By CT Mirror / Ginny Monk, with additional reporting by Westport Journal
MASHANTUCKET–At the State Department of Housing’s annual conference at Foxwoods, HB 5002 was top of mind
Gov. Ned Lamont said Thursday that his office and legislative leaders are aligned on most portions of the new housing bill, being drafted to replace HB 5002: “I think we’re still talking. I think we’re pretty close,” Lamont said.
According to Lamont, town officials have said they’re OK with allowing the conversion of commercial properties to residential without a special hearing in certain districts and — as long as the first floor can remain commercial so residents can access restaurants and shops. The previous proposal had allowed those conversions as of right without the qualification regarding the first floor.
H.B. 5002 had also removed mandates for developers to build off-street parking for residential buildings with up to 24 units. Lamont said under the new bill, that number will likely be lowered to 16 units.
Contacted after the meeting, Westport’s Hartford representatives weighed in on the progress toward a new housing bill.
“The delegation has been advocating for revisions to the housing bill that reflect the feedback we have heard from Westporters over the summer and into fall,” said Representative Dominique Johnson from the 143d district. “Once we see the draft in a couple of weeks we will be able to see what has been included. I will continue advocating to ensure it is a better bill by responding to the specific issues raised by Westport residents and stakeholders.”
Ceci Maher, Senator from district 26, said “I’m glad to see that the commercial buildings as of right change to residential has been reworked to insure that we retain commercial on the first floor, supporting business and finding a pathway for housing growth.” Maher added, “I was opposed to the 24-unit number of apartments not needing parking spots, 16 units is preferable, but still too many for our towns. . . . “Westport has been forward thinking on housing, including the Housing Fund, but there is still more to do. It should be noted that for years the COGs have had the opportunity to move housing along in conjunction with the towns, but they have not — will that change with this legislation? . . . It is worth noting that we have to start housing, and quickly — incremental growth won’t solve the need.”
Representative Jonathan Steinberg from district 136 said, “I haven’t seen the bill and might not until virtually the last minute.
“All I can do at this point is to express my hope that the final product will be something I can support. I’m tired of voting against affordable housing bills.”
On Thursday, Lamont gave some of the clearest details released so far on the new version of the bill — including changes to a parking reform measure, more regional resources, and state aid to build sewer and water systems.
Lamont said after Thursday’s event that he was still discussing some of the same measures he’d taken issue with when he vetoed the bill — parking reform and a requirement for towns to plan and zone for a set number of units known as fair share. Those were among the most controversial measures in the bill.
Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, said he wants to find a solution — and he also wants to see housing built more quickly.
“I hope we can get there, but we will not bring a weak bill to the floor of the Senate,” Duff said.
House Majority Leader Jason Rojas, D-East Hartford, said he thinks lawmakers and the governor agree on about 85% of the bill, but the 15% they don’t agree on is substantive.
“Knowing that we were talking about 15% of the bill … maybe 13%? I’m not just saying that for the sake of saying that, I truly believe that,” Rojas said. “A bill ain’t dead until it’s dead, and it ain’t dead yet.”
Rojas said he’s optimistic that officials will have a housing bill ready for the Nov. 12 and 13 special session. Lawmakers also plan to debate a financial plan to respond to federal human services cuts at the session.
Lamont said “I want to do everything I can to make it easier and faster for developers to build. I want towns to take the lead,” he said.
He said the new bill aims to have towns select areas to “pre-zone” for more housing, such as locations close to public transit — a description similar to elements of the portion of the old bill known as Work, Live Ride.
He said the state will provide regional councils of government with planners who have “the skills they need to work with the towns” and to work “as a region.” He said towns will be able to work collectively on housing, sewer and water resources under the approach. The state will help with the projects, and for towns that build more housing and need to expand their schools, Lamont said the state will be ready to help.
I was one of several hundred housing professionals who attended the annual conference on Thursday.
One of the morning panels included Sen Bob Duff and House Leader Rojas, who spoke in great detail about the proposed new bill. Both men admitted the bill was close to completion but not yet ready for a vote.
My greatest takeaway from the conference; I am proud to live in a State with a governor so deeply committed to helping all CT residents with programs for affordable housing, work force housing, supportive needs housing for the mentally challenged, housing for the homeless, housing for the aging, veteran’s housing and the for-sale affordable home programs.
In this horrible era of national politics, lead by a President and an administration who appear to take great pleasure inflicting pain and suffering to those already struggling with life’s challenges, it was refreshing to listen to a deeply concerned governor who acknowledges our problems and presents serious and practical solutions.
As I drove home from the conference I realized how grateful I was to witness basic democratic principles in full force. I smiled having captured a glimpse of how this nation once functioned effectively.
Our government is not the enemy. We are the government. We are the people whose role it is to elect forward thinking, credible officials to implement positive change to help our fellow human beings.
We simply need elect better candidates, not destroy every facet of government (including the East Wing of the White House) by installing fascist grifters determined to remove all social safety nets, enrich themselves and their cohorts and create a modern day slave state.
Connecticut is far from becoming a dying State, as Republican’s would like you to believe. Our population is on the rise. We have one of the most highly educated workforces in the country. Our public education system ranks as one of the best in the nation. One of the greatest challenges we face lies with our inability to house workers relocating to our State.
Until you are able to ignore the chatter from the ignorant and take a deep dive into understanding the policies, the programs and the results our State offers, don’t be so quick to give up hope on democracy.
Joseph V. Vallone, A.I.A.
COMMENT:
Pushing out national talking point as a smokescreen to hide the poor process and bad policy being negotiated behind closed doors at the state level is unacceptable. #nokingsct It is time for real discussion, not narratives and gaslighting. Tell the Governor NO to backroom deals and secret embargoed bills that will likely be full of errors since they have not been properly vetted by the technical experts – send our petition now:
https://ct169strong.org/petition-2025
Some takeaways from CT169Strong on what we are hearing in this article may be in the new bill:
1) Moving no parking can be required for projects under 24 units to 16 units STATEWIDE is still not workable policy.
-Residents in CT overwhelmingly need cars. For safety, to access food, services, jobs, etc.
– It is a safety issue as we have seen in Bridgeport where much of the workers are in the service industry. If a City like Bridgeport lacks adequate public transit on the evenings, weekends, on holidays for residents’ life activities – what about all the smaller towns rural communities and suburbs that lack transit. This is just total nonsensical legislation. This is nothing but a developer handout, subsidized by residents.
2) They are silent on the other nonsensical provision that stated that NO PROJECTS CAN BE DENIED SOLELY BASED ON LACK OF PARKING. This provision needs to be completely removed.
3) Fair Share as written has unworkable mandates based on a completely flawed methodology that was set solely on 3 wealth factors of a community and percentage of existing multifamily housing. This is completely irrelevant as to what is actually needed to set numbers for housing development including a buildout analysis, existing infrastructure, including public water and sewer capacity, access to jobs, access to transit, traffic considerations, width of roads, access to on street parking, etc. Aside from all of that, it also must consider protections for state’s natural resources like reservoirs, watershed, rivers, tidal and inland wetlands, etc.and impacts of density development on septic systems and wells. Our local P&Zs do this job when the state has some of the weakest protections.
4) Many as of right mandates were scattered throughout HB5002. CT has some of the poorest protections in the U.S. for the environment and we rely on local P&Zs to be the first and last line of defense in CT for our environment. As of right development can completely undermine these needed protections to ensure on water quality and environment is protected.
Read the WestCOG report on protecting our privately held land around public water supply:
https://westcog.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Safeguarding-Public-Water-Supply-Watersheds.pdf
5) Increase housing density developments “as of right” conversions from Commercial to residential development, taken with no minimum parking can be required (even at 16 units) is of significant concern. Totally lost in the conversation is the importance of commercial revenues from businesses to the income of a municipality. Businesses are a much lower burden on municipalities than residents, so losing their revenue while also increasing the demand for services needed by more tenants creates a greater burden on the taxpayers, making it less affordable to live in the municipality. While adding the ability to keep mixed use on the ground floors helps it is not the only issues with automatic conversions statewide everywhere. This is poor statewide policy and local discretion is needed to ensure the vitality of communities. Conversions are already happening as of right. There is no reason to go to these extreme legislative measures. This once again just seems to be a developer handout, nothing more.
6) Sen. Maher stating that COGS have had the opportunity to “move housing along” is off base. It should be noted that for years legislators have had the opportunity to improve the referrals process for COGs, but they have not. Instead legislators have obsessed completely with state mandates on zoning. An Urban Studies report looking that the results of completely eliminating zoning has shown very minimal impact on improving housing affordability or housing creation, yet the potential adverse impacts to municipalities and the environmental harm can be significant. But the nonsensical proposals of the housing advocates would definitely line the pockets of developers to be sure….
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/2023-03/Land-Use%20Reforms%20and%20Housing%20Costs.pdf
7) We just have to ask, where are all the environmentalists? Then again, we have seen how some have taken donations from the developer advocates, so we understand why some have sold out and support such poor policies.