Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 7-273d (2026)

Assumption of Transportation Department powers relative to transit system within district. Appeals

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Upon written notice to the Department of Transportation, to the chief executive officer of a private transit system, and to the elected chief executive officer of each municipality composing the district, the district, by its board of directors, may assume all powers of the Department of Transportation to regulate and supervise the operation of any such transit system within the district, provided that such transit system would be subject to the supervision of the department except for this section. Upon assuming such supervision the district, by its board of directors, shall establish passenger fares and any other rates to be charged and shall establish service standards, may order abandonment of uneconomic routes and shall exercise all powers of regulation and supervision over such transit system as are conferred on the department by title 16, in the same manner and under the same standards as are established by said title 16. Any company, town, city, borough, corporation or person aggrieved by any order, authorization or decision of the board of directors, except an order, authorization or decision approving the taking of land, in any matter to which he or it was or ought to have been made a party, may appeal therefrom to the department within thirty days after the filing of such order, authorization or decision. The party so appealing shall give bond to the state, with sufficient surety, for the benefit of the adverse party, in such sum as the board of directors fix, to pay all costs in case he or it fails to sustain such appeal. To the extent applicable, such appeal shall conform to the standards and procedure for appeals in contested cases under sections 4-176e to 4-182, inclusive. Where the department determines that the order, authorization or decision of the transit district would affect state-wide transportation policy adversely, such order, authorization or decision may be modified or overruled. The decision after hearing shall be final except that the applicant for such hearing, if aggrieved, may appeal therefrom in accordance with section 4-183. The district may use any grants, loans or other revenues for subsidies to any transit system operating under private ownership within the district in order to continue the operation of uneconomic routes. Subsidies may be provided for that portion of such uneconomic routes which operate outside the transit district but which are integrated into the service provided in the district.

(1961, P.A. 507, S. 3; 1972, P.A. 261, S. 3; P.A. 73-2, S. 9, 11; P.A. 75-486, S. 24, 69; P.A. 77-614, S. 162, 610; P.A. 80-94, S. 1, 3; 80-482, S. 11, 348; P.A. 88-317, S. 49, 107.)

History: 1972 act clarified procedure for transit district takeover of system under control of public utilities commission and added provisions concerning appeal to commission and subsidies to privately-owned companies; P.A. 73-2 deleted references to assessments; P.A. 75-486 substituted public utilities control authority for public utilities commission; P.A. 77-614 substituted division of public utility control within the department of business regulation for public utilities control authority, effective January 1, 1979; P.A. 80-94 substituted department of transportation for the division and deleted reference to abolished business regulation department, replaced reference to appeals as provided in Secs. 16-35 to 16-39 with reference to appeals under Secs. 4-177 to 4-182 and added provision for appeal after hearing; technical changes made in P.A. 80-482 were not enacted; P.A. 88-317 amended reference to Secs. 4-177 to 4-182 to include new sections added to Ch. 54, effective July 1, 1989, and applicable to all agency proceedings commencing on or after that date; (Revisor's note: In 1997 the Revisors editorially changed the phrase “in the same manner and under the same standards are established by said title 16.” to “in the same manner and under the same standards as are established in said title 16.” thereby correcting a clerical error in the codification of P.A. 73-2, S. 9).

Cited. 235 C. 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1994–2016 · leading case: New Britain Transp. Co. v. Comm'r of Transp., 151 A.3d 823 (Conn. 2016).
New Britain Transp. Co. v. Comm'r of Transp., 151 A.3d 823 (Conn. 2016). · cites it 8× “See General Statutes § 7-273d. Although some of the certificates have been amended since they were issued, neither the commissioner nor the Greater Hartford Transit District has moved to suspend or revoke them.”
Westport Taxi Serv., Inc. v. Westport Transit Dist., 664 A.2d 719 (Conn. 1995). · cites it 2× “to 1975) § 7-273d. 8 The defendant repre *8 sented that it intended to revoke the certificates of the private companies and issue new certificates to them that would exclude shared ride service.”
Ferguson Mech. Co. v. Dep't of Pub. Works, 924 A.2d 846 (Conn. 2007). · cites it 2× “ection 4-183”); General Statutes § 4a-100 (o) (“[a]ny applicant aggrieved by the commissioner’s final determination concerning a preliminary determination, a denial of certification, a reduction in prequalification classification or aggregate work capacity rating or a revocation…”
In Re Westport Transit Dist., 165 B.R. 93 (Bankr. D. Conn. 1994). “§ 7-273d. The district is authorized to establish a new transit system or acquire an existing system and is granted the power of eminent domain.”
Dattco, Inc. v. Comm'r of Transp. (Conn. 2016). · cites it 2× “17 General Statutes § 7-273d provides in relevant part: ‘‘Upon written notice to the Department of Transportation, to the chief executive officer of a private transit system, and to the elected chief executive officer of each municipality composing the district, the district, by…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.