You have to wonder if there’s anyone other than the few, the bamboozled, the Norwalk Democratic party who think Bruce Morris does anything worthwhile. The Reverend Morris even has a difficult time getting the progressive People of Faith organization to give him what should amount to a no-brianer score, if ahem, Morris were actually progressive. But since Morris doesn’t believe that women go to the urologist, it should not be a big shocker, that on Morris’ self described “big issue” affordable housing, he was a no show. Brian Lockhart apparently got the spin back from Morris to explain away his lackluster score.
The score appears to show Morris failed to live up to his campaign promise last fall to fight for more affordable housing. What the People of Faith’s scorecard does not note is Morris did not have an opportunity to vote on the bill. The legislation was not reviewed by any of the committees of which he is a member, and was never taken up by the House of Representatives.
Ah yes, and the dog ate my homework too. But unfortunately for Morris, the real world doesn’t function like the Corda world, and we know that there were many bills floated up in Hartford about affordable housing, because we subscribe to the CGA web site. Handy site that it is, it puts the facts on the table and so we can see why a progressive group would think that Morris contributed zilch, nada, zero, to the debate on affordable housing. Why? Because Morris claims a great many things, like an under graduate degree, but when it comes time to do the work, well, much like his record in the Norwalk schools, he just doesn’t show up.
And so Lockhart writes that Morris was not on any committee that reviewed affordable housing, yet on 2/06/2007 here is Bruce Morris, committee member, at a public hearing on Select Committee on Housing, our subject matter hearing on issues of affordable housing appeals, and affordable housing land use. And gee look, here’s a bit where he is question Larry Cafero on a bill that would increase affordable housing incentives throughout the state. Yep, a transcript of Morris stringing together words in hopes of sounding knowledgable, or something.
REP. MORRIS: Good morning, Representative Cafero.
REP. CAFERO: Good morning, Representative.
REP. MORRIS: So glad to have you today. The bill you’re talking, you have here before us, talks about incentives that we need, and I like the ideas that you’re floating out there about whether the drafting of it ought to be such that even the towns that haven’t met the 10%, maybe we’d do something to provide incentives for them, when we start to consider about, you know, housing, how it impacts transportation and the overall future economic viability of our state.
But while we’re talking about, and I hear everyone talking about wanting to throw away the stick, and providing an incentive, I’d like to know your thoughts in terms of some out of the box thinking that says, if we’re going to provide incentives for towns, that increase their affordable housing stock, currently the law, there isn’t any consequences.
So should there be a consequence for those towns who are keeping the State of Connecticut in a bad situation by the fact that they have not created affordable housing over these many numbers of years.
And by the way, there’s at least 3,000 units of housing that has been created under the current law, so the stick has been effective to some degree. I don’t think it’s been as effective as all of us would like it to be.
So I’d like to know your thoughts on, if we’re going to provide some incentives, should there be, you know, on the other hand for the towns that don’t increase their percentages or numbers, that dollars are taken away?
REP. CAFERO: Well, Representative Morris, that might be the case, but I think at very least it’s a start. We had the stick approach, and we’ve had it for 20 years. And though, you’re right, we have created over 3,000 units of affordable housing.
Let’s look at where those units have been created. You and I come from the City of Norwalk, where we’ve done, I think, a good job and are always striving to do more in providing affordable housing because of the population that we have in our town.
But we can’t do it alone, and you might say, well, you know, we’ve done a great job, and I guess the stick’s worked for Norwalk. I’m not so sure it has.
I’m not so sure that we could not have done even more had there been more incentives out there, and what we did do, we did, frankly, out of necessity because of the population that lives within our town.
What about those towns that don’t have that population, that don’t have that incentive, and spend all those times, that time and resources and money fighting developers who come in with that stick over their head.
Should there be a consequence? Maybe there should be. But I think before we get to that, let’s try the incentive first. We tried the stick. Let’s try an incentive.
If that doesn’t work, then I think it’s, then I think we do have to look toward some sort of consequence, negative consequence for those towns and municipalities that don’t meet the standard that we set.
But I’m willing to try the stick first. I mean, excuse me, I mean the carrot first.
REP. MORRIS: Okay, I kind of like stick, stick and carrot if I can.
REP. CAFERO: Yeah [inaudible]
REP. MORRIS: And maybe just taking another look at the stick and how we’re using it. My concern is, again, and you’re right, the City of Norwalk has done a great job. Stamford has done a fantastic job with coming up with some laws and regulations to increase their housing stock.
But there are the large, the vast number of other towns, what are we looking at here, 31 out of 169 towns, you said? There’s an awful lot of towns that are way below, and if we just give them the incentive alone, just based on the history, is that enough to say that they’re going to do something.
We heard an earlier proposal. We weren’t given exact numbers, but I think it was a matter of providing a number equivalent to the per pupil allocation as an incentive to the town. Average per pupil allocation somewhere between $10,000 and $12,000. That’s not enough for a unit.
So being serious about this as an issue, you know, I’m just concerned, and I just want to hear your thoughts about that, you know, going forward.
REP. CAFERO: Well, you know, times have changed so that even those towns in lower Fairfield County, Representative, that you and I are very familiar with, our neighbors, there used to be that theory that well, the teachers, police officers and firefighters that serve those towns, Darien and Wilton and Westport, New Canaan, etc., let them live in Norwalk, you know.
We want to keep our housing stock available for you know, 4,000 plus square feet, etc., etc. Those days are over. Towns like New Canaan and Darien and Westport and Wilton, they need to house their, they’re finding trouble finding people to come and teach their children and protect their town, etc.
So I think they have that kind of, at least motivation, if you will, to provide affordable housing, but they do need the incentive, and they need the incentive to be planning as to where, within their town, they could help decide, and least with the, in conjunction with a developer, where within their town boundaries is the best for that town, to have affordable housing units, whether it’s in the center of town, whether it’s on the outskirts of town, whether it’s mixed use development, etc.
Right now that’s not their choice. Right now it seems like that’s the choice of the developer, again, that comes in with that stick, so that’s what we’re all talking about, I guess, a different way, about changing the paradigm here and doing more of a reward than a penalty.
Let’s see how it because I would submit to you that the current system has not worked nearly as well as we need it to.
REP. MORRIS: Would it be worth our trying to maintain the current system, and include your system? Your proposal?
REP. CAFERO: Well, certainly that’s a logical way to think about it. However, I would hate to one, send a mixed message, and two, have those resources divided, that a town is fighting the stick on one front, and then also trying to create the incentives on another.
As I said, the stick, in my opinion, doesn’t work. Let’s try the carrot right now.
REP. MORRIS: Thank you.
Needless to say the HSG committee sent up many bills on affordable housing. Morris apparently, contributed nothing of substance.
But here’s the link to the People of Faith scorecard. The last score is the overall grade, the first is party affiliation, click the link to see categories.
Perone Chris D H C A+ A+ C A+ A
Duff Bob D S B B A+ B A+ B+
Morris Bruce D H D A+ A+ A+ B B+
Cafero Larry R H F C A+ D A+ C
Boucher Toni R H D F A+ F A+ D
Ryan John R H F F A+ F A+ D+
League of Conservation scorecard.
Boucher R 143 88%
Morris D 140 80%
Duff D 25 77%
Perone D 137 75%
Cafero R 142 67%
Ryan, J. R 141 36%
source: Advocate, Lawmakers get mixed grades on faith, conservation, By Brian Lockhart, August 1, 2007
