Legislative opponents say housing bills would undermine local control
Opponents of a slate of new bills designed to increase housing density and affordability in Connecticut decried the proposed legislation as government overreach at a community meeting on Sunday.
The bills, which were recently advanced by the General Assembly, would establish a right to housing, require every municipality to create an affordable housing plan and allow a housing authority to expand its jurisdiction to neighboring localities.
Supporters of the legislation argue the bills will increase the amount of affordable housing, make residential communities more accessible to commuters and increase the quality of life for countless residents.
But lawmakers and residents skeptical of the bills worry changing the law would undermine local control over proposed housing developments, negatively impact historic structures and threaten environmental resources.
In an online event featuring elected officials from across Fairfield County, state Sen. Tony Hwang, a Republican representing the 28th district, argued the proposed laws do not take into consideration the differences between the state’s diverse communities.
A one-size-fits-all approach “is not a policy that is going to address the problem at hand and instead creates frustration, anger and strong opposition from people,” Hwang, who also said he believed there is a real need for affordable housing in the state, told the audience.
Kathryn Braun, an attorney and a member of the Fairfield Plan and Zoning Commission, said she believed most of the bills would minimize local control over housing construction and exclude the public from the approval process.
“I feel the local citizenry know the best about exactly what's going on nearby,” Braun said. “As zoning commissioners, we need to hear from the public as well as the applicant to understand what's going on.”
Matthew Mandell, a member of Westport’s non-partisan citizen’s assembly and president of Westport Weston Chamber of Commerce, said the legislation would harm towns by inflating local populations without adding new infrastructure.
“If the roads aren’t built, and they haven’t been built, you’re just going to have tremendous congestion. And that means it's difficult to get anywhere,” Mandell said. “It's difficult to shop, it harms the business, it makes it difficult for everybody to do anything.”
Affordable housing advocates notched a significant victory this month when a bill mandating the creation of affordable housing plans for each municipality was advanced out of committee. Known as the “fair share” affordable-housing bill, the measure would give towns and planning regions control over development, but would require some affordable housing.
“This legislation looks to change the way Connecticut towns have historically addressed where housing is located and who has the opportunity to live in it,” Cheryl Sharp, deputy director of the state Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities, wrote in a letter to lawmakers supporting the bill.
Hwang noted that a different bill intended to encourage affordable housing near transportation hubs recently failed to make it out of committee.
But he warned that state lawmakers could still revive portions of the proposal before the legislative session ends in May.
“Unfortunately, we have in our legislative process creative ways in which bills that have been discussed can be inserted in other correlating or jurisdictional connected policies,” Hwang said. “As we would say in the General Assembly, there is no bill, good or bad, that is ever dead.”