AGO 1993-012.

CourtConnecticut
Connecticut Attorney General Opinions 1993. AGO 1993-012. 1993Opinion No. 1993-012Hon. Joseph M. Suggs, Jr.State Treasurer55 Elm StreetHartford, CT 06106-1773 Dear Mr. Suggs: In your letter of March 26, l993, you requested our opinion concerning perceived conflicts between the requirements of proposed House Bill 7114, "An Act to Assist Connecticut Communities Seeking Economic Stability" (the "Act"), and Article Tenth, Section 1 of the Connecticut Constitution which preserves home rule for Connecticut municipalities. It is our opinion that the provisions of the proposed legislation do not conflict with or contravene home rule. In Connecticut "the powers of a municipal corporation are wholly statutory." Sheehan v. Altschuler, 148 Conn. 517, 526, 172 A.2d 897, 901 (l961). The legislature's authority to pass statutes concerning municipal power is limited by Article Tenth, Section 1 of the Connecticut Constitution, which generally prohibits the enactment of special, and not general, legislation concerning municipalities. Conn. Const. art. X, e 1. Special legislation, generally, is legislation that is "made for individual cases or for particular places or districts...." Black's Law Dictionary 1253 (5th ed. 1979). Connecticut statutes, too, prohibit "special legislation relative to the powers, organization and form of any town, city, borough or other unit of local government unless requested by a town, city, borough or other unit of local government...." Conn. Gen. Stat. e § 2-14. Special legislation is still permitted as to borrowing power, validating acts, and formation, consolidation, and dissolution of any town, city or borough where in the delegation of legislative authority by general law, the General Assembly failed to prescribe the powers necessary to effect the purpose of such special legislation. Conn. Const. art. X, e § 1. The home rule provisions of Article Tenth, Section 1 prohibit the state legislature only from regulating matters of purely local concern. Caufield v. Noble, 178 Conn. 81, 90-91, 420 A.2d 1160 (l979). "It does not follow from our constitutional commitment to home rule that the state legislature is thereby precluded from addressing problems of statewide concern...." Shelton v. Commissioner, 193 Conn. 506, 521, 479 A.2d 208, 216 (l984). House Bill No. 7114 proposes to establish a program called ACCSES...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT