge Matthew J. Budzik in New Britain Superior Court, who ruled the council had exceeded its authority by deviating from the utility's original proposal. After the court remanded the matter back to the council, members initially signaled opposition in June before appearing to shift direction again in September. State Sen. Tony Hwang (R-Fairfield), who has been a vocal opponent of the project, called Thursday’s decision "a crucial step toward restoring public trust and honoring the voices of residents, municipalities, and environmental advocates." Hwang said the council's move effectively resets the controversial UI proposal and clears the way for a transparent, community-centered process. "This is not about stopping progress, this is about doing it right," Hwang said. "We can and must build critical infrastructure in a way that respects environmental impact, neighborhoods and historic sites, and most importantly, the people who live in these communities." Hwang praised the council for "finally listening to the will of the people and reaffirming the principle that process and public input matter." The Bridgeport and Fairfield House delegations, including Reps. Antonio Felipe (D-Bridgeport), Steve Stafstrom (D-Bridgeport), Jennifer Leeper (D-Fairfield), Christopher Rosario (D-Bridgeport), Christin McCarthy Vahey (D-Bridgeport, Fairfield), Andre Baker, Jr. (D-Bridgeport), Fred Gee (D-Bridgeport), Marcus Brown (D-Bridgeport) and Sarah Keitt (D-Fairfield), issued a joint statement praising the decision. "This decision affirms our strong and unequivocal opposition, alongside the voices of the communities directly impacted, to what can only be described as environmental discrimination against Bridgeport and Fairfield," the legislators said. "This project would have stifled economic development, infringed upon property rights, and triggered widespread social disruption. The unity shown by our communities was a powerful demonstration of what we can achieve when we stand together. We hope this serves as a model for future collaboration." The delegation thanked the Siting Council for hearing and acting on their concerns and said they "will remain vigilant in monitoring any future developments." Lamont also expressed support for the council's decision to reject UI's proposal for an overhead line. "Our hope is an alternative plan will be presented that minimizes the impacts to these communities while strengthening the reliability of our grid and protects rate payers," Lamont spokesman Rob Blanchard said in a statement. UI's proposed project would replace aging catenary structures carrying transmission lines above the Metro-North railroad tracks with modern monopoles. The utility has argued the upgrade is necessary for grid reliability and resiliency. The project represents the final phase of a transmission upgrade initiative that UI began in 2017, with the first three phases from New Haven to Stratford already completed. UI said that “all legal options” remain under consideration as it works to complete the transmission line project. A UI official said the company has 15 days from Thursday's vote to file a motion for reconsideration, which would ask the Siting Council to reconsider its decision and essentially revote without going back through the entire evidentiary record. After that, the company could file an appeal in court.