Researcher: JSH Page 1 5/1/24
OLR Bill Analysis
sHB 5272 (as amended by House "A")*
AN ACT CONCERNING THE EXPIRATION OF CERTAIN LAND USE
APPROVALS AND THE NEW HOME CONSTRUCTION GUARANTY
FUND.
SUMMARY
This bill allows zoning enforcement officers (ZEOs) to take
enforcement action against a business that suspends work required by
an unexpired site plan, subdivision, or inland wetlands approval. Under
the bill, the ZEO may generally do so if he or she determines the
business has no intent to resume the work within a reasonable time
period and (1) finds the incomplete work creates a public health or
safety hazard or (2) receives a complaint alleging it caused personal or
property damage. The bill appears to treat these businesses like
violators of zoning regulations by allowing the (1) ZEO to pursue certain
enforcement actions that apply to zoning violations (e.g., written orders
and civil fines under CGS § 8-12) and (2) municipality to fine violators
(up to $150 per day) if it adopts an ordinance to do so.
Separately, the bill expands eligibility for the New Home
Construction Guaranty Fund. It allows consumers to recuperate money
from the fund for judgments awarded against certain individuals with
an ownership interest in a new home construction company who
violated certain laws. It also makes these individuals and contractors
liable for consumer payouts from the fund that result from a judgment
against them.
With respect to the home guaranty fund, the bill also (1) increases,
from $30,000 to $50,000 per claim, the maximum amount consumers
may recuperate from the fund and (2) lowers, from $750,000 to $650,000,
the fund’s annual cap. It correspondingly increases (from $300,000 to
$400,000) the funds exceeding this cap that must be annually transferred
into the Consumer Protection Enforcement Account. Existing law
requires any remaining excess to be transferred into the General Fund. 2024HB-05272-R010638-BA.DOCX
Researcher: JSH Page 2 5/1/24
Lastly, the bill makes technical and conforming changes.
*House Amendment “A” primarily (1) eliminates the underlying
bill’s provisions allowing local land use authorities to move up certain
approvals’ expiration dates; (2) adds the provisions allowing ZEOs to
take enforcement actions against businesses suspending required work;
and (3) in provisions on the guaranty fund, replaces references to
individuals with financial or operational control of a new home
construction company with references to, and requirements for,
“proprietors.”
EFFECTIVE DATE: October 1, 2024, except the provision on site plan
approvals is effective July 1, 2024, and the guaranty fund provisions are
effective upon passage.
§§ 1-5 — BUSINESSES SUSPENDING WORK REQ UIRED BY
CERTAIN LAND USE APPROVAL S
Enforcement Actions Under State Zoning Law
State law authorizes municipal zoning officials (e.g., ZEOs) to enforce
zoning regulations. This authority includes instituting actions and other
proceedings to (1) prevent unlawful construction, alterations, or use; (2)
restrain, correct, or abate zoning violations; or (3) prevent occupancy of
violative buildings or land or other illegal acts in or on them. CGS § 8-
12 specifies that these enforcement actions and proceedings include
issuing written orders to remedy conditions that violate zoning
regulations and seeking civil and criminal penalties in Superior Court
(see BACKGROUND).
The bill expands the reasons for which zoning officials may initiate
enforcement actions under CGS § 8-12 to include addressing public
health or safety hazards related to suspended work required in
connection with certain land use approvals. It specifically authorizes
ZEOs (or authorized agents of an inland wetlands agency, as applicable)
to take enforcement actions against “businesses” that suspend work
required by unexpired site plan, subdivision (with less than 400 units),
or inland wetlands approvals.
Under the bill, a ZEO or authorized agent may take enforcement
action if he or she determines the business has no intent to resume the 2024HB-05272-R010638-BA.DOCX
Researcher: JSH Page 3 5/1/24
work within a reasonable time period and (1) finds the incomplete work
(i.e., physical improvements that the approval required but that are
incomplete due to construction being suspended) creates a public health
or safety hazard or (2) receives and verifies a property owner’s
complaint alleging these hazards caused personal or property damage.
(It is unclear if the suspended work must be the direct cause of the
damage and whether a ZEO is authorized to make this determination,
or if a property owner need only allege it. Additionally, the bill does not
specify how a ZEO must determine a business’s intent or what
constitutes a “reasonable time” to resume work.)
While the bill appears to apply the enforcement actions authorized
under CGS § 8-12 (which apply only to zoning violations) to the work
suspensions described above, it is unclear if the bill establishes these
work suspensions as zoning violations.
Under the bill, a business is a sole proprietorship, trust, corporation,
limited liability company, union, association, firm, partnership, or other
organization or group of people.
Municipal Citations
Under existing law, any municipality may establish, by ordinance,
penalties for violations of its zoning regulations. The bill additionally
allows municipalities to establish penalties related to violations of
enforcement actions the bill authorizes (i.e., against businesses that
suspend work required by a site plan, subdivision, or inland wetlands
approval, as described above). It is unclear what would constitute a
“violation” in the context of the bill’s authorization for ZEOs to institute
enforcement actions.
Under existing law and the bill, the ordinance must establish the
types of violations for which a citation may be issued and the amount of
any fine to be imposed (up to $150 for each day the violation continues),
which are payable to the municipality’s treasurer. By law, these citations
may be contested through a municipal hearing procedure and appealed
to Superior Court.
§§ 6 & 7 — NEW HOME CONSTRUC TION GUARANTY FUND
Under current law, a consumer who is awarded a judgment (e.g., a 2024HB-05272-R010638-BA.DOCX
Researcher: JSH Page 4 5/1/24
binding arbitration decision, court judgment, order, or decree) against a
registered new home construction contractor but is unable to satisfy the
judgment (i.e., get payment from the contractor) may apply to the
Department of Consumer Protection (DCP) to instead recuperate the
judgment amount (up to a specified maximum) from the New Home
Construction Guaranty Fund. (New home construction contractors
annually pay into this fund when renewing their registrations.)
Under the bill, consumers may also recuperate money from the fund
if the judgment was awarded against certain individuals with an
ownership interest in a new home construction company who have been
found by a court to have violated certain laws (i.e., “proprietors”).
More specifically, to qualify as a “proprietor,” the person must meet
two criteria. First, he or she must have an ownership interest in a new
home construction company that is currently, or was previously,
registered by DCP. Second, he or she must have been found by a court
to have violated the state’s new home construction contractor laws for
the company’s conduct. The company must either be currently
registered as a new home construction company or have been registered
within two years before it entered into the contract with the consumer
harmed by the company’s or owner’s actions.
The bill makes consumers awarded a judgement against a proprietor
eligible for funds from the New Home Construction Guaranty Fund
subject to the same conditions and requirements the law sets for
consumers with a judgment against a contractor. For example, among
other things, the consumer:
1. must apply in writing to DCP within two years of the judgment
being finalized;
2. is eligible to receive payment from the fund (up to $50,000 under
the bill) for the actual damages and costs he or she was awarded
by the court (excluding punitive damages) and minus any
amount already recovered; and
3. must affirm that he or she has made a good faith effort to satisfy
the judgment by following statutory post-judgment procedures. 2024HB-05272-R010638-BA.DOCX
Researcher: JSH Page 5 5/1/24
Additionally, the bill makes new home construction contractors and
proprietors liable for consumer payouts from the New Home
Construction Guaranty Fund that result from a judgment against them.
BACKGROUND
Penalties Under CGS § 8-12
By law, a municipality’s zoning enforcement authority may issue
written orders to remedy conditions in a building or premises that
violate zoning regulations. The authority may also issue cease and desist
orders for violations involving the grading of land, the removal of soil,
or soil erosion or sediment control.
CGS § 8-12 subjects a person to a civil penalty of up to $2,500 if he or
she (1) has been served with a written order and fails to comply with it
within 10 days, (2) has been served with a cease and desist order and
fails to comply immediately, or (3) continues to violate the provision of
the regulation specified in the order. In addition, the court can grant the
municipality injunctive relief if a person subject to an order does not
comply with it.
In addition to these penalties for violating an order, a violation of the
underlying regulations is subject to civil and criminal penalties.
Ordinarily, violations are subject to a court-imposed fine of between $10
and $100 per day. However, if the violation is willful, the violator is
subject to a fine of between $100 and $250 per day, imprisonment of up
to 10 days for each day of the violation (up to a maximum of 30 days),
or both. A willful violator may also be responsible for the municipality’s
costs and attorney’s fees.
COMMITTEE ACTION
Planning and Development Committee
Joint Favorable Substitute
Yea 21 Nay 0 (03/22/2024)
Appropriations Committee
Joint Favorable
Yea 53 Nay 0 (04/22/2024)