State Senator Herron Gaston, vice chair of Housing, doesn’t hold back about his take on the roadblocks to inclusive housing. See video above.
Let’s call it what it is, people do not want to allow poor people, working class people, black people, indigenous people in their community. We are not going backward in Connecticut and rhetoric wanting to “keep their communities the same” promotes hatred toward a fundamental right that we as humans are entitled to – housing. Everyone deserves a place to live and while I sit in office here at the state Senate, I will continue to fight for your fundamental rights.
5+
I agree with the need for affordable housing…but pose this question:
Is it still beneficial to lower income citizens to have affordable housing built in towns like Easton, Redding, or Weston that have zero public transportation, close to zero local necessity businesses like grocery stores, gas stations, pharmacies, etc., are in the middle of the woods, and are often subject to extended power outages due to their less-dense population and more trees….doesn’t that seem counter-intuitive?
This is why I don’t see the need to force this down every town’s throat. How can someone without a car call home to any of these middle-of-nowhere towns? It’s borderline punishment.
Hold on, Senator Gaston! What about the Puerto Rican
People? NIMBY does NOT stand for ‘Not In My Black Yard’. NIMBY stands for ‘Not In My Borricua Yard’.
The Cobbler’s children have no shoes!
What is Section 8-30g?
Since 1989, Section 8-30g of the Connecticut General Statutes, the “Connecticut Affordable Housing Land Use Appeals Procedure,” has promoted the development of low-cost housing with long-term affordability protections. 8-30g includes an appeals procedure to override local zoning denials of affordable housing proposals without just cause: 8-30g ensures that municipalities cannot deny an affordable housing proposal unless there is a specific significant health or safety concern. The burden of proof for this concern is placed on the municipality. If the State Department of Housing has designated at least 10% of a community’s housing stock is as “affordable,” that community is exempt from the appeals requirement.
There’s an element of truth, John tends to pick up the mantle to that fight particularly for black people in the end it’s American history, but when the a quilibrium hits the fight tends to get lopsided. However, I think that pendulum swings both ways.
Can’t speak on any coded word or language use but one word that was not used was the word Latino. Black, indigenous, were used poor, working class but not Latino. Perhaps there is a fundamental psychological reason for that.
Lake Forest guy, there is a sense of truth that I agree . However, it doesn’t revolve around the needed infrastructure like public transportation, but more rather than the concept of devaluation, that tends to be more of an real substance issue then a political one for me.
Does anybody find it ironic, where the “poor ” speak up and against “rich” “white” moving into their neighborhood and demonize the “word” gentrification. Though perhaps not so poor, right Mama Bear LV,Gen Now.
https://youtu.be/whfQf3Pd5bU?si=M4EovoeGZNSpZJwG
You don’t have to go far to find not in my backyard when it comes to building more housing just within a few hundred yards in the Port. You have Mario’s old Testo’s trying to build a out of character building for housing and a few hundred yards up the road you have a much more suitable place for a much more larger housing complex be affordable or market rate to in crease the supply and a discussion is housing for people who have too much stuff. Also note in my back yard.
https://youtu.be/4rhVQCzF3r0?si=W02-oA_wIFcnNMgp
P.S how that equilibrium hits in NIMBY.
Didn’t the Port’s, black, brown, and Latino community and the “white” teachers speak up against integration without segregation when it was proposed that Wilbur Cross School students be moved to Thomas Hooker?
From my understanding it wasn’t about race more than the devaluing the education of Thomas Hooker students.
https://connecticut.news12.com/bridgeport-families-discuss-student-shake-up-outside-thomas-hooker-school
Based on the principle of supply and demand, instead of forcing wealthier communities to incorporate “affordable” housing they should be forced to add rental market rate housing. Perhaps with some restrictions to insure they go to long term existing CT residents.
This will shift the supply and demand without extensive devaluation, like affordable/public housing to wealthier communities. Reaganomics states as people move from one community to another more “wealthier” community/neighborhood, who are currently paying market rate, the supplies open up, creating a similar reaction to fill that void/supply, lowering the rental inflated increase because of the lack of supply, No?
Also, Trump has ordered Federal workers back into office. That should be expanded to all state and private companies, at least 3 to 4 days out of the week. That has weakened that state of the economy, particularly on the construction side. IMO SJ.
Think about it.
https://onlyinbridgeport.com/wordpress/governor-opposes-new-tribal-federal-recognition-rules/
Who the lobbyist for this shit.:)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EVo4C4cDn4
At any rate, play nice, peace out Port. Good luck.
I depart with the Prophet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvGIyYbVZjc
Every town in the state needs to be liable for population expansion/location. Transportation and service options can be located along with the new housing in suburban areas (e.g., bus/shuttle service, pharmacy/grocery, medical clinic within/nearby downtown Easton for surrounding new housing…).
Some towns need prompting/”incentives” to amend their plans of development and zoning requirements to allow for their fair share of the statewide housing “burden.” It shouldn’t be just a city problem. That being said, some towns have some “natural’/logical impediments to accommodating more than a modicum of new housing, such as location of reservoirs/watershed, agricultural land, and official, regional/statewide open-space/recreational set asides…
But using the present availability of mass-transit or practical service/supply accommodations is bs — the latter kind of development is a natural requirement to the expansion of residential development, and must be undertaken in tandem.