Civil rights group sues Woodbridge for allegedly violating housing laws
Civil rights attorneys and housing advocates have sued the town of Woodbridge for what they say is a violation of fair housing laws that aim to make Connecticut towns more equitable and diverse.
Woodbridge, a suburb of New Haven, prohibits multifamily housing of three units or more on most of its residential land. Advocates claim that’s exclusionary zoning, which they say has led to a lack of affordable housing that often disproportionately impacts Black and Latino residents in Connecticut.
“We are here today to confront this history and move us towards a more equitable future, a future where Connecticut's towns guide to their own zoning, but do so within the parameters of laws designed to ensure that families of all ranges of incomes have choices in every community of the state,” said Erin Boggs, director of the Open Communities Alliance and the principal of Open Communities Trust, one of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.
Boggs spoke at a news conference Tuesday morning in front of New Haven’s state courthouse where the suit’s four plaintiffs and supporters would file the case.
Connecticut Public has reached out to Woodbridge First Selectwoman Beth Heller and Kristine Sullivan, a land use analyst with the town’s planning and zoning commission, and is waiting for a response.
The lawsuit comes almost two years after the Open Communities Trust leased a residential property in Woodbridge in hopes of turning it into low-density multifamily housing. The trust submitted a proposal to the town’s planning and zoning board that would make that development possible not only on the leased property but also in other residential areas in Woodbridge.
After an extensive public hearing process, the town did not adopt the proposal and instead made small changes to its zoning regulations that town officials said were a step forward. Changes included allowing multifamily housing on 1.6% of residential land by permit when served by public water and sewer infrastructure and permitting accessory dwelling units.
The decision was “designed to provide a framework for additional housing options and choices in all residential zones, with some options and choices only allowed in certain zones in order to protect health and safety,” according to the planning and zoning board’s ruling on the application.
“Instead of engaging in a serious effort to equitably rezone, the town amended our proposal in a way that makes a mockery of state zoning requirements and civil rights obligations,” Boggs said.
Woodbridge has a little over 1% of housing deemed as affordable under the state’s 8-30g statute. Meanwhile, New Haven has over 33% as of last year, according to the Connecticut Department of Housing.
Advocates said this action is a last resort to remedy the lack of effort to offer affordable housing in the suburb through zoning changes and to set a model for other towns in Connecticut and beyond.
“While Woodbridge is the only defendant in this one litigation, a ruling for the plaintiffs in this lawsuit would highlight the illegality of similar zoning practices in other affluent towns in Connecticut that contribute to the state’s insufficient housing stock as well as racial and economic segregation,” said Mira Netsky, a law student with Yale Law School’s Jerome N. Frank Legal Services Organization, one of the legal representatives in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit claims the town’s exclusionary zoning practices violate the state’s Zoning Enabling Act, which requires towns to provide housing opportunities for low- to moderate-income households. In addition, the plaintiffs claim the town allegedly violates Connecticut's Fair Housing Act and the state Constitution for perpetrating segregation.