Connecticut Environmental Groups File Federal Lawsuit to Stop 'Energy Sweeps'
Environmental groups have filed suit to stop the state from shifting $175 million from three efficiency and clean energy programs to the state's general fund.
May 15, 2018 at 06:41 PM
3 minute read
A coalition of environmental organizations filed a lawsuit Tuesday in U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut contesting the legality of so-called energy sweeps contained in the state's October 2017 budget.
At issue is the rerouting of $175 million from three funds for clean energy and energy efficiency programs, and putting the money in the state's general fund. The lawsuit, which was filed in federal court in New Haven, seeks a preliminary injunction as the budget is set to take effect June 30.
John Wolfson, a partner with Feiner Wolfson in Hartford, is one of five attorneys representing the environmental organizations, which include The Connecticut Fund for the Environment and Fight The Hike. Attorneys from Holland & Knight are also assisting the plaintiffs.
Defendants are Dannel Malloy in his capacity as governor; Denise Nappier in her capacity as treasurer; and Kevin Lembo in his capacity as comptroller.
“What this will do if this budget takes effect is decimate Connecticut's efforts to become more energy-efficient and to lower our carbon footprint,” Wolfson told the Connecticut Law Tribune Tuesday. “We think this action by the General Assembly violates the contracts clause of the Connecticut Constitution and the U.S. Constitution, and violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.”
Wolfson is asking Judge Janet Hall to issue a preliminary injunction.
As it stands, the budget calls for sweeps from the Green Bank for $28 million; the Energy Efficiency Fund for $127 million; and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative for $20 million. All of these funds are slated to go into the state's general fund.
Wolfson said he believes the General Assembly voted the way it did because “they were desperate for money. They did not think it through, though, that is my view.”
Ironically, Malloy, a Democrat, agrees with those suing him. In a statement late Tuesday, he said: “This should come as a surprise to no one. I have long maintained that these short-sighted sweeps would increase energy costs for consumers and businesses, and cause untold harm to our green energy economy. … The energy sweeps pushed by legislative Republicans represented a massive step backwards, and I continue to strongly oppose them.”
Pat O'Neil, speaker for House Republicans, responded to the critique. He told the Connecticut Law Tribune Tuesday, “The governor conveniently ignores the fact that the adjustments to the underlying budget that [were] approved in bipartisan fashion last Oct. 31 [were] approved May 9 by a vote of 142-8 in the House. So, I'm no sure what scorecard he is looking at.”
Lembo's office issued a statement similar to the governor's.
“For the sake of our environment and our state economy, Connecticut must uphold its commitments to clean energy and innovation,” the statement read.
Nappier's office declined to comment.
Meanwhile Roger Reynolds, chief legal director of the Connecticut Fund for the Environment, opposed the sweeps.
He wrote in a release: “We believe the state's action is illegal and unconstitutional, and are demanding those funds be protected and used for their intended contractual purpose: energy efficiency and clean energy projects that reduce home energy bills, generate economic activity, and reduce air pollution.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All‘Really Deflating’: Judges React to Biden Threat to Veto New Judgeships Bill
US Judge Throws Out Sale of Infowars to The Onion. But That's Not the End of the Road for Sandy Hook Families
4 minute readAmid Growing Litigation Volume, Don't Expect UnitedHealthcare to Change Its Stripes After CEO's Killing
6 minute readAttorney Overcomes Low Medical Bills, Captures $1 Million Policy Limit
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Examining New York Court Decisions on Website Accessibility Claims
- 2What to Expect in the Securities Enforcement Space in 2025
- 3Against All Odds—How to Try, and Win, High-Leverage Cases
- 4Evolving Legal Standards to Combat Disqualification of Arbitrators for Failing to Disclose Conflicts of Interest
- 5Class Gifts and NY’s 'Adoption Out' Statute: Guidance for NY Fiduciaries on Minimizing Litigation Risks
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250