Kohut Chastises Mayoral Candidates About Sacred Heart Housing Concerns

Sacred Heart University’s growing campus injects a major economic impact on Bridgeport and Fairfield. Its expansion has also created some town-gown divides particularly student housing issues in the city’s North End, something City Council members who represent the area seek to regulate.

Jeff Kohut, a write-in candidate for mayor, asserts other candidates for mayor are giving these issues lip service or remain silent.

From Kohut:


Senator Moore has studiously avoided this topic–being well-connected to the SHU BOD and Trumbull-Bridgeport border developers that are now building hundreds of SHU apartments on Lindeman Drive (adjacent to/upstream from the already flood-prone area of Lake Forest) that will use Bridgeport services and pay Trumbull taxes, per the politically sanctioned policy of suburb pirating of Bridgeport services even as they profit by the taxes (and in this case, as they fulfill state “affordable housing” quotas per housing that is essentially in Bridgeport).

The Ganim and Finch Administrations have actively cooperated (actually facilitated) the SHU expansion and takeover of the North End (Ganim I rolled over and acquiesced to the first dorms, and later Ganim II sold Bridgeport parkland to SHU for expansion; the Finch Administration rolled over to more dorm construction and gave SHU carte blanche to our schools and use of our parkland.

But on another level, as a state senator for the 22nd, Senator Moore has remained silent on SHU actions in the North End and has avoided acknowledging the many environmental and public safety/public health issues (of state-level concern) related to the SHU rentals in the North End (22nd District), as well as SHU-related (and non-related) Trumbull (also 22nd District) development issues that negatively impact her Bridgeport constituents.

Read the article and realize the lack of concern of the aforementioned candidates for the welfare of their constituents–and the likelihood that they will do nothing, if elected/re-elected, to salvage the quality of life for residents in the huge North End of Bridgeport.

Mayor Ganim’s concerns, voiced in the Post article, will last only until 8 PM, November 5. Senator Moore apparently doesn’t have such concerns–even for the election season (no comment from the R/Rodriguez camp, either).



  1. In Joe’s defense,he doesn’t really care about anything but himself,and in Marilyn’s defense,she’s probably uniformed & confused about Sacred Heart’s never ending expansion..

    1. Don, let’s change things from the Gold Coast and let’s have it to become the Poor Coast then see what type of socal problems Bridgeport would have. To many political leaders and residents are looking for the golden egg of a casino to solve all of Bridgeport’ ills, that won’t happen, remember Atlantic City.

      1. Advocating a casino in Bridgeport is actually BAD fiscal financial business policy for Bridgeport. Recently,MGM announced that business was DOWN according to business projections. New York is expanding all gambling operations through the state but the Catskills casinos are also performing below plan. And don’t that that MGM won’t be doing big on the Yonkers casino/horstrack which MGM already owns. As Ron Mackey,Atlantic City casinos cannot be called a success and there is also the physical/business between AC casinos and ,literally, as you step outside in AC itself which is a mess and filed bankruptcy several years ago. The ENTIRE Northeast United States is over saturated by various gambling businesses. A Bridgeport casino would be a failure the exact day that it would. Any person who advocates a Bridgeport casino is oblivious to the facts.

  2. Most respectfully,Jeff Kohut condemns SHU for their expansion but offers no answers or plans. What SHU do? Knock down a majority of buildings of the expansion and go back to the small campus of 40 years ago. That is completely unrealistic. What should be done is that the communities of Bridgeport,Trumbull,Fairfield should work together and work on a comprehensive plan with Sacred Heart University so that will be constant communication instead of some of the “surreptitious “ means that Sacred Heart used in the past. Certainly,Bridgeport has a major grievance of SHU “partyin.” Fairfield University had the same problems with FU students partying at Fairfield Beach place which they rented. The Town of Fairfield,Fairfield UniversityFairfield Police and regular residents of the Fairfield Beach area worked together and it seems that planned partnership mitigated to a large degree the Partying situation since I have not heard to many complaints in the last couple of years. Taking an antagonist approach to SHU will solve nothing.


Leave a Reply