A big thanks and Congratulations to everybody who helped!!! Unbelievable, Epic. Concerned citizens spoke out and actually had an impact! 

Mr. Naik's Attorney, John Casey, withdrew the dock application yesterday. No explanation was given for the action. Once again Mr. Naik's attorney has played the role of Lucy pulling the football away at the last minute from Charlie Brown, played by the HMC. What does this mean?

It has been clear from the beginning that the HMC, especially the chairman, were planning to approve the project. They willfully accepted all of Mr. Naik's requests for postponements while denying our single request when we were blindsided with the initial review that the HMC tried to conduct without informing any of the adjacent neighbors. The HMC Chairman repeatedly said "People have the right to wharf out!" A catchy phrase, he repeated like a mantra, that ignored the actual intent of the HMC Plan. What happened that caused this abrupt withdrawal?

The only thing that changed is that the HMC got a flood of e-mails pointing out the absurdity of the proposal and the specific reasons that it violated the specific goals of the Harbor Management Plan. Mr. Naik's team realized that the HMC was not going to approve the proposed dock; Perhaps they were tipped off by a member of the Commission.  The HMC is clearly not use to getting feedback, much less a large volume of it, from well informed writers. The letters I have seen have several things in common. They are well written, logical, compassionate, and backed with factual information. In fact, they contained more factual information than any of the HMC meetings or minutes I have reviewed. The result was that the HMC was going to have to adhere to the stipulations in their own Plan. Why did it take so much time, effort, and $ to achieve such a simple and obvious goal?

What Now? What is the back story?

I doubt Mr. Naik has given up on his apparent dream of berthing giant boats and jet skis in our shallow cove. It is possible that he has developed an appreciation for the environment, wetlands, migratory birds, Eel grass, and the Public's right to use the water and land up to the high tide mark. This is sadly unlikely; Adults rarely make epic paradigm shifts in the absence of a life changing event, or a severe head injury.  Here are some snippets:

1. Mr. Naik violated CT wetland laws at both of his properties and got caught. He is an environmental criminal. Mr. Naik's team probably wants to wait until the violations and fines have been resolved. DEEP will not allow the dock application to proceed until the violations are fully resolved.

2. Mr. Naik's attorney knows that every time he has pulled the dock agenda item it has cost us time and money. He also has been able to get a written copy of our arguments that we have had to send to HMC before each meeting. Last month he cancelled a review just minutes after receiving our submission. It's a sleazy yet effective tactic. This approach is typical of well financed clients who are unwilling to compromise. If you can't win the argument, crush the opposition financially and wear them down over time. We have now spent nearly $25,000 fighting this, not counting hundreds of hours invested in building a website, talking to residents, and researching CT law. A single family could have their savings wiped out trying to defend their home and environment from this project. Fortunately, there are three neighbors sharing costs, but this doesn't make it right. The state should not force citizens to personally fund the protection of the environment from people intent on destroying it

3. The HMC is planning to re-write its Management Plan. Citizens need to be involved to assure the new rules are more environmentally protective, not less. It would make sense to survey other townships for Plans that have been recently modified for ideas. These changes cannot happen without community input