Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Eminent Domain topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Coventry council over Johnson's Pond eminent-domain process, GZA contract and procurement
Summary
At the April 22 meeting residents urged the council to scrutinize a condemnation and a contract with GZA for a public-use determination at Johnson's Pond, citing state eminent-domain rules and questions about sole-source procurement.
Several residents raised concerns about Johnson's Pond during public comment at the April 22 Coventry Town Council meeting, asking the council to re-examine the town's condemnation, the timing of a public-use determination, and the procurement that led to an environmental contract with GZA.
Steve Riley told the council he has spent years researching property rights and eminent domain and urged officials to consider whether the town and its Community Redevelopment Authority followed state statutory requirements prior to condemning the parcel adjacent to the dam. Riley said he believes state statute requires a development plan approved by the governing body before an eminent-domain action for economic development can proceed; he identified the statutory reference in public comment as "state law, sections 42 64 dot 12 dash 7." Riley asked the council to have the town engineer re-examine the condemned parcel for possible controlled parking and beach access.
Riley also urged the council to review procurement, saying the Community Redevelopment Authority (CRA) entered a contract with GZA (the transcript spells GZA Geo Environmental) for a public-use determination and that the contract was for "upwards of a hundred and $30,000." He questioned whether state procurement rules required competitive bidding rather than a municipal sole-source decision.
Council response and procedural action Town Manager Perillo said the CRA initiated a public-use determination with GZA in March and that the condemnation occurred a year earlier; he asked for more time to gather procurement records. Council voted 5-0 to accept Riley's letter into the public record at the meeting.
Why it matters Residents noted potential property-rights and environmental implications of moves affecting Johnson's Pond, and asked the council to ensure compliance with state statutes and procurement rules. They also urged early involvement by the town engineer and court scrutiny for unclear legal issues.
Next steps Council members and staff said they would review the procurement record and the sequence of steps that led to the public-use determination contract and report back at a future meeting.
