I have to say it is good to read that someone else out there is thinking about this. It is certainly getting harder and harder for members of BZAs to correctly understand, interpret and follow legal precedent, particularly when many BZA members have little or no legal education or background. This seems to almost always lead toward discussions and presentations that are for the most part off-track, and decisions that can often be fairly inconsistent with the reasoning behind earlier precedent.

I think we need to look more closely at who should appoint members of the BZA (i.e. which branch of government) and what a BZA member’s background should be. BZAs are quasi-judicial bodies and at least a majority of a BZA’s members should have an adequate legal background.

Anyways, I look forward to the future article you mentioned and enjoy following your blog!

Happy Holidays.

It’s none other than Steve Brechtel from KA writing to you here. I came across your BZA article above via a LinkedIn update, and couldn’t help but respond.

I am still sore (and probably will be for life!) at the ZBA (that’s what they call it in CT where we have our cottage). It is a long story, but my attorney told me after we lost back in 2006 that he will never take another case in Old Lyme, CT again! In all, with $9k going to legal, it cost me roughly $30k to take a simple wooden platform taken down because it resembled a deck (non-conforming property).

I wrote a letter and got it published in “The Day” (local New England paper). Nearby New London, CT soon after made national news when the “Eminent Domain” case was made against 20 or so homeowners.

I can send you the letter I wrote (I thought it was pretty good!) regarding how “Boss Hogg-like” these ZBAs/BZAs behave. When it came right down to it, I and others agreed it came down to favoritism. I wasn’t liked or known in the small town by any of the 70+ yr-old people on that committee. The 92-yr old woman who still presided over the committee ruled with an iron fist, and I have some very funny stories of residents who were approved for some very major additions, etc, while I was declined for a very simple non-deck. Real joke.

Thus, regarding your last paragraph questioning the reader what they think, I would say in my situation the cart comes before the horse. . .meaning, I would turn the question on its back: “What is the plight of the resident who is subjectively reviewed by the BZA, and when it comes down to it, really has no recourse (unless money is no object)?”

My attorney did say if I continued to fight it, I would very likely win. However, that would’ve been at least another $20k in legal fees without any guarantee. It turns out my plight isn’t very different from many of the other part-time beach residents (who pay full yearly taxes), as the minority (40%) control the majority (60%). I had googled Old Lyme one day back in ’06 and discovered several academics & college students had written papers on how local BZAs make arbitrary decisions without any regard to previous rulings or precedence, let alone already-established covenants or grand-fathered rules of that community.

Please feel free to call or email me if you’d like to discuss in more detail. I hope all is well with you and say hello to Connie for me.

Happy Holidays!

Regards,

Steve Brechtel
s.brechtel@sbcglobal.net
(203) 980-9689