May 21, 2021

May 21st Capitol Update

This article was archived from the previous WordPress site. Formatting and media should be close, but may not match the original post perfectly.

It was another very busy week at the State Capitol with the House of Representatives being in session on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday. I wanted to outline a few bills of particular importance. If you have any questions or concerns, I am always here to assist you however I can.

H.B. No. 6417- AN ACT REQUIRING BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR CERTAIN EMPLOYEES OF YOUTH CAMPS AND YOUTH SPORTS COACHES, TRAINERS AND INSTRUCTORS. I wanted to begin this weekly update off with some positive news that strengthens protection of children here in Connecticut. On Tuesday evening, a bill that I have been working on since my freshman year in the State Legislature passed through the House of Representatives and now awaits action from the Senate. Although the vast majority of coaches and camp employees are wonderful role models in their communities, however, there are bad people out there that look to infiltrate organizations where they can harm children. This bill will add another layer of protection for our children by requiring camp employees and youth sports coaches receive full and proper background checks. There are many people to thank for passing this bill through committee and through the House, but I wanted to mention my colleague, State Representative Greg Howard who is a police detective and youth football coach. Representative Howard was a big help in getting this bill passed and I appreciate all he does for the community.

I included the link to my speech on the House floor this past Tuesday evening, click here.

S.B. No. 835- AN ACT CONCERNING DECEPTIVE ADVERTISING PRACTICES OF LIMITED SERVICES PREGNANCY CENTERS. For all of the good that these often faith-based, pregnancy centers do for women in need? This bill is absolutely shameful. S.B. #835 will use the power of the Office of the Connecticut Attorney General to bring legal actions against these centers. At no point during the hours of debate on this bill did the proponent, or anyone else clearly define what the term “deceptive advertising” even means. But looking back on it now, I can clearly understand why they couldn’t adequately answer the question; because there has not been one formal complaint on it to date!

These wonderful pregnancy care centers provide free services to women in need that are pregnant. These centers receive no tax dollars and are funded by individual donors who know, first-hand the good that they do for people that need the help. This bill is another reprehensible example of using the power of government to hurt people who are weaker than they are that do not subscribe to the political and social agenda of the Hartford elite. Many Republican Amendments were offered and shutdown quickly by the Democrat majority, who wanted no part in working in a bi-partisan way to do what is best for people who need the assistance from these centers.

To view my comments and an amendment that I called on the House floor on Wednesday, click here.

H.B. No. 6107- AN ACT CONCERNING THE REORGANIZATION OF THE ZONING ENABLING ACT AND THE PROMOTION OF MUNICIPAL COMPLIANCE. On Thursday afternoon, a long-awaited proposal that aims to change local planning and zoning regulations was unfortunately passed by Democrats after hours of Debate. While the amended bill is not exactly the same as the original zoning proposals, make no mistake: this is just the tip of the iceberg in the majority’s quest to critically alter zoning laws in towns across Connecticut.

Through constant work by Republican leadership, virtual forums and rallies across the state, we showed the opposition to such proposal carries strength in numbers. Now it is crucial that we keep up the pressure, as it was promised that we would see bills in the future expanding this legislation This is a dangerous grab of power from the people and their locally elected members of planning and zoning commissions. Local officials know much more about the unique zoning needs in their communities and should not be subjected to a one-size-fits-all approach crafted by the state.

Also, this bill allows accessory apartments “as of right,” which means that zoning regulations cannot prohibit their construction. Municipalities can however opt-out of these requirements with a two-thirds vote from the zoning commission and legislative body of the municipality. The bill also mandates that municipalities to require additional parking spaces, but they can also opt-out of this section with the same two-thirds vote. Democrats can spin this as there is still local control, but this is not necessarily the case. The state has set requirements in order for a municipality to opt-out of that should not be a state requirement in the first place.

These are bad concepts and I will be voting against ANY further state intervention into local zoning in the future.