Court Overturns Controversial Decision; Ruling Is A Victory For Fairfield And Bridgeport

FAIRFIELD, CT — A state Superior Court has overturned a Connecticut Siting Council’s approval of a controversial overhead transmission line project in Fairfield and Bridgeport, a significant legal victory for the communities and a coalition of local stakeholders who challenged the plan.

New Britain Superior Court Judge Matthew Budzik ruled Wednesday that the Connecticut Siting Council "exceeded its statutory authority and violated principles of fundamental fairness" in granting United Illuminating permission to construct transmission lines along the north side of the Metro-North Railroad tracks.

The decision stems from a March 2024 lawsuit filed by the Town of Fairfield and co-plaintiffs including BJ’s Wholesale Club, Inc., the Southport Congregational Church, the Sasco Creek Neighbors Environmental Trust, and the City of Bridgeport. They contested the council’s February 2024 approval of UI’s plan, arguing that the council failed to follow proper procedure and altered the project under review without adequate public notice.

The Superior Court agreed, citing the council’s switch from reviewing work on the 1430 Line to the 1130 Line — a change the court said was not properly disclosed and prevented stakeholders from fully participating in the process. UI had not submitted a new application for the 1130 Line, which became central to the revised route.

The court’s decision sends the case back to the council for reconsideration, consistent with the ruling.

"We made a promise to residents of Fairfield to fight UI’s initial application and the subsequent decision made by the Siting Council," Fairfield First Selectman Bill Gerber said in a statement. "This is a substantial win for every resident, but especially those whose properties were potentially subject to forced easements on the north side of the Metro North railroad tracks in a blatant violation of their due process rights. The ruling affirms our right to expect accountability and transparency from utility companies that too often act without concern for the impact on residents of Connecticut’s cities and towns. We greatly appreciate the work of our legal team at Cohen and Wolf, led by Attorneys David Ball and David Dobin."

Gerber added that Fairfield "residents, businesses and places of worship" should know that the town will continue to fight the overhead project.

"We hope that UI will finally see the wisdom of burying its transmission lines, rather than continuing with its efforts to build overhead lines that will destroy the precious resources of our Town," he said.

In a statement to Patch, UI spokesperson Sarah Wall Fliotsos said the utility will submit a new plan to the council.

"Transmission line development is crucial for ensuring grid safety and stability regionally, enhancing grid reliability to prevent outages locally, and ensuring communities, like Fairfield and Bridgeport, have the electricity they need to power their growing economies," Fliotsos said. "Connecticut’s energy needs continue to grow, and after years of delays, the fundamental purpose of this project remains unchanged. The longer this project is stalled by permitting and legal challenges, the more urgent this project becomes to ensure continued safe and reliable service to the region. UI is eager to put forth its plan for the Siting Council’s consideration, in-line with this program’s previous projects spanning six communities, from New Haven to Stratford, that have been approved again and again for the past decade."

Support for the court’s decision came from across the political and civic spectrum. Democratic state Rep. Jennifer Leeper and Republican state Sen. Tony Hwang both praised the ruling as a testament to community advocacy and procedural fairness.

"This is such an important win for our community that so many worked to achieve together. I'm so proud to have been a part of this fight," Leeper said in a statement. "Fairfield and Bridgeport have been unified in this effort and [Wednesday’s] decision is the result of an incredible, dedicated team, who sacrificed countless hours and resources to push back on this egregious utility proposal and approval process."

Hwang added, "The Siting Council failed to fulfill its legal obligation to weigh the environmental compatibility and public need impact of all proposed routes and denied residents and the town their fundamental right to be heard. I commend the dedicated community leaders, advocates, and town officials who stood up, spoke out, and won a critical battle for accountability. This outcome reaffirms that the voices of local residents matter and must never be ignored."

Andrea and Stephen Ozyck, co-founders of the Sasco Creek Neighbors Environmental Trust, which joined the appeal, said the outcome underscores the importance of local engagement in infrastructure planning.

"This outcome is a result of our community’s resilience and unity—residents, businesses, and our elected leaders all pulling on the rope together to protect the people and places this project would have harmed," the two said in a joint statement. "It affirms everything we’ve been fighting for and sets a critical precedent: utilities and the Siting Council cannot sidestep proper procedure or public accountability."