Groton Open Space Association

Wright has proposed a bill that would do just that, saying that such town open-space purchases should fall along the same lines as purchases that use state funds – a permanent conservation easement is placed on the land.

But her bill has frustrated several Groton Town Council members who were unaware that their representative had proposed it and believe it has the potential to tie towns’ hands in future uses of such property.

Councilor Heather Sherman Bond brought the issue to the council’s attention last week, saying testimony on the bill, which was heard before the environment committee Feb. 18, implied Groton officials were involved in the proposal, though the Town Council was not asked for input.

“Elissa is supposed to be our representative,” said Bond, who ran against Wright for the legislative seat in 2006, adding that the council deserves “at least a little more information on what she’s proposing.”

The issue is familiar to some councilors, going back to a proposal Wright raised four years ago while serving on the council.

Though voters approved $8 million for open-space purchases in a 1988 referendum, Wright said the deeds of five of the six parcels failed to specify that they were to be dedicated for open space, conservation or recreation purposes.

She proposed a resolution requiring that land records indicate that the parcels were to be preserved in perpetuity.

It failed to pass, however, due to concerns about its language and whether it was legally binding.

Wright resurrected the issue at the state level, and has received support from the Groton Open Space Association, the Connecticut Forest & Park Association, the Connecticut Fund for the Environment and the Rivers Alliance of Connecticut.

Rivers Alliance Executive Director Margaret Miner wrote in her testimony that, “This bill was written in response to an issue in Groton” – a statement Bond protested.

Wright said she could not comment on another person’s testimony, but that she did become aware of the need for the bill while serving on the Groton council. ”It’s not simply a local issue … as the testimony verifies,” Wright said. “It’s a concept of paramount interest throughout the state.”

As far as the council’s involvement, Wright said she represents the entire district and believes the bill is in the best interest of her constituents. The bill was included in a council information packet, and legislative process is a matter of public record, she said.

The Connecticut Conference of Municipalities, however, said in its testimony that land decisions made with local funds should be allowed to be changed through the same process used to approve them should the needs of the community change.

”It would be wrong for the state to dictate to local governments what they can do with items purchased with their own funds,” according to CCM’s testimony.

Wright said if a town envisions wanting to use land for purposes other than open space, they can frame the referendum to include “a full range of future uses.”

”It’s a matter of respecting the integrity of voters … they are entitled to know that their vote is going to be respected and honored,” she said.

Connecticut Light & Power and Yankee Gas also expressed concern about the bill’s impact on the companies’ ability to serve its customers if transmission-line rights of way traverse undeveloped land acquired for open space.