Opinion
CV155006569S
03-17-2016
Michelle Hendricks v. Meriden PUC
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
John F. Cronan, Judge.
I.
STATEMENT OF APPEAL
The plaintiff, Michelle Hendricks, a resident of 4 Colony Place, Meriden, Connecticut, appeals from the decision of the defendant, City of Meriden Public Utilities Commission, to assess a charge of $1, 369.00 against each of the homeowners on Colony Place for the emergency repair of a sewer line which was causing a sewer backup in the vicinity of Colony, including the basement of one house on Colony Place in August 2015.
II.
The plaintiff owns property on Colony Place in the City of Meriden. In August 2015, the City started to receive complaints of sewer leakage in the vicinity of Colony Place. The City's response involved both the Health Department and the Water Pollution Control Authority. The City determined that the sewer line serving the eight homes located on Colony Place was a private sewer line. In other words, it was never accepted as a city sewer although it was connected to a public sewer line on North Colony Road. On August 20, 2105 and on September 1, 2015, the Meriden Health Department sent orders to all homeowners on Colony Place to make the required repairs. Despite the two orders, no repairs were undertaken.
Because of the owners lack of action and the health danger created by raw sewerage, the City contracted with a private contractor to repair the line. The repairs cost $10, 852.00. At a meeting of the Public Utilities Commission on October 20, 2015, the defendant Commission voted to divide the cost of the repairs equally among the eight property owners on Colony Place. On November 21, the plaintiff, the owner of 4 Colony Place filed the present action.
III.
DISCUSSION
" The right to appeal from the decision of an administrative agency exists only under statutory authority." Silverman v. New Haven, 19 Conn.App. 360, 367, 562 A.2d 562, cert. denied, 212 Conn. 812, 565 A.2d 537 (1989). C.G.S. § 7-250 allows an aggrieved party to appeal to the superior court where the property is located.
The Court finds that the defendant followed the requirements of C.G.S. § 7-246f(b) in undertaking an emergency repair of a defective sanitary sewer connection which could have produced serious health consequences if not abated. The Court also agrees with the Connecticut Supreme Court in its decision in 661 Forest Walk, LLC v. Water Pollution Control Authority, 291 Conn. 271, 285-86, 968 A.2d 345 (2009). " When a water pollution control authority performs its administrative functions, a reviewing court's standard of review of the [authority's] action is limited to whether it is illegal, arbitrary or in abuse of its discretion . . . Moreover, there is a strong presumption of regularity in the proceedings of a public agency, and we give such agencies broad discretion in the performance of their administrative duties, provided that no statute or regulation is violated."
While the plaintiff conducted an exhaustive history of Colony Place, and they certainly deserve recognition for their efforts, the Court finds that they failed to prove that the Hall Place-Colony Place sanitary sewer line was accepted by the City of Meriden. Most telling is the evidence that the Colony Place line is a 6-inch line which is non-conforming with the City's requirement that sanitary sewer lines be 8 inches in width to be conforming. While the plaintiff offered several other interesting arguments, the Court must find that such arguments are outside the limited scope of " illegal, arbitrary or in abuse of discretion."
IV.
CONCLUSION
The decision of the Public Utilities Commission is supported by case law and substantial evidence in the record. Judgment shall enter in favor of the defendant.