Ryan Fazio has a three-pronged approach to housing that reduces the cost of housing, allows Connecticut to grow its housing supply, and protects local control of zoning and decision-making. For eight years, Gov. Lamont has allowed Hartford bureaucrats and big developers to make decisions for municipalities over local objections and added new mandates that drive up costs for municipalities and families. Ryan’s “Grand Bargain” Plan will help Connecticut change course.
THE GRAND BARGAIN PLAN
I. Reduce and Cap Property Taxes
- Roll back hundreds of the 1,400 unfunded state mandates on our municipalities that have driven up Connecticut’s property taxes to the 3rd-highest in the nation
- Reform the tax exemptions for large solar arrays, universities, and hospital systems; their contributions will lower the tax burden faced by the middle class
- Ensure that state funding to towns and cities, especially Educational Cost Sharing, is predictable, unbiased, and increases with costs annually
- Cap property tax increases at no greater than 2% or the rate of inflation
II. Reduce the Cost of Building Housing and Expand Supply
- Eliminate licensing fees, streamline licensing, and lift the cap on apprenticeships to support and bring in workers to the building trades
- Reform building codes and other regulations that do not improve safety but reduces the supply of housing, including reforming stairwell requirements, allowing three unrelated people to live together, making elevator installation more affordable, and more
- Streamline permitting processes to make them more rules-based, speedy, and predictable
- Incentivize small-scale housing development and other housing with more community support, including Accessory Dwelling Units, residential in mixed-use areas, and more
- These zoning reforms and others are contingent on the third category of reforms protecting local control
III. Protect Local Control by Rolling Back 8-30g and H.B. 8002
- Eliminate or roll back 8-30(g) and H.B. 8002 in a way that gives towns and cities more flexibility. Large developers should not be able to ignore local zoning to build 100-unit complexes in single-family zoned neighborhoods.
- If 8-30(g) isn’t repealed, allow more forms of naturally occurring affordable housing, transit-oriented or mixed-use development, and senior housing to meet statutory requirements. Also, reform the percentage-based incentive in 8-30(g) to a fixed number to align with incentives.
- Place height and size limits on 8-30(g) builder’s remedy (see: Massachusetts 40-B law)
- Allow approved and reasonable adoption of “Housing Growth Zones” to earn municipalities an indefinite reprieve from 8-30(g) mandates