Following the Manchester Board of Directors August meeting which addressed whether the town’s membership in the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities (CCM) aligned with Manchester’s needs in light of CCM’s opposition to a key pro-housing bill passed by the General Assembly and then vetoed by Governor Lamont, Senate President Martin M. Looney (D-New Haven) and Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff (D-Norwalk) urged other Connecticut towns and cities to review their residents’ priorities and compare them to those of CCM.
Should town and CCM priorities differ, the Senate leaders said, municipal leaders should consider whether their municipality’s membership remains beneficial to them.
“No two towns in Connecticut have exactly the same needs, but many of them know we’re facing a deepening housing crunch,” said Sen. Looney. “For an organization purporting to represent the best interests of municipalities to emphasize rejection of already-passed legislation that would help address local housing needs suggests a disturbing gulf in priorities. I would encourage municipal leaders to take time to review CCM’s advocacy role and compare the benefits of membership with its messaging efforts opposing policies that could help them. The results could be striking.”
“I applaud Manchester leaders for recognizing their priorities supporting housing and labor may run in opposition to those held by organizations they are members of,” said Sen. Duff. “With CCM taking a more active role in calling for action on key legislation, I encourage more leaders to take time to reflect on best practices and next steps in rectifying the potential gap between their priorities and CCM priorities.”
CT Insider reported in August that Manchester’s Board of Directors voted to write a letter to CCM following the organization’s opposition to House Bill 5002, a major affordable housing bill that would have created significant new opportunities for housing units and alleviated the state’s housing crisis as well as spurring needed economic development. While CCM’s opposition alleged the bill would remove local control over zoning, Manchester’s response stated the bill’s policies were essential to combating homelessness and housing insecurity in Connecticut, issues that represent critical pressures on Connecticut residents and municipalities alike.
CCM was a leader in an effort to lobby Governor Lamont after House Bill 5002 passed both chambers of the General Assembly. While Lamont did not express opposition to the bill prior to its passage, he would ultimately veto it following a weeks-long campaign of opposition by detractors, leaving Connecticut’s housing shortfall of hundreds of thousands of units unaddressed.
In fact, CCM’s own messaging in April, in reference to its claims of municipalities being underfunded by the state, cited “surging” housing costs as a key issue impacting state residents. Its June statement in response to Lamont’s veto also recognizes “the urgent need to expand housing opportunities across the state” – in response to rejection of a bill passed by both chambers seeking to do just that.
Share this page: