Appointments Committee Meeting - July 29, 2026: Nine Appointments Approved Unanimously
Appointments Committee Meeting – July 29, 2026
The Appointments Committee of the Stamford Board of Representatives met on Wednesday, July 29, 2026, at 6:30 PM to interview and vote on nine appointments to various city boards and commissions. All appointments were approved unanimously by an 8-0 vote. The meeting adjourned at 8:25 PM.
Discussion Items
- Laura Tessier – Environmental Protection Board (Reappointment) – Tessier, a current member, discussed challenges balancing wetland protection with community needs. She noted an increasing workload and the difficulty of assessing cumulative environmental impacts from developments approved years apart. She emphasized the importance of wetlands for water supply quality, especially for South Stamford residents who rely on reservoirs.
- Thomas Romas – Environmental Protection Board (Alternate to Full Seat) – Romas, who served as an alternate since 2025, shared his background in business and metallurgy. He expressed concern about the strain on the sewage treatment plant, especially during heavy rainstorms, and noted that new downtown developments with green roofs may help. His engineering experience allows him to evaluate building materials and blueprints.
- Joseph "Todd" Gambino – Environmental Protection Board (Reappointment) – Gambino, with a construction background, highlighted the diverse perspectives on the board. He described how staff (Bob Clowsy) determines which applications trigger wetland review based on clear distance thresholds. He also addressed enforcement issues, noting that uncooperative applicants face fines and deed restrictions.
- George Legierse – Parking Violations Hearing Officer (New Appointment) – Legierse, whose wife served in the same role, emphasized his experience handling high-pressure customer escalations. He committed to fairness and due diligence, including visiting violation sites. He replaces Christiansen (R).
- Raina Siladi – Zoning Board of Appeals (New Appointment) – Siladi, a former teacher and now a patent attorney, stressed her legal mindset. She would apply the legal standard of "undue hardship" and follow precedent, not personal opinion. She acknowledged the emotional aspects of hearings but stated her role is to interpret the law, not legislate.
- Enton Nikaj – Zoning Board of Appeals (New Appointment) – Nikaj, a compliance professional with 15 years in financial compliance, said he would adhere to the letter of the law while applying common sense. He learned about the position from his local representative and a Nextdoor post. He supports accommodations like minor garage setbacks where no harm is done.
- Steven Cohen – Historic Preservation Advisory Commission (New Appointment) – Cohen, a compliance officer, sees the commission's role as consultative and promotional. He discussed the importance of a cultural resource inventory, citing his family's 150-year history in Stamford. He suggested creating driving tours or historic districts for mid-century modern homes.
- Lucas Severo – Economic Development Commission (New Appointment) – Severo, a commercial real estate professional focusing on Stamford, identified barriers to business: cumbersome zoning, opaque permitting, and excessive parking requirements. He advocated for form-based zoning and better communication for small businesses. He noted a current "hypersupply" of apartments, making it a renter's market, and suggested the city promote this. He also supported affordable housing as workforce housing, countering NIMBY narratives.
- Anthony Romano – Director of Administration (New Appointment) – Romano, a city employee for 18 years and key figure in the Oracle ERP implementation, outlined priorities: completing the FY2026 audit on time, maintaining the AAA bond rating, and improving grants accounting by creating a temporary in-house system within 3-6 months. He noted the FY2025 audit is nearly complete, with a draft expected in two weeks.
Key Outcomes
All nine appointments were approved unanimously by an 8-0 vote with no abstentions:
- A32.045 – Laura Tessier, Environmental Protection Board (Reappointment) – Approved.
- A32.055 – Thomas Romas, Environmental Protection Board (Full Seat) – Approved.
- A32.056 – Joseph T. Gambino, Environmental Protection Board (Reappointment) – Approved.
- A32.057 – George Legierse, Parking Violations Hearing Officer – Approved.
- A32.058 – Raina Siladi, Zoning Board of Appeals – Approved.
- A32.059 – Enton Nikaj, Zoning Board of Appeals – Approved.
- A32.060 – Steven Cohen, Historic Preservation Advisory Commission – Approved.
- A32.061 – Lucas Severo, Economic Development Commission – Approved.
- A32.062 – Anthony Romano, Director of Administration – Approved.
Meeting Transcript
So uh it is 6 30 p.m. on the 29th of July 2026. Welcome to the Board of Representatives, 72nd Board of Representatives appointments committee. Uh just quickly call the role. We have I'm co-chair Felix Garner, we have Co-Chair Stephen Shaw, Representative Weinberg, Representative Hill, Representative Caparelli in the room, and then we have Representative Hyatt, Representative Weathers, and Representative Bradford on the call. So that is a quorum. So let's get started. So we can do our first interview, which is Alpha 32.045 for the Environmental Protection Board. It's Laura Tessia, who we joined by right now. It's a reappointment with expiring December 1st, 2028. Welcome, Laura. Thank you for being here. Thank you for your service and board so far. What was the biggest challenge you faced with the environmental protection board in the last run? Tell us about because enlighten us. I think the biggest challenge is trying to strike a balance between protecting the resource and accommodating the needs of the community, the property owners. I think that's definitely a recurring theme we've heard of other applicants. And what do you think about the um the like the load on the environmental protection board, which the in the wetlands permits or the variances which I know you have we've heard about that? It can be quite fun. Yeah, it's um it varies from month to month, but yeah, it seems to me that um be interested to hear what Thomas and Todd have to say, but in my time on board, I think it's gotten heavier, the load, and um there are certain months where there are just a lot of development proposals with very sensitive issues, and they can carry over from meeting to meeting, and depending on the attendance of the meetings, sometimes we have to worry about consistency. So um that can be rejoiced. Um yeah, it's it's it's challenging. It really is. It takes a lot of time to review the packets that come to us the Friday before the meeting on that there's following Thursday, and those packets can be heavy duty. Yeah, okay. Any other questions? Of course, go ahead. Thank you for your service. I you have the most unbelievable resume on how you have to be here. And I'm so grateful that you donated your services for as long as you have. Um, how do you balance economic development and protecting the environment? It's challenging. I mean, for me personally, and you know, certainly within the rubric and the requirements of the law and what we're charged with and the guidance that the state provides, but acknowledging all of that, cutting that aside for a moment. You know, the existing property owner who just wants to make reasonable use of its land and is already there in proximity to the resource. Those are a little bit easier to deal with. I do find that um it's important to we we don't currently have a way of analysing development. So when you have a wetland system, we see developments that are one off. So someone will come in to us, let's just say it's poor housework, and that system, and we see one development here, one development here, and they may be years apart. There's no way for us to assess the cumulative impact on that system from all of the developments over the course of the years that have been brought forward and approved. And so for due diligence, that's a real challenge. Um for new developments, I find those difficult because the particularly in North Stamford, the topography is such that the region's oil topography makes it very difficult to sufficiently protect wetlands from not just the direct impacts, it's not just direct encroachment, but there are indirect impacts as well. And with the septics issues and the public and not having public water supply, it gets to be very complicated, and on some of these sites, it just doesn't leave a lot of room for reasonable development. So that can be very challenging as well. Keeping keeping septic systems far enough away from water supply, that kind of thing. Keeping septic systems, in other words, the full complement of the development proposal, ensuring that it is sufficiently removed from the wetland itself, right? Given the topography, the geology, the soils, and the other factors, that um it's not over time to degrade that system. And that can be very challenging to assess. Is most of your work in the North Stamper area versus the rest of the city? The new developments are predominantly in the North Stamper. Yeah.
openpublica.com