Land Use-Urban Redevelopment Committee Approves Conservation Commission Ordinance

On Wednesday, August 19, 2026, the Land Use-Urban Redevelopment Committee of the Stamford Board of Representatives held a virtual public hearing and committee meeting at 7:00 PM to consider LU32.009, an ordinance establishing a Conservation Commission. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by Co-Chair Ryan Hughes, the public hearing opened at 7:02 PM and closed at 7:49 PM, and the meeting adjourned at 7:59 PM. After hearing extensive public testimony, the committee voted 6-0-1 to approve the ordinance.

Consent Calendar

• There were no consent calendar items on this agenda.

Public Comments & Testimony

Eleven members of the public testified, the vast majority expressing strong support for establishing the Conservation Commission. One speaker described himself as neutral. No opposition was voiced.

• Lee Shemetz (career environmentalist, 15+ year EPB member, head of Sound Waters): Spoke from three perspectives: as an environmentalist, EPB member, and local leader. Argued that the EPB is a regulatory workhorse focused on inland wetland oversight, leaving no capacity for broader conservation planning. Stated a Conservation Commission would augment and extend good environmental decision-making and planning.
• Jack Egan (Stamford resident): Expressed very strong support, citing changes in Stamford from town to city, environmental threats, and the need for citizen science and local action. Highlighted that world is changing and local actions matter.
• Mike Papa (Stamford resident): Described himself as "a little bit neutral." Discussed government being late to act, praised Stamford’s organic turf efforts, but criticized municipal management and lack of merit-based promotions. Did not state opposition to the ordinance.
• Diane Colaiye (23, ecological landscaper, student): Supported the commission, describing how she grew up in an affordable housing community with no trees and now sees environmental inequities. Cited Fairgate development as an example of integrating conservation and housing. Argued the commission would influence how Stamford builds, not whether it builds.
• Mary Ellen Lemay (Conservation Director, Aspatuck Land Trust; former Trumbull Town Council member and Conservation Commission chair for 17 years): Described her experience establishing a conservation commission in Trumbull. Said development did not stop; instead, the town gained capacity for natural resource inventories, GIS mapping, open space protection, and advisory services. Emphasized a conservation commission is advisory, not regulatory.
• Anika Kamaff (engineer in renewable energy, moving to Stamford soon): Supported the commission, citing need for green spaces for her dog, health benefits, and childhood experiences in nature. Said urban green spaces are essential for all residents.
• Paula Waldman (Stamford resident, technical advisor for Stanford 2035 comprehensive plan): Strongly supported, arguing that protecting the environment and encouraging development are not opposing goals. Emphasized that affordable housing should include healthy environments—trees, green space, shade. Urged the committee to support the commission.
• Gina Calabries (Stamford resident, Cove neighborhood): Supported the commission, noting no public opposition was present. Criticized some newer board members for an anti-environment track record, including on the tree ordinance. Argued that environmental review concerns may be misinformed.
• Michelle Cordray (resident, master's in climate society, 15 years conservation experience): Urged support, citing the need for biodiversity, green infrastructure, and climate resilience. Noted heat disparities of over 20°F in some Stamford neighborhoods due to lack of tree canopy. Called green spaces essential for quality of life.
• Jerry Silver (45+ year resident, founder of People Friendly Stamford): Supported the commission, emphasizing the need to balance development with open space. Noted the EPB is too busy for such planning.
• Dave Adams (Stamford resident): Stressed that creating a conservation commission is a "no-brainer," not a threat to development. Said it ensures development is done smartly and advised the committee to pass it.
• Mara Kravitz (Waterside neighborhood resident): Supported, citing improvements to Mill River Park and roof deck vegetation. Advocated for collaboration between holistic stewardship and housing creation.
• Jeanette Billichnanski (Stamford resident): Supported the stand-alone commission as an urgent need given federal deregulation. Mentioned the Mill River Plan as an example of a shelved study that, when acted on, became a major asset. Quoted Dr. Seuss to urge passage.

Discussion Items

• Representative Camporeale (lead sponsor): Thanked the public for testimony and the committee for debate. Emphasized that Stamford’s actions matter nationally. Reiterated that the commission is intended to balance economic development with long-term environmental stewardship. Invited qualified individuals like Michelle Cordray to apply for the commission.
• Co-Chair Ryan Hughes: Thanked Rep. Camporeale for robust debate. Addressed concerns that the commission could hinder housing, noting his initial concern centered on one sentence in state statute. Acknowledged housing affordability as the top issue for his constituents but recognized common ground. Stated he cares about the environment and volunteered at a camp.
• No other committee members sought the floor for further discussion.

Key Outcomes

• Vote on LU32.009 (Ordinance Establishing a Conservation Commission): Motion to approve made, seconded, and passed 6-0-1. Voting in favor: Co-Chair Price, Reps. Adams, Beckham, Boudreau, Finkel, Pelliccia. Abstaining: Co-Chair Hughes. Absent: Reps. Field and Gardner. The ordinance now proceeds to the full Board of Representatives.
• The public hearing was opened at 7:02 PM and closed at 7:49 PM. The meeting was adjourned at 7:59 PM.