This commentary originally appeared in the Hartford Courant. The views expressed are the authors’ own.
Recently, a controversial New York developer was shot down by Bethel, Connecticut, in its plan to build attainably priced apartments, following failed efforts in Granby and Manchester, as well as success in Avon, Cheshire and New London—with appeals underway in Rocky Hill, Simsbury, and West Hartford.
For several decades, Connecticut municipalities have admirably strived to solve the challenge of developing more affordable housing in and around town centers. Their efforts, however, have proven to be too slow in the best of cases or ineffective in most instances. The “Not in My Backyard” (NIMBY) movement and its allied lobbies often weaponize state and local laws and use delay tactics to outmaneuver short-staffed local councils and commissions.
While New England small town democracy is frustrating to developers, local control and town meetings are a pillar of Connecticut’s local government, representing an ancient form of direct democracy where residents gather to vote on budgets, ordinances, and other town matters, preserving voice, greenspace, and the public interest. The administration of Governor Ned Lamont seems to have found a wise common ground.
In response to the clash between housing needs, commercial interests, and local control, Lamont, the General Assembly, and municipal leaders—from both the left and right—came together to provide a new, more promising path forward. A sweeping housing bill passed in the November special session establishes a statewide, systematic approach for identifying solutions tailored to each locale’s unique needs. Most importantly, while the legislation flexes state muscle to hold towns and cities accountable, it empowers them to combat NIMBYism, provides them with state- and regional-level resources, and still allows them to formulate their own response to the housing shortage.
The bill generously provides municipalities 2.5 years or more to develop their “housing growth plans,” providing ample time to identify everything from land inventories for development to infrastructure upgrades to implementation schedules. It leverages the advantages of regional councils of government to define affordable housing goals and leaves much of the strategic decision-making to municipalities to meet these goals. Additionally, for municipalities that are understaffed or overwhelmed by their other essential responsibilities, the legislation provides a valuable resource via their regional councils.
Localities can choose to develop their own housing strategies or collaborate with neighboring communities through regional councils. Municipalities that create and follow good-faith plans are eligible for state funding and legal protections, specifically against lawsuits from developers seeking to bypass local zoning for affordable housing projects under the 8-30g statute. The bill incentivizes smart housing policies, such as participating in zoning that increases density near transit hubs. In contrast, those that decide not to participate do not face penalties or legal actions but simply forgo these benefits. Regional councils may act as advisory bodies, providing recommendations that municipalities can accept or reject at their own discretion.
Outdated parking rules that previously compelled developers to create more parking spaces than residents actually need will be phased out. Smaller developments with fewer than 16 units are no longer required to meet minimum parking standards. At the same time, larger projects are encouraged to use traffic studies to demonstrate their actual parking needs instead of relying on standard formulas. Municipalities still have the ability to safeguard neighborhoods facing genuine congestion issues and can impose stricter regulations on up to 8% of their land.
Instead of requiring all houses to be built on large lots—which can lead to the destruction of forests and fields—the new law will allow developers to cluster homes together, better preserving larger open green spaces. This method, known as “conservation subdivision,” protects more trees and wildlife habitats while promoting better land use. Localities have full authority to decide which areas to conserve and how to integrate new developments into their conservation strategies.
Transforming dying strip malls, vacant storefronts, and empty office buildings into housing is easier than clearing forests for new subdivisions. By cutting through red tape and reducing parking requirements, rehabilitating existing structures in downtowns and older commercial districts becomes more financially viable. Towns keep control over design standards and building codes while acquiring new tools to revitalize neglected properties.
The bill trusts local leaders to craft their own solutions rather than imposing housing quotas from Hartford. Each town may create its own housing plan tailored to local needs and conditions, with the final authority over zoning and development decisions remaining in town hall. Moreover, the state offers crucial funding and technical assistance to municipalities that opt in, rather than issuing mandates.
Exclusionary practices that restrict housing diversity and affordability should be phased out. Protections have been introduced to prevent the misuse of abandonment rules against nonconforming uses. Discriminatory rejection based on income or other protected characteristics will be prohibited. Decisions on development approval or denial based on district “character” must be based on objective standards. Additionally, there will soon be requirements for reasonable flexibility in determining lot sizes, floor areas, and housing types.
Through the landmark legislation, clear ownership and accountability are assigned at both the state and local levels. The Office of Policy and Management must approve plans within 120 days. If they fail to do so, a newly established Council of Housing Growth must respond within a reasonable timeframe. The council will be directed by state officials and legislative leaders, or their designees, as well as the Connecticut Municipal Development Authority, and managed by the municipal authority’s staff.
The comprehensive housing bill is the result of extensive conversations with mayors, selectmen, and legislators from both sides of the aisle. Republican state legislators claim it compromises local control, yet local officials—Republican and Democrat—widely disagree and have continued to support the bill. Municipal associations, major cities, and small towns have also endorsed the bill.
Towns will decide where their housing belongs. The old parking lots, abandoned mills, half-empty office buildings, and shuttered suburban malls that have blighted areas across the state can be turned into housing. Young people can finally start their families. Their parents can cash in on their nest egg by downsizing to a more affordable home. Businesses can feel confident that the state can provide cost-effective options for the next generation of workers to call home while fortifying Connecticut municipal voice.
Even southerner and Constitutional framer Thomas Jefferson wisely saluted such governance in an 1816 letter stating “The townships in New England… are the vital principle of their governments, and have proved themselves the wisest invention ever devised by the wit of man for the perfect exercise of self-government, and for its preservation.” He saw the local direct democracy as essential for self-governance and hoped it would serve as a model for new states. Lamont has again provided a map for Connecticut to build it new future on the foundation of past cherished values.
“The Yale School of Management is the graduate business school of Yale University, a private research university in New Haven, Connecticut.”
Please visit the firm link to site