A revised version of a housing bill vetoed earlier this year by Gov. Ned Lamont was passed by the 黑料吃瓜网 House on Wednesday, the first day of the legislative special session.
The House passed the bill, 90-56. It now heads to the Senate, which is expected to take up the bill on Thursday.
Republican lawmakers say they didn鈥檛 receive copies of the final housing bill draft until Wednesday morning and were unprepared to debate the bill in detail.
Republican Rep. Steve Weir, who represents towns including Andover and Glastonbury, said the housing bill being considered in the special session isn鈥檛 bipartisan. Weir said the work was conducted privately by Democrats.
鈥淪ome of the best policies come with a little bit of pushback,鈥� Weir said. 鈥淎nd we didn鈥檛 get that here today by any stretch of the imagination.鈥�
The earlier omnibus housing bill, vetoed by Lamont in June, was largely criticized for its 鈥渇air share鈥� policy, which would have required towns and cities to add a certain number of affordable homes to their community.
The new version of the bill doesn鈥檛 include fair share. Rather, there's an opt-in program run by the regional government councils, determining what type of housing is needed for various locations across the state.
Before debate began Wednesday, Democratic House of Representatives Majority Leader Jason Rojas said Democrats tried to work with Republicans on the modified bill.
鈥淲e鈥檝e long said local control, local officials being involved in decision making,鈥� Rojas said. 鈥淲e actually did that, compromised, and now they鈥檙e trying to find all sorts of other reasons to oppose a bill that is really important to the people in the state of 黑料吃瓜网.鈥�
Republicans take issue with a portion of the bill that would make it easier for new housing to be built on land that was once home to commercial properties.
Under the new bill, transforming former commercial space into housing must be approved 鈥渁s of right鈥� in communities that participate in the state鈥檚 鈥淲ork, Live, Ride鈥� program. It incentivizes new housing construction near transit hubs.
The bill wouldn鈥檛 take away commercial properties that are functional; developers would still need to follow local zoning and building codes, according to Rojas.
鈥淭hat assumes that someone who owns a revenue generating property is somehow going to pay to tear it down, displace those businesses so they can build nine units of housing. That doesn鈥檛 seem logical to me,鈥� Rojas said.
Republican Rep. Tony Scott, who represents parts of Easton, Trumbull and Monroe, is worried that with the commercial to residential shift, homes may spring up near undesirable locations, like liquor stores or marijuana dispensaries.
鈥淎 residential place right next to a dispensary. There鈥檚 no thought process,鈥� Scott said.
