Connecticut housing committee raises wide slate of concepts, places most items on consent; several measures cleared for hearings

The Housing Committee met to raise concepts, refer bills and calendar public hearings on a wide slate of housing-related measures, with the committee chair opening the session by saying the meeting was "a third meeting where we're just raising concepts" to make proposals available for public review. The committee read a list of proposed bills for referral, debated several concepts in detail and placed most items on a consent calendar for a public hearing on Thursday, Feb. 13.

Why it matters: The committee’s actions determine which bills will receive public hearings and move toward drafting; items raised as concepts do not become final law but set the agenda and instruct the Legislative Commissioners' Office to draft bill language if leadership pursues it. Several of today’s concepts, if drafted and advanced, would shape landlord-tenant rules, fair-rent commission authority, housing finance and voucher allocation in Connecticut.

The committee first read a set of proposed bills to be referred to other committees, including bills on group and family childcare protections, accessibility of records for common-interest communities, short-term rental registration and taxation, conversion of vacant motels to multifamily housing, flood-hazard notifications, caps on rent increases in manufactured-home parks, sealing certain eviction records, and changes to inclusionary zoning. Those referral recommendations were moved, seconded and approved by voice vote.

The committee then voted on a series of concepts and held roll-call votes on several. The first concept raised was "prohibiting a municipality from implementing a multifamily moratorium." The chair explained this concept as a clarification of existing law (the chair noted a prior incorrect reference to a "30g" statute in the draft description) and said the idea is to make explicit that a moratorium on multifamily housing in certain municipalities is illegal. Senator Sampson asked whether the committee was voting only to change references or to actually refer bills; the chair said these were changes of reference and that the committee was raising concepts. After discussion, the committee took a roll-call vote on the moratorium concept; the chair announced "the ayes have it."

Several other concepts were discussed at length: - Income thresholds in set-aside developments (placed on consent). - Landlord entry for showing units (placed on consent; Senator Sampson cautioned that drafted language should not inadvertently undermine private lease agreements). - Expansion of the Open Choice voucher pilot program (clarified by the chair as housing-related, an extension of an existing pilot—not creation of a new program; placed on consent). - A proposed state "housing growth fund" (chair described a $50,000,000 fund concept with a points system tied to municipal building activity; placed on consent). - Reporting requirements for housing authorities, a working group to define "affordable housing," and a working group on housing growth and water-supply protections (all placed on consent).

A sequence of bills and concepts concerning tenants’ rights and fair-rent commissions drew extended debate. Committee members discussed: permitting tenants to file complaints within 30 days of signing a lease; prohibiting landlord retaliation against a tenant who prevails in a fair-rent commission proceeding (Senator Sampson cited state statute CGS §4-47a-20 and questioned whether the proposal duplicates existing retaliation protections); and other measures to expand fair-rent commission authority. Senator Sampson and others repeatedly urged caution about expanding fair-rent commission powers before ensuring procedural safeguards; supporters said fair-rent commissions in some municipalities have been effective, can include subject-matter experts, and can relieve burden on housing courts.

The committee debated a prominent concept to limit how criminal records are used in rental decisions. The concept would create graduated "look-back" periods tied to maximum statutory terms: for offenses with a 20+ year maximum term, a five-year look-back from release; for 5–20 year maximum terms, a three-year look-back; for crimes with under five-year maximum terms, a one-year look-back. The sponsors said the draft would exclude certain serious crimes from any look-back (for example: murder, felony murder, human trafficking and certain violent felonies and firearm-involved offenses), while still allowing applicants to submit evidence of rehabilitation. Senator Sampson and others raised concerns about public-safety implications and enforceability; Representative Roberts and others urged keeping an open mind about rehabilitation and reentry. The committee voted to raise the concept and send it to a public hearing.

Lawmakers also discussed a concept to establish a construction-employment and affordable-housing pilot enabling building trades pension funds to use equity to finance housing for workers, and an array of CHFA-related and tenant-assistance measures. Representative Weir asked for more details on several items and the chairs and bill proponents said the public hearings will allow fuller explanation of program mechanics, fiscal impacts and implementation.

On the right-to-counsel concept, the chair clarified this proposal would change statutory language to allow state funding to be used for a tenant right-to-counsel program that was initially funded with ARPA dollars; the chair said the program launched in 2022 with $20,000,000 in ARPA support and that most of that funding has been expended. Senator Sampson and Representative Scott expressed budgetary concerns about making such a program a state-funded ongoing entitlement; the concept to allow state funding to be used for the program was raised for public hearing.

The committee set a subject-matter hearing on a bill (filed as Senate Bill 1159 in the draft list) to increase funding for affordable-housing development and rental assistance while expanding fair-rent commission authority; that item prompted a heated exchange over due process, the composition and powers of volunteer fair-rent commissions, and whether housing courts are the proper venue for certain disputes. Senator Gaston and Representative Butler defended fair-rent commissions as useful local bodies that can include professionals and improve access; Senator Sampson and Representative Weir urged limits on powers and procedural safeguards.

Votes and next steps: The committee placed most items onto a consent calendar for public hearing and scheduled a public hearing on Thursday, Feb. 13, at 11 a.m. in Room 2D and on Zoom. The chair recessed the meeting after completing votes and scheduling hearings. Several concepts were advanced for public hearing; none of the concepts raised today were enacted into law—raising a concept only advances it to drafting and public hearing.

Ending note: Committee members emphasized that a vote to "raise a concept" is not a final endorsement of any drafted bill; several members noted that favorable votes at this stage do not commit them to final support of future bill language.

"It's a concept — we're casting votes on whether these items will come up for a public hearing and ultimately be drafted into language in the future," Senator Sepperson said during discussion.

Votes at a glance (committee action summary) - Concept: prohibit municipal multifamily moratoria — raised for public hearing (roll call; chair announced "ayes have it"). - Concept: income threshold for set-aside developments — placed on consent for hearing. - Concept: landlord entry for showings — placed on consent for hearing. - Concept: expand Open Choice voucher pilot (housing component) — placed on consent for hearing. - Concept: housing growth fund (state fund concept described at $50,000,000 with points allocation) — placed on consent for hearing. - Concept: graduated look-back periods for criminal records in rental decisions, with enumerated exclusions for certain violent offenses — raised for hearing; sponsors provided look-back details and a list of excluded crimes. - Concept: right-to-counsel program statutory change to allow state funding (program launched with $20,000,000 ARPA in 2022) — raised for hearing; members debated fiscal implications. - Subject-matter reserved: SB 1159 (increase funding for affordable housing and expand fair-rent commissions) — reserved for public hearing; members debated expansion of fair-rent commission powers.

No measures were adopted as final legislation in this session; the committee will hold public hearings on the raised concepts and referred bills on Feb. 13.

Quoted speakers are identified in the committee record and are attributed in this report.