Thomas Breen photo
City housing authority prez DuBois-Walton: A “great step forward.”
A state bill that would let public housing authorities develop properties in neighboring towns moved ahead Thursday, as state lawmakers voted to advance the proposed legislation out of committee and to the General Assembly floor for further debate.
The state legislature’s Housing Committee took that 7‑to‑3 vote Thursday morning on Raised House Bill 6430: An Act Concerning Housing Authority Jurisdiction.
The bill is backed by New Haven’s entire state delegation and supported by a host of city residents interested in expanding access to affordable housing in racially and economically segregated suburbs. The proposal would grant public housing authorities — like New Haven’s Elm City Communities — the right to build within a 15-mile radius of the municipality where they were created. Current state law limits housing authority jurisdiction to their town or city of origin. It would also limit housing development authorities to only “high” or “very high” opportunity areas within that expanded jurisdiction.
“We are so pleased to see the HB 6430 advance out of committee,” city housing authority President Karen DuBois-Walton told the Independent by email in response to Thursday’s committee vote.
“This is the result of the strong leadership of the Housing Committee and years of strong activism. As some of the greatest developers of truly affordable housing, housing authorities should not be subject to inequitable limitations when acting in their role as developers. This bill is a great step forward in advancing the development of more affordable housing across a wider number of communities. Now we must continue to advocate so that this bill gets passed in the General Assembly.”
Public housing authorities leverage federal funding to subsidize rent for low-income tenants at housing authority-owned properties and in the private rental market through Section 8 vouchers. Some have spun off their development work into separate but related nonprofits, like New Haven’s Glendower Group, charged with transforming existing housing projects and developing new affordable housing complexes.
DuBois-Walton has said that the city’s housing authority currently has “tens of thousands” of people on its waitlist, with a third of those people living outside of New Haven.
Critics: This Is A “One-Size-Fits-All Mandate”
YouTube
State Rep. Polletta.
Last month’s public hearing on the proposed bill sparked hours upon hours of testimony by suburbanites opposed to what they described as a loss of local control.
While the proposed bill explicitly does not allow housing authorities to exercise eminent domain within their expanded jurisdictions, Republican state lawmakers picked up that critique on Thursday that this bill would spell the end of municipal autonomy.
“I fear that some of our suburban areas will be adversely affected because they may lose their control of zoning,” said Watertown State Rep. Joe Polletta. “They may lose a right to have a say of what goes in their town and what it looks like.”
He criticized the bill as a “one-size-fits-all mandate.”
State Sen. Cicarrella.
North Haven State Sen. Paul Cicarella agreed.
“We understand there is a housing issue and it does need to be addressed,” he said. “But by taking away the ability of local governments to make decisions about what they know is best, not only aesthetically, but logistically … This is not going to sit well with a lot of my constituents.”
State Sen. Lopes.
New Britain State Sen. and Housing Committee Co-Chair Rick Lopes, a Democrat, said he was baffled by the argument that this law strips local zoning boards of their power.
“There are some bills that change local zoning” before the state legislature this year, he said. “I don’t think this bill really does that.”
Woodbridge Republicans Wave “Home Rule” Flag
Thomas Breen photo
On Tuesday night, Woodbridge’s Republican Town Committee weighed in on the housing authority expansion bill and on the broader statewide debate about local zoning and affordable housing with a unanimously endorsed resolution in support of “home rule.” The town RTC’s spokesperson sent out a press release about the resolution on Wednesday.
That resolution, printed in full below, singles out the housing authority jurisdiction bill in its seventh “whereas” clause. It then goes on to state that the RTC from New Haven’s leafy suburb to the west “opposes any State Mandated one size fits all Zoning Legislation and the ability of any outside housing authority to have jurisdiction on our town’s Affordable Housing plan and any similar legislation that would further overrule, remove or diminish local control and decision making related to planning and zoning or affordable housing from the town of Woodbridge.”
The Woodbridge Town Planning & Zoning Commission is still hearing a months-long debate over a rezoning proposal introduced by civil rights attorneys and Yale Law students. That proposal, supported by some New Haveners interested in the regional roots of segregation, would allow for multi-family housing to be developed as of right in any residential district in the overwhelmingly single-family-zoned town. Click here, here, here, and here for more on that rezoning debate.
In responding to the parts of the Woodbridge resolution that specifically called out the housing authority jurisdiction bill, DuBois-Walton told the Independent by email, “The Woodbridge RTC’s resolution seems to reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of the intent of HB 6430. HB 6430 simply seeks to treat housing authorities that act as developers in the same way that any other developer is treated. This bill allows a housing authority developer to seek to acquire property, design development, go through local zoning approvals, secure financing and build just as any other developer would. It places housing authority developers on a level playing field with other developers. I would hope that there would be no opposition to this.”
Following is the text of the Woodbridge RTC resolution:
A RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF “HOME RULE” IN MUNICIPAL ZONING DECISION MAKING
WHEREAS, Connecticut’s towns and cities successfully use local zoning and planning processes to balance private property rights, the community’s interests, demands on infrastructure, housing needs, and economic growth; and
WHEREAS, local control and decision making empowers the residents and taxpayers of each town and city to carefully tailor zoning policies that reflect its unique geography, economy, and housing market; and
WHEREAS, localized decision making ensures the greatest level of accountability while allowing affected community members the greatest level of input and the platform through a public hearing to provide specific, relevant information on potential impacts that only they would have knowledge of; and
WHEREAS, local control and local input enable neighbors and the local community to provide beneficial suggestions, identify errors and maximize community buy-in on zoning proposals; and
WHEREAS, proposals have been introduced in the General Assembly to strip local planning and zoning processes from towns and cities; and
WHEREAS, proposals have been introduced in the General Assembly to allow BY RIGHT market value multi-family development that will not generate any new affordable housing units; and
WHEREAS, proposals have been introduced in the General Assembly to allow outside Housing Authorities within 15 miles radius to develop affordable housing projects within our [town/city]; and
WHEREAS, BY RIGHT multi-family development can lead to exponential market value overbuilding and can cause adverse impacts to town infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, BY RIGHT development gives outsized rights to builders over all other property owners and prevents local Planning and Zoning Commissions from identifying the potential impacts of their project and imposing conditions upon a developer to address those direct impacts; and
WHEREAS, eliminating public hearings and community input on zoning matters would have unintended consequences such as increased infrastructure costs, increased local property taxes, and reduced home and business values which will be born by the town residents; and
WHEREAS, each town and city already has the choice to modify or abolish its zoning ordinances if the elected town or city government decides it best serves the community’s interests; and
NOW BE IT RESOLVED the Republican Town Committee of the town of Woodbridge opposes any State Mandated one size fits all Zoning Legislation and the ability of any outside housing authority to have jurisdiction on our town’s Affordable Housing plan and any similar legislation that would further overrule, remove or diminish local control and decision making related to planning and zoning or affordable housing from the town of Woodbridge.
I am not a developer but I am curious. Does anyone know if this proposal goes the other way? For example, could a developer buy property in New Haven that is currently zoned for multi-family or commercial use and then make it into single-family use?