Tim Tai

Activists, local government officials and civilians testified to Connecticut legislators Monday regarding Work Live Ride, a state bill that would incentivize towns to build affordable housing near transit centers.

Legislators considered older versions of Work Live Ride in their 2023 and 2024 sessions. The bill, backed by a coalition of nonprofits, lobby groups and municipal leaders, purports to fight urban sprawl, boost the supply of affordable and market-level units and conserve Connecticut’s natural resources.

During Monday’s 12-hour-long hearing, the Connecticut General Assembly’s Planning and Development Committee fielded dozens of comments on the bill’s promises and potential drawbacks, including threats to local zoning independence and decreased funding for municipal infrastructure projects.

“Sprawl is increasing. Traffic’s increasing,” Nick Kantor, executive director of Desegregate CT, the group backing the bill, said. “People are driving further to get to work. These are all things that we don’t want to happen because people deserve a better life and they can get it. It’s there for our taking.”

Work Live Ride, filed in the legislature as House Bill 6831, awards infrastructure funding to towns with “transit-oriented districts” — areas designed to boost dense mixed-use development around train or bus stations. New Haven’s Union Square, for instance, is one of those communities, and it is likely the city would receive funding if the bill were to take effect.

Many of those who testified in opposition to the bill represented small towns, including town selectmen and planners from wealthier communities in Fairfield County, which borders New Haven County. They raised concerns about a section of the bill that allows state agencies to “prioritize” infrastructure funding for communities that qualify as transit-oriented districts.

Opponents said that the language would mean a loss of funding for their towns, including support from previous state grants, and would infringe upon historic or protected environmental zones.

“Having us surrender a lot of our decision-making to a coordinator who’s going to be known as a ‘zoning czar,’ who could overrule our elected and appointed officials here in town, is troubling,” Fred Camillo, the First Selectman for Greenwich, testified. “I’ve yet to meet an official on a local level who thinks that’s a good idea. You should let towns govern themselves because they know what works.”

These speakers cited towns’ independent efforts to build affordable housing, which they say were successful because they relied on local planning, not state intervention.

Leaders at Desegregate CT, the coalition that helped to author and organize around the legislation, claim that these concerns are rooted in misinformation surrounding the bill. They cited language in the legislation that allows for local leaders to have autonomy over land use, receive public input and coordinate with environmental agencies like municipal inland wetlands agencies to ensure transit-oriented construction does not impact protected zones.

Some testimony in support of the bill directly blamed municipalities like Greenwich, whose housing stock has not grown significantly in the past few years, for inhibiting Connecticut’s housing market and discouraging prospective homebuyers from settling in the state.

“For decades these towns and cities have used their local control to legislate against housing affordability,” Zachary Oberholtzer, a member of People Friendly Stamford, said in his testimony. “In these exclusionary towns, we have one-size-fits-all luxury zoning where single-family homes own large lots – basically the most expensive and most infrastructure-intense way to house the least number of people.”

Despite resistance from some local officials and Republican lawmakers, activists say that the bill’s early hearing date is a sign of support from state leadership and the success of their ongoing organizing efforts.

The bill passed through the House last year with bipartisan support but ran out of time for a vote in the Senate. To boost the bill’s chances, Desegregate CT has organized meetings with 70 local Planning and Zoning Commissions to listen to leaders’ concerns. After these conversations, Kantor is confident that most municipalities would be eager to take advantage of the bill’s built-in support, even if they’re not on board yet.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if, after three years of this going and some cool projects get built in communities in Fairfield County, that Greenwich opts in later on,” Kantor told the News. “They’re going to see their economy increase, their … tax base increasing, and they’re going to see that it is going to drive positive impact.”

The Planning and Development Committee will host its next public hearing on Feb. 19.

Correction, Feb. 6: The article has been updated to accurately reflect what Kantor told the News.