KENT, Conn.—The Inland Wetlands Commission agreed Monday, April 28, that a state trooper should be present during future site inspections of an ongoing remediation project at 422 Kent Hollow Road.

The property in question is owned by Andria Budd. The commission approved an after-the-fact application to clean up debris and tree cuttings on the land in March 2024, after it was noted that a violation had taken place. Land Use Administrator Tai Kern conducted a site visit in 2024 and determined that “a lot of work has occurred in a regulated area.”
She was unable to determine when the trees had been cut, however, and determined from Google maps that the work had been done after 2018, perhaps by a previous owner. Budd and her husband, Todd Young, have lived at the location since 2020.
Budd agreed to undertake remediation work and signed a Permission to Inspect form that allows Kern and commission members to monitor the progress of the remediation project.
At the time the after-the-fact application was submitted, commissioners questioned what a pathway was doing in the wetlands on other side of a watercourse. They noted then that machinery had crossed the watercourse to the wetlands.
Budd said in 2024 that they put in the walkway so they could access all their property. She agreed to engage a professional planner who would recommend whether the pathway should be removed.
A year later, Kern duly scheduled a spring inspection of the property and received the property owner’s approval. But when she and commissioner Paul Yagid arrived on April 24, interactions rapidly deteriorated.
“We met on the site and had some pleasant chitchat,” Kern told the IWC members. The inspectors then walked the property. “We crossed the watercourse and went down the trail. As we viewed the area, we noticed the no-mow area appeared to have been cut back.”
Young “charged” across the watercourse and became “very aggressive,” according to the land use administrator.
Yagid reported that the couple insisted the no-mow area had been like that when they bought the place years before. “But if that were true, it would have come back by now,” he said. “It was recently cut, probably last season.”
Indeed, Kern said Budd had insisted twice that if the area was not cut, the vegetation would be over her head in a week.
“Right from the beginning, they always seemed edgy about what was going on,” Yagid said. “When we were there the time before, we mentioned, ‘What’s that gravel path across the brook?’ You could see a machine had crossed over. There was a lot of reluctance to give an answer.”
Kern said, “At one point, they acted as if they didn’t know who we were and demanded to see identification. I said, ‘You know who I am, you have been in my office several times.’ It was very odd.”
Kern said the wetlands were “park-like compared to what you would see naturally. I don’t know that you would have approved that.”
Nevertheless, she said she would have to review the records of the application’s approval to determine exactly what was allowed. She said that because of the confrontational nature of her last visit, she was “rattled,” and unable to compare the approved application and the conditions on the ground.
“We have to decide how we will handle any violation,” said IWC Chairman Lynn Werner. “We want to make sure if it’s a violation, that we are doing the right thing. By our next meeting we should have a common sense of what we approved. Any violation is separate from dealing with the [confrontation].”
But she added that, considering Young’s aggression, the land use administrator, a commissioner, and a state trooper should be present for future inspections. Kern said she had already brought the incident to the attention of the first selectman and town counsel and that there should be no problem having a trooper accompany her.
Kern said that inspection of properties is a “very normal thing.” The last time a trooper was required for an inspection was about a decade ago for a wetland violation on the Schagticoke reservation.
In other business, the commission approved applications for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a single-family dwelling at 164A and 164B Kenmont Road; removal of a building on South Kent Road, and repairs to a wetland area related to a pool installation at 11 Woodin Road.
It accepted several applications for consideration next month: At 201 Treasure Hill Road, where the owners want to replace a barn that burned down; from the Northwest Connecticut Land Conservancy to remove dangerous trees at 99 Cobble Road, and to install a driveway at 0 Macedonia Road.
An application for an agricultural exemption at 17 Straight Road was withdrawn and a new application will be submitted next month.
And an application for construction of tennis courts at 324 Kent Hollow Road will require a site visit that Kern will set up.

I almost can’t believe my eyes — what you have written here is a one-sided, sensation piece meant to embarrass and vilify tax paying residents. Admittedly, I don’t know all of the particulars of this situation but I do know there are countless, similar situations that aren’t exploited by The Kent Dispatch in this unfortunate manner. Why this one? You simply could have reported something informative like, “To foster greater transparency and ensure the safety of Kent residents and employees, scheduled private property visits by Town personnel will now be chaperoned by a police trooper.”