Could Connecticut dissolve the Borough of Newtown, and did borough officers have to help?

Plain-English summary

In November 1993, Connecticut’s AG answered questions about dissolving the Borough of Newtown. The state constitution generally limited special laws for an individual municipality but expressly allowed special acts for a town, city or borough’s formation, consolidation or dissolution. The AG therefore said the General Assembly could enact a special act dissolving the borough. The general statutes supplied a consolidation route but no separate dissolution procedure; the special act would have to define that process.

The AG suggested that such an act address who would take over the borough’s duties after dissolution and noted that lawmakers could include hearings or a referendum if they chose. He found no state-law obligation requiring borough officials to begin or supervise the dissolution effort. He left any duties arising from the borough’s 1824 resolve and later special acts to the borough attorney’s review. The opinion did not itself dissolve the borough or establish a voter petition procedure.

Residents and legislators at the time

The opinion identified a special act as the legal route and left its terms, including any public approval process, to the General Assembly.

Borough officials at the time

The AG found no general state duty to initiate or supervise dissolution. He did not decide whether local enactments imposed separate duties.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1993. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Q: Could the legislature dissolve a single borough by special act?
A: Yes. The AG pointed to the state constitution’s express dissolution exception to the general restriction on special municipal legislation.

Q: Was there an automatic statewide dissolution procedure?
A: The AG said no general-statute procedure governed this dissolution; a special act would set the steps.

Q: Did borough officers have to organize residents’ request?
A: The AG found no such duty in the state constitution or general statutes and left possible local duties to examination of the borough’s own enactments.

Background and statutory framework

Article X of the Connecticut Constitution expressly allowed special legislation for municipal dissolution. The AG contrasted that path with the consolidation provisions illustrated by Conn.Gen.Stat. § 7-198 and declined to infer a required procedure or officer duty from the general statutes.

Citations and references

Statute: Conn.Gen.Stat. § 7-198.

Source

• Landing page: https://portal.ct.gov/AG/Opinions
• Opinion page: https://portal.ct.gov/ag/opinions/1993-formal-opinions/representative-edward-c-krawiecki-jr-house-minority-leader-1993036-formal-opinion-attorney-general-o

Original opinion text

Representative Edward C. Krawiecki, Jr., House Minority Leader, 1993-036 Formal Opinion, Attorney General of Connecticut

Attorney General's Opinion

Attorney General, Richard Blumenthal

November 30, 1993

Representative Edward C. Krawiecki, Jr.

House Minority Leader

House of Representatives

State Capitol

Hartford, CT 06106

Dear Representative Krawiecki:

In your letter of August 12, 1993, you relate that by a Resolve of May, 1824, a Borough of Newtown was created. Subsequently the General Assembly passed 1931 Special Act No. 290 and 1953 Special Act No. 106 also relating to the formation of this borough. You ask three questions relating to this borough. First you ask whether the borough may be dissolved. Secondly you ask the procedure in accomplishing this dissolution. Thirdly you ask what legal requirements are imposed upon the officials of the borough to assist residents in bringing about dissolution.1

In answer to your first question, a borough may be dissolved by special act. The provisions of Art. X of the Connecticut Constitution2 specifically permit special acts regarding the dissolution of political subdivisions. Therefore, by virtue of this constitutional provision, the General Assembly may enact legislation to dissolve a borough.

As you point out, the general statutes are silent as to the means to dissolve the borough, as opposed to consolidation of the borough with the town. The legislature, however, is not prohibited from passing a special act relating solely to dissolution. Article X of the Connecticut Constitution itself supplies authority to the General Assembly to enact a special act regarding dissolution of the borough. See also Moran v. Bens, 144 Conn. 27, 30-31 (1956).

The answer to your second question is that the procedure to be followed in dissolution would be set forth in any special act which the legislature enacted. Thus, the procedure to be followed is within the purview of the legislature. However, we note that this special act should address under what circumstances, and by whom, the duties of the borough should be assumed on the dissolution of the borough.3 The special act might also provide, if the legislature so wished, for hearings and a referendum procedure to approve the dissolution.

In regard to your third question, there are no state legal obligations imposed on borough officials by the Connecticut Constitution or general statutes to initiate or supervise the process of dissolution of a borough. Any duties of the borough officials regarding the request for dissolution would be local in nature and should be determined by the borough attorney. The borough attorney on review of the Resolve and the existing Special Acts will be in a position to advise the residents further.

We trust that we have been of assistance in this matter.

Very truly yours,

Richard Blumenthal

Attorney General

Henry S. Cohn

Assistant Attorney General

1 We are also in receipt of correspondence from Andrew and Ann Zitnay and Joan Crick, Warden of the Borough, regarding the general issue of dissolution. This correspondence does not bear on the legal issues you raised.

2 This provision provides in part: After July 1, 1969, the general assembly shall enact no special legislation relative to the powers, organization, terms of elective offices or form of government of any single town, city or borough, except as to (a) borrowing power, (b) validating acts, and (c) formation, consolidation or dissolution of any town, city or borough .... (emphasis added)

3 It is noted that Conn.Gen.Stat. § 7-198, which applies when a borough is consolidated with a town, contains certain analogous provisions to be addressed in a proposed special act dissolving a borough.