Commercial Property Owner Sues Town Over New Sewer Usage Fee

More

179 Cherry St. in New Canaan. Streetview

The owners of a commercial building on Cherry Street are suing the town following New Canaan’s adoption of a new way to assess sewer usage fees.

According to a civil summons and appeal received Oct. 21 in the Town Clerk’s office, the building at 179 Cherry St. was placed in a newly conceived tier that will see its owners pay $2,500 annually in sewer fees though “no basis exists” for that placement.

“The assessment is not based on the reasonable volume of water discharged to the sewer system or any other statutory or reasonable factors for the property, but was grossly excessive, disproportionate and unlawful,” according to the lawsuit, filed on behalf of property owner 179 Cherry Street LLC by Danbury-based attorney Candace Fay. The LLC’s principals are Santo and Lynda Silvestro, according to Connecticut Secretary of the State records. 

New Canaan is expected to collect nearly $1.4 million in sewer fees during the current fiscal year.

In the past, the burden was carried primarily by residential property owners, with a sewer tax also paid by commercial property owners though nonprofit, municipal and church uses had been exempted, and specific fees were divvied up based on assessments rather than actual water usage. The new flat-rate, tiered system is designed to more fairly distribute sewer-related costs among residential and commercial property owners. After some voiced concerns about the new system during a public hearing in May, the Board of Finance unanimously approved it the following month.

Officials established an appeals process for property owners seeking to contest their sewer fee assessments. 

Filed in state Superior Court, the lawsuit names the town and its Water Pollution Control Authority as defendants. It says the Authority denied the plaintiff’s appeal. The suit seeks to reduce the assessment and reimburse the plaintiff “for any overpayment of taxes, together with interest and costs, or, at their option, be granted a tax credit for such overpayment, interest and costs.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *