By Ken Valenti
WESTPORT–After another discussion about joining a statewide municipal planning group, Westport Representative Town Meeting (RTM) members still reached no conclusion. But they did learn that two changes were made to the state statute establishing the agency because of concerns members had raised in the past.
Executive Director David Kooris of the Connecticut Municipal Development Authority (CMDA) told two RTM committees – transit and planning and zoning – in Town Hall last night that the law’s wording had been adjusted to clarify that joining the agency does not bind the town to establishing a development district, and that the town does not give up any taxing authority to the organization.
Kooris continued to tell RTM members that joining the quasi-public agency opens the town up to benefits in funding, expertise and technical assistance, as he had in meetings in December 2025 and January.
“There is no downside, especially in this first step,” he said, adding, “There’s no obligation. There’s no commitment.”
Launched in August 2024, CMDA aims to partner with communities to create districts around train stations and in downtowns where it can help foster walkability, transit-oriented development and housing. Westport has three potential districts with two train stations – Westport and Greens Farms – and its downtown.
Matthew Mandell, chairman of the RTM Planning and Zoning Committee, said he wanted more input from town attorneys, who already have explored the statute.
“One thing I want is to go back to legal and ask about (the statute) again because for me that’s a big step forward in terms of what we have to do and what we don’t have to do,” Mandell said.
The agency has $90 million to spend over two fiscal years providing matching grants to municipalities, loans to developers and expertise from 17 consultants, among other measures. More than 40 municipalities have joined the CMDA. Kooris said “14 or 15” members have joined since he last met with Westport leaders in a public meeting.
One issue centered on a note in the law saying that a municipality that joins the CMDA “shall” enter into an agreement to establish a development district. Kooris said wording was changed to clarify that the agreement is needed only “in order to establish” a district, which the town would have no obligation to do.
The other issue with the statute concerned wording that appeared to give the CMDA the power to collect real estate taxes payable to the town. Kooris said the wording was held over from a previous statute referring to a specific area in the Hartford region, but it has been changed.
A full RTM meeting that had been planned next Tuesday was expected to be canceled as its only agenda item was to vote on whether to approve any recommendation on the matter from the committees.
The committees did not schedule a time to continue talking about the matter, but Mandell said the discussion may continue in September.
Ken Valenti
A career journalist and lifelong resident of the New York City region, Ken Valenti has enjoyed decades of reporting local, regional and national news in New York and Connecticut. Topics of special interest are development, the environment, Long Island Sound and transportation. When not reporting, he’s always on the lookout for the perfect coffee shop or used book sale.
While Matt Mandell is not wrong to be cautious, I hope that Westport will ultimately avail itself of the expertise offered by the CMDA. This is a rare opportunity to profit from a broader view of what creative land use policies can deliver to a vibrant community facing the problems posed by growth, traffic and an urgent need for affordable housing.
The RTM is worried that maybe “shall” is a binding term afterall? Interesting. Weren’t we famously told that “shall” means “may”?
One reason the RTM is right to proceed thoughtfully is that Westport is already engaged in another major planning process affecting the same part of town.
The future of the Cribari Bridge and the Bridge Street National Register Historic District remains under active federal review by the Federal Highway Administration under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Consulting parties—including neighborhood representatives and preservation organizations—have raised unresolved questions about impacts on the historic district, cumulative effects, traffic assumptions, and the adequacy of the environmental review.
Against that backdrop, it would be prudent for the town to avoid actions that could be perceived as anticipating or encouraging a particular pattern of future development before the federal review is complete. Even if CMDA membership creates no legal obligation to pursue transit-oriented development, it understandably raises questions about long-term planning priorities around the railroad stations and transportation corridors.
Westport’s careful questioning has already prompted changes to the proposed CMDA statutory language. That alone demonstrates the value of due diligence. The same patience should be exercised here: let the FHWA complete its work before the town takes steps that could complicate—or appear to prejudge—the outcome of an ongoing federal historic preservation process.
Westport has an opportunity to show that thoughtful planning and historic preservation are complementary, not competing, values.
Have we not learned anything? Just say no thank you to this attempt by certain persons in the state government who have repeatedly tried to gain control of our town planning. We don’t need their money. Our town staff and various commissions and boards, know what they are doing when development opportunities are presented. Good developments get passed and bad ones don’t.
The way this whole interference has come about is right out of the Regional Planning Authority play book. The P&Z will be doing the 2027 POCD, let them do their job without CMDA. The P&Z director is very capable of finding the right consultant to guide this state mandated 10-year planning document. As part of the POCD process, the residents of Westport will have multiple opportunities for input into how we want to see our town develop over the next 10 years.
Well said, Cathy. The last thing we need is some state actor with an agenda bellyfloping into our pool. This is one of those things that looks like what it is. RTM just use the little word: NO.
I am not as skeptical of using state resources. I think it’s a good idea. But Westport can’t get out of its own way. The Finance Board has yet to approve the requested appropriation for the POCD plan. Tick tock. We are creating our own problems with this obsessive distrust of the state. Get the POCD going now!!! This is our, Westport’s North Star and vision for the future.
At the meeting (I was there) Mr. Kooris reiterated his talking points from January. In response to a question about the cons of Westport joining CMDA, he charmingly told the committee that he had racked his brain to think of a single one and was unsuccessful. I thought of several…he admitted in January that there is a charge for this “service” but could not give even a ballpark figure. Last night the question of cost did not come up. Another con is that this “quasi government” agency is very much an entity of Hartford, which does not have the best interests of Westport in mind (unless you consider lots of apartment buildings and additional traffic and town resources strained by thousands of new residents, many of whom require financial assistance, to be good for our town). Also, the signed up communities are all in the planning stage with no completed project available for assessment. When asked by a member to explain what expertise is Mr. Kooris bringing to town, he repeated his claims of water, traffic, sidewalks, etc. but never explained what HIS expertise is in these areas and where can we see these great successes. Last, he cagily reiterated that before an MOA is signed there are off ramps; after? not so much.
As this is being debated, a full town planning assessment and report is also in the works. Presumably, much of the questions regarding possible changes to the town regarding placement of housing developments, sidewalks, parking issues, etc , will be revealed in that process. We don’t need CMDA.
In the few minutes since my post, I had multiple phone calls from friends who were in the meeting. My question is: Why did a certain District 1 RTM member keep pushing for a vote? Congratulations to Matt (not the district 1 rep in question) who led the RTM in the right direction. Now lead the RTM to the 100% correct solution-SAY NO. There is no room for appeasement. This is a terrible idea for Westport.