By Anne White
Lawmakers in Hartford are pushing forward a renewed effort to incentivize high-density housing near transit hubs, reigniting a fight over local zoning control. House Bill 6831, introduced in January 2025, closely resembles last year’s failed HB 5390, which would have conditioned state funding on municipalities adopting state-mandated zoning changes.
The bill, backed by housing advocacy groups, aims to encourage residential development near train stations, citing a need for more affordable housing in Connecticut. Opponents argue that it undermines local decision-making and strips towns of authority over land-use policies.
“This bill is coercive and harmful,” said Dionna Carlson, first selectman of New Canaan, in testimony submitted to the state legislature’s Planning and Development Committee. “Towns that do not opt in will be penalized by losing access to critical state funding, including environmental preservation and infrastructure improvements.”
The bill received a public hearing on Feb. 3, drawing opposition from municipal leaders, zoning boards, and residents. The bill is also being opposed by statewide organizations such as the CT Council of Municipalities, the Council of Small Town, CCAPA CT chapter of the American Planning Association as well as Councils of Government, which all submitted testimony against the bill.
Carlson and State Sen. Ryan Fazio were among those warning that it would grant sweeping power to the Office of Policy and Management (OPM) at the expense of local governments.
HB 5390 passed the Connecticut House in May 2024 but was blocked in the Senate following strong opposition from Fazio, who called the bill an “overreach.” The issue became central in the November 2024 elections, with Fazio winning reelection by a significant margin after campaigning against top-down zoning mandates.
“I think people need to know that it’s back,” Fazio said in an interview with The Sentinel. “And I actually didn’t realize it was going to be coming back quite so soon. They intentionally made it one of the first public hearings in the entire legislature.”
Fazio said the bill’s language remains largely unchanged, keeping the same financial penalties for towns that refuse to adopt transit-oriented zoning.
“You can lose eligibility for hundreds of millions of dollars in state funding if you do not adopt this permissive zoning within a designated transit district,” he said. “It’s an ‘opt-in’ with eligibility for funding hanging over you.”
The discretionary funding at stake includes Urban Act grants, small-town economic assistance, and infrastructure grants. Fazio pointed to a $2 million state reimbursement for the New Canaan Playhouse as an example of funding that could be jeopardized.
His plan to fight HB 6831 mirrors last year’s approach. “I’ll offer better solutions on the front end. I’ll debate it tirelessly. And if necessary, I’ll filibuster it in the Senate,” Fazio said.
State Rep. Tina Courpas, a member of the Housing Committee, raised concerns about the bill’s broad environmental impact and its lack of consideration for infrastructure capacity.
Communities “must have a say in how development affects our resources and public services,” Courpas said. “The bill’s language does not guarantee that towns will be able to maintain oversight on critical issues like water management, wetlands preservation, and traffic congestion.”
Courpas said that while she supports transit-oriented development in principle, she believes local governments should retain control over zoning decisions rather than ceding authority to the state.
“There is nothing stopping municipalities from developing near transit hubs now—except for a lack of funding,” she said. “And they can already apply for discretionary infrastructure grants without being forced into a rigid, state-directed planning process.”
Courpas also noted that similar policies in other states have produced mixed results. “California has been at this for 30 years, and it has been an abysmal failure,” she said. “Washington state has had more success, but only because it paired zoning changes with tax credits and business incentives. If we are going to attempt a major housing initiative, we need to ensure it has a proven track record of success.”
Maria Weingarten, a local housing policy advocate, submitted testimony on behalf of CT 169 Strong, a group that opposes statewide zoning mandates. She argued that HB 6831 benefits developers at the expense of local control.
“This bill eliminates site-specific considerations and imposes one-size-fits-all mandates on height, density, setbacks, and parking,” Weingarten said. “It prioritizes out-of-state developers who build and leave, leaving municipalities to bear the cost of unfunded infrastructure expansion and environmental damage.”
She warned that the bill’s “as-of-right” provisions would remove local zoning reviews for high-density developments near transit hubs.
“The ‘as-of-right’ clause allows up to nine-unit market-rate buildings with no affordability requirements to bypass local land-use commission reviews and public hearings,” Weingarten testified. “It also accelerates 8-30g developments by stripping municipalities of their ability to impose height, density, and setback restrictions—even eliminating public hearings on safety and environmental concerns.”
With a Democratic supermajority in the legislature, opponents acknowledge that stopping the bill will be difficult.
“The problem with a two-to-one legislature is that if they make something a top priority, it really can’t be stopped,” Fazio said. “If they make it a mid- or lower-level priority, it becomes something that you can contend with and potentially stop in the minority.”
For now, HB 6831’s future will depend on whether legislative leaders push for its passage or allow it to stall in committee. Fazio said he plans to introduce amendments narrowing the funding restrictions and limiting the bill’s zoning mandates.
“I’m definitely going to propose amendments to narrow the funding to just issues related to sewer and water expansion,” he said. “And to lower the prescribed zoning as well.”
Carlson urged lawmakers to reject the bill, arguing that it ignores local expertise in favor of state-imposed mandates.
“New Canaan has always taken a proactive approach to responsible development,” Carlson said. “We should not be forced into a top-down, one-size-fits-all mandate that disregards our community’s unique needs.”
