Nearly a year later, the state’s termination of its contract with a private developer for the revitalization of the former Seaside Regional Center still appears to have been more a political than a public policy decision.

It may also prove to be costly for the state and Town of Waterford, which means for taxpayers.

This week Seaside In Waterford, the limited liability company created by developer Mark Steiner to pursue the development plans, began its expected legal fight. The would-be developer is asking the state Office of the Claims Commissioner for permission to sue the state, as required by law.

A separate lawsuit seeks damages against a Waterford Planning & Zoning Commission member for failing to recuse himself from a decisive project vote.

In both instances, the developer would appear to have a strong legal position.

In the face of neighborhood opposition and through various permutations, Mr. Steiner spent 15 years pursuing his plan to redevelop the historic Seaside properties as condominiums and provide public access to its coastline. After various swings and misses, his plan as of 2014 had good potential, with the managers of Ocean House, the successful Watch Hill resort, interested in running an inn as part of the project.

Those plans collapsed last September, however, when a 3-2 vote by the P&Z Commission in favor of a zone change to allow the inn failed to reach the two-thirds vote necessary for approval. The newly filed lawsuit contends commission member Dana P. Award should have recused himself, as the town attorney had advised.

As an adjoining property owner who had previously voiced opposition to the project, and given that his wife was a plaintiff in litigation against the developer, it would appear Mr. Award had a statutory obligation to sit out the vote due to “personal or financial” interest. Without Mr. Award’s vote, the measure would have received the necessary approval.

Two weeks later Gov. Dannel P. Malloy announced the state was ending the contract with Seaside In Waterford to pursue, instead, a state park. The Malloy administration pointed to the developer’s failure to win land use approvals, ignoring the developer’s court appeal to try to reverse the P&Z vote. At the very least, the state should have waited.

Back in the fall both Gov. Malloy and a local state Senate candidate were locked in tough election campaigns — the governor would later win, the Democratic Senate candidate would not — which made the timing of the abrupt state park announcement interesting.

Because of what still strikes us as a rash decision by the governor, Mr. Steiner will likely never get the development project he wanted, but he may yet get his big pay day.