At a press briefing in his Capitol office on Monday morning, Governor Ned Lamont vetoed HB 5002, a controversial housing bill that had passed in both the Connecticut House and Senate.
He said he was vetoing the bill “reluctantly,” characterizing HB 5002 as a good start on an important issue impacting the state, but that he would like to see an improved version of the bill.
“We can do better,” Lamont said. “We will do better.”
In the past two weeks, many held their breath waiting to see what the governor would do, knowing his deadline was Tuesday to sign or veto the legislation.
And of course, people were speculating that that a veto might signal Lamont’s intention to run for a third term.
In Greenwich, Planning & Zoning committee chair Margarita Alban, who typically abstains from letter-writing, penned three LTEs with concerns about the bill.
The third letter was published on this news site on Sunday, in which she tackled misconceptions about Greenwich that factored into HB 5002, including that the town had failed to advance housing diversity and affordability.
She noted that in fact her commission had approved hundreds of apartments in the last few years and that Greenwich had more affordable housing units than all but 21 of the State’s 169 towns.
One project P&Z approved is for a massive 120-unit 6-story building approved under 8-30g, with 40% of the units affordable. A dozen turn of century houses and former carriage houses on Benedict Court and Benedict Place in downtown Greenwich are prepared to be demolished to make way for this development.
Posted for demolition, 19 Benedict Place, built in 1925, was home to Joe Tranfo’s offices since 1994. June 5, 2025, Photo: Leslie Yager
Two weeks ago, Alban wrote that while HB 5002 was a combination of 22 different bills proposed during the 2025 legislative session, it failed to tackle the single greatest obstacle to the creation of affordable and diverse housing in Connecticut: Economics.
She wrote, “Why aren’t we seeing that housing construction? Builders tell us they are struggling with increases in materials costs, interest rate hikes and tariff uncertainty. Other towns are hearing the same from their developers. That’s why approved housing projects aren’t moving ahead, not only here but throughout the State. Shifting economics.”
Indeed, House Bill 5002 would have ushered in sweeping changes to local zoning and loosened off-street parking requirements for smaller developments.
The bill proposed to allow the conversion of commercial buildings to residential – with 9 or fewer units “as of right,” meaning not required to get approval of a P&Z commission.
And while most of the proposals in the bill would have been “opt-in,” meaning towns would not be forced to implement then, municipalities that failed to opt in would not be prioritized for certain state funding.
Of course the impetus for the bill is the very real shortage of housing, especially affordable housing, that has contributed to skyrocketing rents in Connecticut and sticker shock among buyers.
This is nowhere as apparent as here in Greenwich, where the Governor makes his home.
One of the bills that was part of HB 5002 was “Fair Share,” which would have imposed quotas on CT municipalities.
The concept of Fair Share was not new – GFP wrote about it in 2023.
One estimate for Greenwich’s “fair share” was 874 more units.
Shortly after the Governor’s veto, Pete Harrison, former director of DeSegreagate CT who is current director of RPA’s Connecticut Programs – RPA is short for Regional Planning Association – expressed disappointment.
“We are deeply disappointed that Governor Lamont has vetoed H.B. 5002. This bill represents years of work from legislators, advocates, local leaders, everyday citizens, and indeed, the governor’s own staff to address the housing shortage and climate crisis in our state after many years of inaction and dithering.” – RPA statement.
The statement goes on to describe the veto as “an affirmation of the status quo and a capitulation to bad faith, fearmongering, or perhaps innocent confusion.”
Further, RPA’s statement says, “Opponents, many of them seemingly unaware of the details of the bill, painted it as an assault on local control or a one-size-fits-all power grab. None of this is true.”
Lastly, RPA said they were optimistic that the bill would be passed and signed in a special session largely intact.
CT 169 Strong, who have for years been vocal critics of the state affordable housing statute 8-30g, and were also opponents of HB 5002, joined the chorus of opponents arguing that the bill’s mandates would erode local control.
On Monday, they shared a post on Facebook describing the veto as “great news,” but reacting to the governor’s criticism of their group.
“He stated CT169Strong is against all changes, the ‘hell no’ group and have no solutions – maybe he needs to stop listening to the gaslighting of our organization by the Majority Leadership!” they wrote.
In a tweet around noon, the group said, “The 92-page omnibus bill was an ill-conceived attempt to usurp local control on zoning matters, stifle public input and to instill unworkable provisions which would have eliminated any parking requirements for certain developments, created ‘as of right’ approval for conversions of any commercial to residential, imposed rezoning for high density near transit or risk the defunding of critical infrastructure funds, and created affordable housing quotas on towns and cities that were arbitrary and capricious as well as unworkable. Good intentions are no excuse for poor policy.”
See also: