Policies

My Philosophy:

The purpose of zoning laws is to serve the common good in a given neighborhood. This includes public safety, property values, preserving its character, and the general public welfare. My job wouldn't be to advocate or legislate zoning policy change. It is simply to serve as a sort of zoning appellate court, to make sure the applications of zoning laws serve their purpose, which is the common good. When drafting zoning policy, it is impossible to ensure that the particulars of every property are accounted for. In such cases, it is important for the ZBA to grant variances or overrule previous applications of zoning law. This ensures that the spirit and purpose of the law are followed, rather than the exact words.

I do personally believe that variances should be granted more frequently, but that belief will not impune my ability to take into account what the law says. Considering all my decisions are subject to review by the Connecticut Superior Court, I acknowledge that what the law says may supersede what I think is right. For example, if a landowner says that following a certain regulation will cost him $10,000, I may feel a strong urge to grant a variance. However, the law is very clear that variances can only be granted if there is an "unusual hardship" created by a peculiarity in the land itself, rather than in the land owner's wallet. If I granted him a variance, I would be clearly violating Connecticut law and judicial interpretations of what "hardship" means. Therefore, by granting a variance in that case, I would be violating the rule of law, something that every good public servant should live and breathe by. I strongly believe it is a greater evil to violate the rule of law and set a toxic precedent that it is acceptable for politicians to ignore the law when it is inconvenient to them. This type of thinking is lethal to a just and free society. I understand what the law is, and have a strong desire to abide by both the spirit and the direct interpretations of it.

That being said, I affirm that it is possible to take into account both what the law says and the particulars of a landowner's situation. After all, that is the purpose of the ZBA, to fill in the gaps in situations where zoning law may not seamlessly apply. As long as the spirit and "general purpose" of laws are being followed, it is acceptable for the board to consider appeals and variances. So I think it's possible to take into account what the law actually says, and the complexities and stakeholders of the situation at hand. Zoning law has a purpose. My job would to be to make sure that purpose is fully realized.