Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram
Governor Ned Lamont is “proud” to have been endorsed by the Connecticut League of Conservation Voters. In the accompanying Facebook post, he frets about “unprecedented threats” to environmental protections from the federal government and boasts of Connecticut’s progress on renewable energy, efficiency, and carbon emissions.
Yes, the same man who allowed the illegal clear-cutting of a protected wetland behind his Greenwich home and also behind his neighbor's home is now being celebrated by the state’s premier green group. You just can't make this stuff up.
In November 2023, crews working on land associated with Lamont, his neighbors the Viks, and the Ashton Drive Association removed at least 180 trees—some estimates put the number closer to 375—along with thousands of bushes and other vegetation.
The work spanned roughly 1,200 feet across several acres in a regulated wetland area, but no permits had been obtained. The cutting crossed onto neighboring property owned by INCT LLC (land with Rockefeller roots) without permission; the attorney described the cutting on the wetlands as “carnage” and “devastation.” Police were called. A cease-and-correct order followed. Greenwich’s Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Agency later fined the parties a paltry $1,000 each—the equivalent of the application fee they never filed.
Lamont eventually took partial responsibility, blaming a “miscommunication” with his landscaper (Your Gardening Angel) and insisting the trees were mostly storm-damaged. He agreed to cover the cost of restoration for his property and his neighbors’. A lawsuit against the landscaper was later withdrawn. The Greenwich First Selectman snagged a Board seat on the land use outfit Lamont used to correct the problem. To many observers, it looked less like routine cleanup and more like a coordinated effort to open up the views down to the pond for “Lamont the Lumberjack.”
Of course, Connecticut’s environmental rules are not suggestions for regular people.
Just ask the Southbury couple who cut roughly 140 trees on neighboring town-owned open space land overlooking Lake Lillinonah. Alan and Teresa Salzman hired contractors to fell or top the trees (many of them substantial) on a football-field-sized swath of protected town land, allegedly to improve their view. The town sued under Connecticut’s 2006 anti-encroachment law, which allows restoration costs plus up to quintuple damages for damage to preserved lands owned by municipalities and conservation groups. The town initially sought as much as $8.7–9 million. A judge ordered them to pay nearly $600,000 in restoration costs and punitive damages; after appeals, the couple settled for about $683,000 including attorney fees.
Ordinary homeowners who try the same thing Lamont did without permits face real, serious consequences. But when the governor’s own backyard is involved, the process somehow resolves itself with a slap on the wrist and a promise to replant—after the view has already been improved.
Now the Connecticut League of Conservation Voters has decided Lamont the Lumberjack is an environmentalist with a record worth endorsing.
The group is the state affiliate of the national League of Conservation Voters, a 501(c)(4) organization that functions as a major Democrat advocacy and independent-expenditure operation. The national LCV and its affiliated super PAC have spent tens of millions in recent cycles supporting Democrat candidates and opposing Republicans. Its funding network includes large contributions funneled through dark-money vehicles (think Arabella Advisors) and major donors who treat environmentalism as a partisan priority rather than a non-ideological one. They also supported the "No Kings" events which have now been tied to the color revolution network uncovered by DataRepublican.
In practice, the Connecticut LCV chapter largely scores and supports Democrat legislators and executives who advance the preferred agenda. Endorsing Lamont is consistent with that pattern, and clearly not an independent judgment of conservation outcomes on the ground.
The broader pattern here is that Lamont’s administration has pursued aggressive climate and energy goals while ordinary residents absorb the costs—higher electricity rates, restrictions on development, and endless regulatory process. Meanwhile, the governor’s own property situation was handled as a local administrative matter that was “fixed” without any lasting political damage.
Stay updated with the latest in the Constitution State with The CT Centinal
