Why are some books pulled from library shelves?
Banned Book Week spotlights some of the most banned books of the year.
Connecticut’s political impasse is a stark reminder that the housing crisis engulfing the nation is a local problem, and some policy proposals are at the mercy of local residents who have little incentive to change their neighborhoods.
Connecticut lawmakers, along with Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont’s office and housing advocacy groups across the state, spent months crafting House Bill 5002. Among other things, it would have encouraged a review of urban planning laws to accommodate more affordable housing development.
The bill was approved by Congress in June, but several groups organized protests once it reached Lamont’s desk. At issue was how much say municipalities would have in allowing new development, with opponents falsely claiming the state wanted to mandate specific quotas for new housing.
Lamont ultimately vetoed the bill, saying, “I don’t think this bill will work if we’re against each other.”
Local housing activists were surprised by this shift in attitude and left frustrated.
“Housing requires long lead times, financing, and many different pieces that need to come together — financial, physical, legal. So even on a good day, it’s a complex process,” said Tim Hollister, a partner at Hartford-based law firm Hinckley Allen. He has worked on behalf of all aspects of development transactions throughout his career and has written several op-eds in local newspapers supporting the goals of the Connecticut bill.
Years of poor construction, strict zoning in many parts of the country, and more recently rising interest rates have combined to create a severe housing shortage and housing affordability crisis.
A more open and participatory political process, particularly in the Northeast, Hollister said, “is both our blessing and our curse. We’ve built a system that makes opposition to housing real and consequential. So it’s difficult to develop that, and all on top of the usual difficulties, we have a system that encourages or tolerates restrictions, discrimination and opposition.”
Connecticut faces a housing crisis
There is one thing all parties can agree on. That means Connecticut needs more housing. A 2025 report commissioned by Congress concluded that the state has “the most constrained housing market in the nation, as measured by the number of units available per household year-round.”
The state’s older housing stock and popularity among people seeking beachfront vacation homes and easy commutes to New York City are contributing to the housing shortage, the report added.
“Connecticut’s overall population is aging and shrinking, and many young families cannot afford to move into their existing homes, while older adults looking to downsize lack options in housing size and type,” the authors write. They estimated that an additional 120,000 to 380,000 additional housing units would be needed.
“If you talk to someone at the grocery store, they’ll say their kids are in the basement and they don’t know what to do with their aging parents,” said Melissa Kaplan Macy, chief initiatives officer at the Housing Collective, a nonpartisan homeless advocacy group.
“No one is against affordable housing,” Republican Senate Minority Leader Stephen Harding said in an interview. “Many of the communities that objected loudly are communities that have committed themselves to developing affordable housing.”
However, Harding voted against the bill because it would have an “arbitrary breakdown that specifies how much affordable housing a community must have, and if it doesn’t, the state would decide what the penalty is.”
Harding sees senior housing as a particular challenge. Many older residents want to downsize to smaller, easier-to-maintain homes while remaining in their communities. But state zoning laws prioritize building affordable housing for low- and moderate-income people over housing for seniors, Harding said.
“That’s a statewide zoning issue,” he says.
Cities want “local control” over policy
Giving states control over rule-making, such as zoning, was the main sticking point that derailed HB 5002.
The bill established community-specific allocations and encouraged cities and towns to develop new housing based on those allocations. It would prioritize state funding to local governments that responded, but vowed it would not withhold aid or punish local communities.
But opponents, who primarily represent wealthy communities, argued that the bill contained punitive requirements from the state. In a press conference after vetoing the bill, Lamont called it a “planning document” rather than a mandate, but said his opponents influenced his decision to veto the bill anyway.
“The governor ultimately did not sign the housing bill because local leaders had concerns about whether it would be able to achieve the goals outlined in the bill,” a spokesperson for Lamont said in an emailed statement to USA TODAY.
“The Governor has been actively working with the Legislature over the past few years to put more resources into housing construction. One thing we learned from that effort is that solutions require buy-in from local leaders, and it was clear that was not the case with this bill,” the statement continued.
Why can’t blue states build housing?
Some housing advocates see similarities between Connecticut’s experience and the challenges in neighboring Massachusetts. In Massachusetts, in 2024, the state took one community to court after refusing to comply with a law requiring housing planning.
“I think some[policy decisions]require a little more political courage to do things that may seem unpopular at first glance,” said Massachusetts resident Jonathan Burke, founder of real estate and placemaking consultancy re:MAIN.
Burke said lawmakers are now becoming “aggressive” in supporting additional housing measures in the Bay State, where some voters have said they don’t like the statewide measure. “Many of these are despite polls showing that some of these reforms are indeed popular, but a vocal minority and a passive majority have been reflected in local housing decisions across the Northeast for decades.”
In Connecticut, some advocates are seeing signs of hope.
“What’s really interesting about the shift in the conversation on this issue over the past year is that there hasn’t been as much discussion about whether we need these goals, but what those goals should be, and that’s a big change,” said Erin Boggs, executive director of the Open Communities Alliance, a fair housing and affordable housing group.
