It looks as though New York Democrats will achieve their goal of overriding local zoning a few years ahead of Connecticut

GOP reps [futilely] rip Hochul’s plan imposing state control over suburban zoning

Republican members of Congress say they have had it with Gov. Kathy Hochul’s “radical state takeover” of local government following her controversial proposal to build 800,000 new housing units — even over the objections of local planning boards.

“Simply put, a mandatory rezoning of neighborhoods within half a mile of MTA, Metro North or Long Island Rail Road stations, would be a radical state takeover of a local government function,” the reps said in the letter organized by freshman congressman Mike Lawler (R-Pearl River).

“Our local governments are already drowning under unfunded mandates and dictates from the state — the absolute last thing we should be doing is adding to their burden with this wrongheaded and unconstitutional plan,” Langworthy said.

The GOP reps say that approach would effectively “eliminate home rule altogether” while providing a “recipe for disaster” by straining local roads, water, sewage, transit, schools and emergency services unprepared to accommodate big population increases.

“I’m startled by this attempt at a sweeping state mandate that would eliminate centuries of legal precedent and render towns, villages, and cities incapable of deciding for themselves how they want their neighborhoods to look,” Lawler said.

This is basically the same plan that was proposed for Connecticut. Unlike New York, which is entirely dominated and controlled by the far left, Connecticut still has a few pocket of rebellion, so the “Desegregate Connecticut” forces were defeated, temporarily. They’re back this year with a new, “voluntary version.

A new legislative proposal would encourage increased housing density near transit stations, one of the major pushes for zoning reform in Connecticut this legislative session.

The proposal is based on a land-use policy called transit-oriented communities. It aims to encourage towns to zone for more housing within a half mile of train and bus stations so residents can easily walk there, experts and advocates from the group Desegregate CT said at a press conference Monday.

Under the proposal, towns that opt in would have access to state money for infrastructure improvements such as bike infrastructure, pedestrian safety measures or remediation for “brownfields,” or sites such as former gas stations or laundromats that have been polluted.

Communities that want to create a transit-oriented community district would work with the state’s Office of Responsible Growth to plan and design the district. The proposal also encourages towns to build “deeply affordable” housing in the transit-oriented communities, Desegregate CT director Pete Harrison said Monday.

This year’s proposal, a modified version of a bill that failed last session, would use financial incentives to encourage towns to zone for housing, rather than require it. This significant shift came from feedback Desegregate CT received while members conducted “walk-through audits” to meet with town residents and see their housing challenges in person.

What’s voluntary today is always mandatory later. Theynever, ever give up on these and, eventually, they win. Here’s Hartford’s chief Looney’s latest tax and spend plan, for instance:

Dan Haar: CT mansion tax, higher levies on the rich, school consolidation in top senator's plan

The mansion tax is back – pitched once again by the Senate leader and longtime captain of tax progressives in the General Assembly, Sen. Martin Looney.

Never mind that Looney, the New Haven Democrat and president pro-tempore of the Senate, saw his 2021 house-tax proposal die under withering attacks from the center and the right. That plan called for a state surcharge on any house or apartment worth more than $428,000 – not just mansions.

This time around, Looney’s mansion tax plan truly is a mansion tax. It would levy a state charge on dwellings worth at least $2,143,000 – those assessed at more than $1.5 million.  It’s part a package of seven sweeping, tax-and-spending reform bills Looney has proposed on his own, just as any state legislator could do. 

Under Looney’s two-tiered mansion tax, the owner of a house worth $3 million would pay a new state tax totaling $800, regardless of the town where the house was located. The owner of a $4 million house would pay an extra $2,900 and the owner of a house valued at $5 million would pay a surcharge of $5,000 to the state – all on top of their local property taxes.  

Also on the Looney List: a plan to raise the top state income tax rates by as much as one-half of 1 percentage point to a maximum of 7.49 percent; add a capital gains tax for wealthy residents; and lower the rates for middle-class taxpayers by one-half of 1 percentage point, from 5.5 percent to 5 percent.

 “We’re at somewhat of a disadvantage in that we only tax income, we don’t tax assets,” Looney told me, explaining the logic behind the mansion tax. “At the highest level, people are able to determine their income.”

Reforming the whole state

Another hot-button issue in one of Looney’s bills: Towns with fewer than 25,000 residents – nearly three-quarters of all Connecticut towns – would see less reimbursement for school construction if they were not part of a regional school system and more reimbursement if they joined a regional system. A similar but stricter plan by Looney in 2021 drew sharp criticism.

The new and higher taxes would serve several purposes for the 40-year veteran lawmaker. First, Looney has long sought to equalize the tax burden, which penalizes taxpayers throughout the middle class. Second, Looney has long tried to stabilize the tax base by capturing a fair tax from extremely wealthy people who shelter their income.  

And not least, Looney wants the state to be able to pay for programs – especially money transfers to lower-income people – that even a state with a large operating surplus could not adopt.  Looney’s latest mansion tax proposal would bring in about $40 million a year, he said, and the proceeds would go toward accelerating a long-planned equalization of state education aid to poorer communities.

… I asked Looney whether he felt like a bit of a flamethrower, proposing dramatic reforms that would seem to have little chance of passing, at least this year, even though he’s the leader of Senate Democrats -- easily one of the five most powerful state officials.

On the contrary, he told me.  “I’m trying to advance a discussion where people will almost always say this is a direction we should go,” Looney said. “It may be outside what is current expressed opinion but it is not outside the currently held opinion.”

Lamont, for his part, has learned the hard way that going against Looney is a really good way to see his own agenda derailed. “Gov. Lamont will present a budget that invests in the people of Connecticut, makes our state more affordable for families and includes a middle-class tax cut. Gov. Lamont looks forward to sitting down with Sen. Looney and the other legislative leaders on how best to achieve those goals,” spokesman Adam Joseph said, carefully, in response to Looney’s proposals.

As for the votes in Looney’s Senate, 24 of 36 seats are held by Democrats, many of them progressives -- including Sen. John Fonfara, the finance committee co-chairman, who backed a similar mansion tax plan last year that did not pass, and has butted heads with Lamont over the governor’s refusal to raise taxes on rich residents.  

“We have a big enough majority that opinion does not have to be unanimous,” Looney said. “We need to advance these discussions because obviously these items get foreclosed if they are not proposed.”

Greenwich is Ground Zero

By itself, a mansion tax could make sense if it’s used to lower other taxes. [No, Dan, that’s not how these things work — sorry. Ed] It would add a relatively modest charge to a small number of households.

The Multiple Listing Service, a real estate registry, showed more than 5,000 houses and individually owned apartments worth $2 million or more on Monday; an exact number wasn’t available.  The vast majority were in Fairfield County and many of those were in Greenwich, which, the listing showed, had – sit down for this – 3,267 properties worth at least $2 million.

Here are more details of Looney’s bills:

• The mansion tax would collect 1 mill, or $1 per $1,000 of valuation, for assessments over $1.5 million; and $2 per $1,000 of valuation, or 2 mills, for assessments over $2 million. 

• The 6.9 percent state income tax rate would rise to 7.2 percent. That applies to married couples filing jointly who make between $500,001 and $1 million a year; and single filers making $250,001 to $500,000.  Those filers would also pay a capital gains tax surcharge of 0.75 percent.

• The highest earners, over $1 million a year for couples or $500,000 for singles – would see their state income tax levy jump from 6.99 percent to 7.49 percent. That group would pay a 1 percent surcharge on capital gains.   

• The income tax rate would drop to 5 percent for people in the middle class paying a 5.5 percent rate – a change Lamont is likely to propose.

• School construction grants would increase by up to 20 percent to towns that meet affordable housing targets.

• The earned-income tax credit of 40.5 percent of the federal credit for low-income residents ($43 million a year) and the child tax credit of $250 per child, as much as $750 per family ($125 million a year), both in effect this year only, would be made permanent.

Looney views his tax plan, including the mansion tax, in the sweep of history.  Around 2000, when he was co-chairman of the finance committee, he proposed what was then viewed as a radical plan to raise income tax rates on the highest earners. “One of the great points of pride was being attacked by name by Rush Limbaugh,” he said of the conservative radio personality who died two years ago.

Years later, that tax plan passed.