Planning and Development Committee
JOINT FAVORABLE REPORT
Bill No.: SB-1066
Title: AN ACT CONCERNING MUNICIPALITIES AND SHARED SERVICES.
Vote Date: 4/1/2021
Vote Action: Joint Favorable
PH Date: 3/22/2021
File No.: 566
Disclaimer: The following JOINT FAVORABLE Report is prepared for the benefit of the
members of the General Assembly, solely for purposes of information, summarization and
explanation and does not represent the intent of the General Assembly or either chamber
thereof for any purpose.
SPONSORS OF BILL:
N/A
REASONS FOR BILL:
SB-1066 seeks to make a technical change to laws regarding municipalities and other
services
RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:
None Submitted for SB- 1066
NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:
Stephen Hudspeth - supports this bill as of now but also with a change in the language.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:
Gabrielle Ansani- opposes this bill because he believes that it is undermining local control
and municipal home rule.
Dennis Crowe opposes this bill because he believes that this bill is deceptive, instead of
granting the towns more freedom he believes that it is in fact a state takeover of local control.
Chris Emme opposes this bill because he feels as thought it is an over reach of state
control.
Olga Konykhov opposes this bill because she believes that this bill will destroy our towns
and assets.
Tammy Langalis opposes this ill because she believes that there is enough affordable
housing already and it should not be the states function to interfere with what local
municipalities do.
280 different constituents from across the state who provided one or under ten word
email testimony expressing opposition to S.B. 1066
Gregory Melich opposes this bill because it undermines local control and municipal home
rule.
Andrew Millar opposes this bill because he views it as being biased and discriminatory, he
also states that it provides people further incentive to move to another state.
Michael Rieger opposes this bill because he believes that the population density caused
by this could lead to putting peoples lives at risk, zoning decisions in CT should not be one
size fits all, there is no mathematical way that this bill will lower housing costs, the bill would
result in an ecological and environmental disaster, and that the goal of the is already being
delivered by the private sector.
Bob Stock opposes this bill because it would threaten local control of zoning which would
thwart the will of small towns.
Elizabeth van Caloen opposes this bill because it could be uses to end local control by
towns when it comes to zoning and other land use decisions.
Griffin Wetmore opposes this bill because he believes that it will only lead to more
financial stress on CT taxpayers.
Reported by: Chris Peritore Date: 4/9/2021
Page 2 of 2 SB-1066


Statutes affected:
Raised Bill: 7-148cc
PD Joint Favorable: 7-148cc
File No. 566: 7-148cc