LTE: Monster Housing Bill Passes State House

To the Editor:

HB 5002, a monster unworkable housing bill was passed late last night despite bi-partisan opposition and an outpouring of emails and phone calls from residents urging lawmakers not to pass this onerous bill. For those who reached out to our lawmakers, I thank you for having your voice heard. It's vital to our process! The bill passed late [Tuesday] night in an 84 to 67 vote.

I watched most of the 11-hour debate via streaming, and I appreciate those who spoke in opposition of the bill and the many amendments that were filed to make it more palatable -- which all failed by party lines. Approaching 11 p.m. on Tuesday night, the vote concluded, and I was in disbelief of the results just like many people in Fairfield and Connecticut who value local control of zoning and land-use decisions. It came just as we had finished our own Town Plan & Zoning Commission meeting which could be a much different place as our decision making will be limited if HB 5002 gets passed by the State Senate.

As a watcher of housing legislation for many years, I find it unfortunate that the earnest work of many towns including Fairfield to create affordable housing and a diversity of housing stock is not recognized. "Keeping the suburbs" accountable is a terrible policy from lawmakers in Hartford who may not have visited our communities or seen firsthand the work that we do. Beauty also matters and having our unique and historical suburbs crammed with outsized developments and apartment buildings will change our landscape forever. Will there be a glut of housing at some point soon with high vacancy rates? Our population is not growing so much that it requires all of this housing stock.

Once land is developed, it's gone forever.

Maybe we will officially become the City of Fairfield through the mandates in HB 5002.

The impact of HB 5002 on our environment:
I first ran for zoning because I was always concerned about environmental impacts of development. The planning aspect and zoning aspects by our communities are severely impacted by HB 5002. That adverse impact along with the extreme development pressure will result in the State never meeting is 21% of open space goal which the towns are supposed to also do, and we will continue to lose sense of environmental areas we will continue to invade the 100-ft buffer most towns have around inland wetlands and allow construction activity well within 100 ft of a tidal wetland.

At this time of climate change the DEEP has warned us sea level will rise 20 inches by 2050 there will be increasingly extreme storm events as well as sunny day flooding. We need open space, expanded and enforced 100 ft buffers around both inland wetlands and tidal wetlands. This is a time when we need to think about expanding our protection of our natural resources as a first line of defense against climate change impacts.

Instead, this bill puts multifamily residential development on the far higher priority than anything else and completely ignores our needs to use nature-based solutions to combat climate change. I don't think that's good policy.

HB 5002 now heads to the Senate where further changes will likely be made but not sure for the better.

What's in the bill?

• Fair Share housing quotas would require zoning boards to pass regulations to enable towns to build as many as 500 to 2,000 more affordable units -- no thought given to budget, infrastructure capacity, sewer capacity, road capacity, the staffing needed at Town Hall to process rapid growth, open space preservation historic preservation, etc. Our town has been involved in several years in developing our next 10-year Plan of Conservation and Development. If this law is passed what happens to that plan was it a wasted effort? You may find Fairfield's Fair Share here.

• Provisions like “as of right” apartment development in commercial zones, elimination of parking requirements (how will the disabled and seniors handle this?), and mandatory Fair Rent Commissions are viewed as one-size-fits-all solutions that ignore the unique needs and wishes of existing residents.

• The scale and speed of mandated development, especially in established single-family neighborhoods, could disrupt community cohesion and alter property values, outcomes that may not be fully understood until after implementation.

• The Attorney General would have new powers to sue towns over zoning outcomes deemed to have “discriminatory effects,” exposing municipalities—and by extension, their taxpayers—to costly litigation

• Developers could recover legal fees in affordable housing disputes, potentially discouraging towns from defending local interests and further reducing homeowner influence over neighborhood development.

• The bill’s “one-size-fits-all” approach ignores local infrastructure limits and unique community needs, raising concerns about overburdened schools, roads, and services.

• The process—introducing a vague bill that mushrooms into a complex omnibus measure overnight—undermines transparency and public trust, especially when timed to minimize opposition right before a holiday weekend.

The bill is expected to move to the Senate in the next day or so. I urge you to not only contact State Sen. Tony Hwang but also Majority Leader Bob Duff and Senate Pro Tempore Martin Looney and urge them all to vote no. The good news is that Fairfield's State Reps. Keitt and Leeper voted against the bill, however, Fairfield State Rep. McCarthy Vahey voted for it.

The battle continues.

As always, thank you for your time and consideration.

Alexis Harrison
Fairfield Town Plan & Zoning Commissioner