LTE: Fairfield Needed Its State Representatives to Push Back. They Didn’t.

The following Letter to the Editor is by Fairfield resident Michael Grant:

What makes HB 8002 so disappointing is not just the bill itself, it’s that Fairfield’s own delegation signed onto a sweeping state mandate that will permanently reshape the character, infrastructure, and livability of a town they claim to champion, without insisting on public vetting, transparency, or meaningful local input.

Fairfield is not an abstract dot on a statewide planning map. It is a centuries-old coastal town with real infrastructure limits, flood-prone neighborhoods, century-old roads, finite sewer capacity, schools that cycle in and out of crowding, and commercial districts that are the backbone of our tax base. And yet Fairfield’s representatives, Cristin McCarthy-Vahey, Jennifer Leeper, and Sarah Keitt, chose to support a bill that imposes:

• Top-down housing quotas that ignore local capacity
• As-of-right dense development in commercial zones
• No-parking mandates up to 16 units, even in transit-poor neighborhoods
• Statewide preemption of public hearings and local review
• A new unelected housing council with enormous power
• The loss of future 8-30g moratoriums for towns that can’t satisfy unrealistic state metrics

Not one of these mandates received a full public hearing. Not one was meaningfully vetted by the people who will live with the consequences. If this was truly “towns taking the lead,” why were Fairfield’s own residents shut out of the process?

Fairfield’s delegation know, because they live here, that Fairfield is a built-out coastal community with:

• Dense neighborhoods on the water
• Narrow residential roads that cannot absorb overflow parking
• Wetlands and flood-zone challenges
• A fragile commercial tax base
• One of the highest commuter-to-resident traffic ratios in the state
• No large tracts of developable land

Yet they voted for a bill that treats Fairfield as if it were a blank suburban grid with unlimited capacity and unlimited infrastructure dollars.

That is not representation.

That is acquiescence.

The job of a representative is not to simply “support statewide goals.” It is to deliver statewide solutions in a way that respects and protects the town they were elected to serve.
McCarthy-Vahey, Leeper, and Keitt know how fiercely Fairfield guards its character, its environmental constraints, and its ability to manage growth responsibly. Fairfield has added affordable units, earned HUE points, and invested in thoughtful planning - exactly what the state asked for.

And yet this bill punishes towns like Fairfield that have done the work.

Why would our delegation vote for the single greatest expansion of state power over local zoning in Connecticut history, without demanding public input, transparency, or even a final released text before committing to it?

Supporting a bill of this magnitude without insisting on daylight, scrutiny, or local protections is not leadership.

It is not a bipartisan compromise.

It is not representative democracy.

It is surrendering local autonomy to Hartford in a way that will outlast every one of their political careers.

This isn’t about personalities.

It’s about judgment, priorities, and accountability.

Cristin McCarthy-Vahey, Jennifer Leeper, and Sarah Keitt chose to sign a bill that places state bureaucracies, regional mandates, and unelected councils above the lived realities of Fairfield residents.

And Fairfield deserves representatives who insist on:

• Transparency
• Public hearings
• Infrastructure awareness
• Environmental protection
• Respect for local planning
• Reasonable growth that aligns with community character

HB 8002 does none of those things.

And Fairfield will be living with the consequences long after the press releases fade.

Michael Grant

Fairfield, CT