Opinion: A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing? A View of the New Housing Bill

The following opinion essay was written by Fairfield resident Alexis Harrison, a founding member of CT169Strong:

A special legislative session will convene this week, Wednesday, November 13 through Friday, November 15, which will focus on securing funding to offset recent federal cuts and freezes, and advance a significant housing legislation (the latter, just two plus months away from the regular session). This issue with special sessions is that there are no public hearings or much time to speak to experts and residents.

Just last Friday, Gov. Ned Lamont, joined by majority-party leaders and housing advocates, held a press conference to promote a new housing bill billed as “bipartisan.” However, after a review of the bill (which is not even final yet), LCO10901 (version 3) has raised serious red flags.
Releasing a draft bill just days before a special session allows very little time for legislators to properly vet a bill, much less the public to digest it and offer feedback.

That’s a bad process that can and should be avoided.

The replacement bill for HB 5002 – which Governor Lamont vetoed last June — is being touted as a “grand compromise” that gives towns more control. It’s the same wolf in slightly different sheep’s clothing: centralized, top-down planning that overrides local zoning, guts home rule, and forces unaffordable, unfunded mandates on every Connecticut town.
Below are the four most objectionable parts of this 53-section bill, 99 pages in all. I’ve boiled them down so you can see exactly why it must be stopped. I’ve also put together a Google document with summaries of the most unworkable sections: Summary of LCO10901 – Google Docs

Weaponizes 8-30g — Punishes Towns That Have Already Done the Work
Anyone who’s been impacted by development from 8-30g projects who has been clamoring for reform with the affordable housing law — don’t expect any changes with 8-30g in this bill. This bill does the opposite: it actually weaponizes 8-30g by penalizing towns who are working hard towards an 8-3g moratorium if they don’t satisfy the bill’s planning and development requirements. Thus, any points legitimately earned—whether through municipal initiatives or private development—for creating affordable housing will be nullified, and the hard-won moratorium from 8-30g will be stripped away. This is a slap in the face to every community that has sincerely committed to building affordable housing.

“Fair Share” Never Went Away — It Just Got a New Name
Fair Share is still there – despite the change of name to something called housing growth – this is still the much-maligned Fair Share program (Section 4 & 5). Regional (COGs), which will then divvy them up to individual towns. We still have zero visibility into the secret formula OPM will use—or the final numbers. The statute caps any town’s target at 20% of its existing housing stock counted as “affordable.” For Fairfield (currently ~3% affordable), hitting even 10% would require 3,500+ new deed-restricted units. That’s mathematically impossible without carpet-bombing half the town with apartment towers. Once the quota lands, miss it and you lose:

• Our 8-30g moratorium
• All discretionary state funding
• Infrastructure grants
• School-construction reimbursement

It’s top-down central planning dressed up as “regional collaboration.”

Summary Review The newly coined “Summary Review” process—originally designed for nursing home conversions—is now being touted as a compromise for communities upset over the loss of local control under “As-of-Right” development. While it does involve staff or commission approval, it deliberately eliminates public hearings and special permits. In reality, this is nothing more than a name change that further excludes residents from the decision-making process and strips towns of their rightful authority to shape their own future.

Massive Unfunded Mandate — Rushed With Zero Fiscal Note
The bill has so many short deadlines, complicated moving parts, additional planning and reporting requirements, on top of the development targets, that towns will have to expand their infrastructure in terms of roads and sewers, add public safety equipment and personnel, add Town Hall personnel, deal with school enrollment and redistricting and facilities issues, hire consultants to conduct the various reports, studies and plans that will be required. This bill is being rushed so quickly it has not even had a fiscal review by the State or vetted by the Office of Legislative Research.

Multifamily Development Trumps Everything — Local Control Is Dead
Small businesses, open-space preservation, and historic protection are explicitly de-prioritized in this sprawling bill. It strips local zoning commissions of their core authority to safeguard our environment, neighborhoods, quality of life, and commercial tax base—all sacrificed on the altar of multifamily development. Whether a project is approved “as-of-right” or through “summary review,” public hearings are banned and zoning boards have zero discretion to impose even the most reasonable conditions to mitigate traffic congestion, flooding, school overcrowding, or stormwater runoff. Certain provisions even prohibit towns from enforcing their own open-space regulations. How is this a good policy for Connecticut?

Without public hearings, residents are silenced. They lose the ability to raise environmental concerns, protect historic districts, or fight inappropriate projects.

Commercial-to-residential conversion—only slightly watered down from the vetoed bill—will still devastate small businesses by allowing apartments to replace shops and offices with no public input.
Parking requirements? Zero spaces mandated for developments of up to 16 units—still outrageous policy, even if one unit better than the original bill.

The bill’s definition of “developable land” is a developer’s dream and a conservationist’s nightmare: it counts wetland buffers (both tidal and inland), unprotected open space, historic areas without ironclad easements, and critical watershed land unless they’re already 100% locked up forever. In an era of intensifying climate change, we cannot afford to pave over the undeveloped land that provides free ecological services: flood control, drought resilience, pollinator and wildlife habitat, and carbon sequestration.

Also – this bill does not make Connecticut more affordable for residents, and it lacks adequate state funding needed to create the deepest affordable for the poorest residents. HB5002 had the same issue. The economics won’t work and the units for the most deeply affordable units can’t be built without significant subsidies since they don’t pencil out.

Land is finite. Once it’s gone, it’s gone forever—along with the irreplaceable benefits it provides.
Local commissions — not Hartford bureaucrats — know their towns best. They must retain the power to decide what land deserves protection. This bill takes that power away.

What can you do? We are not powerless. Contact your State Senator and State Representatives today to urge them to vote against it. You can also use this petition from CT169Strong to send to Gov. Lamont here.

Alexis Harrison
Fairfield, CT

Alexis Harrison is a founding member of CT169Strong and also serves on the Fairfield Town Plan & Zoning Commission, but she was not re-elected to another term on Nov. 4.

—