Desegregate CT (Updated)

Exceptional letter to the editor of Greenwich Free Press by Michael E. Hahn of Riverside

I don’t know Mr. Hahn, but he’s penned an excellent dissection of the current push to override local zoning and impose low-income housing on “rich towns”.

You should definitely read the whole thing, but here’s an excerpt on the type of people behind it; it’s not an ad hominem attack on a particular individual so much as an exposition: “this is who they are, this is what they want to do”. If you’re okay with that, then Desegregate CT’s new director and deputy, socialist communists Peter Harrison and Nick Abbott are your men; if not, then not.

….. Last year, Desegregate CT proposed a plan centered around Transit Oriented Development  (TOD), or what could also be viewed as the oversupply of both market rate and  affordable housing in close proximity to transit hubs throughout Connecticut. This year, they have  chosen to change the name to Transit Oriented Communities (TOC), “communities” being a friendlier, fuzzier term than “development.”

The bill they have sponsored (Live Work Ride) is predicated on the concept of TOC. It consists of central planning on a massive scale (Think New Rochelle MTA complex) that offers little to no benefit to any municipality on which it is imposed, simultaneously stripping local zoning boards of the ability to effectively manage these developments. 

One change from last year is that Desegregate CT has hired a new Director, Peter Harrison. Research into Mr. Harrison’s background unveils a body of work on behalf of the most progressive political figures in America.

The Regional Planning Association website states, “Mr. Harrison also advised on the presidential campaigns of Vice President Kamala Harris, Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, and former HUD Secretary Julian Castro.” The website also mentions that Mr. Harrison worked as a volunteer for NY Congresswoman Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, a self-proclaimed member of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA). On its website, DSA states, “The Democratic Socialists of America is the largest socialist organization in the United States, with over 92,000 members and chapters in all 50 states. We believe that working people should run both the economy and society democratically to meet human needs, not to make profits for a few.” 

An unsuccessful New York Congressional candidate himself, Mr. Harrison gave an interview with Greenpointers, a North Brooklyn online community resource in 2020.

To the question “What could be the first piece of legislation you’d push for if elected to the U.S. Congress?” Mr. Harrison replied as follows: “It’s the one I’ve got to work on, which is the Homes Guarantee, a national progressive plan to solve the housing crisis. Representative Ilhan Omar has introduced both the broader goal of Homes Guarantee but also the emergency bill to cancel all rent and mortgages and utilities.” The introduction to the interview also states that Mr. Harrison “isn’t paying rent for his apartment” as he is “refusing to fork over money to landlords during a global pandemic.” In Mr. Harrison’s case, he went on “rent strike” to protest his landlord in Stuyvesant Town, New York in 2020. In an Instagram post, Mr. Harrison called his landlord a “greedy private equity landlord.”

Desegregate CT represents an extreme point of view toward affordable housing. Some think its main goal is to create more “affordable” market conditions in the Connecticut housing market by forcing an oversupply of housing to the market, thereby lowering surrounding property values. This was made clear in a letter to the editor last year by Nick Abbot, who described himself as Deputy Director of Desegregate CT. Mr Abbot wrote, “The only people in this debate with a financial conflict of interest are a few wealthy homeowners – like our opponents – who have a vested interest in starving our state of supply so that their property values will continue to skyrocket.”

In saying this, Mr. Abbot is confirming that his approach is designed specifically to drive down real estate values. [emphasis added]

Live Work Ride, TOC and similar legislative proposals are not in the best interests of Connecticut’s municipalities. Instead, they are a profit driver for the real estate industry at the expense of our communities. Mr. Harrison recently said on a Zoom call that “If you build it, they will come,” without any regard to the infrastructure such as parking and schools.

That is music to the ears of the developers and real estate companies who clearly know they will be the principal beneficiaries of these initiatives. [emphasis added] While Mr. Abbot’s target may be “wealthy homeowners” ALL homeowners in Connecticut will be adversely impacted by a decline in real estate values. Those who do not fall into the category of being wealthy homeowners will see a disproportionate decline in property value and their net worth. As the saying goes, as a rising tide lifts all boats, an ebbing tide lowers them.

Hahn’s last point is also important: it’s not just our Connecticut and out-of-state communists who are behind this, they’re joined by large commercial developers, as we’ve seen in the massive 8-30g project proposed by Jimmy Cabrera’s Eagle Ventures (notice the plural) and his multi-state money bag partner, SJP Properties for Church Street. That application was subsequently withdrawn in the face of fierce local opposition, but they'll be back, and if Hartford passes Desegregate CT’s vision for Greenwich and other Gold Coast towns, they’ll be back with a vengeance, because as they and people like Peter Harrison recognize, this is where the money is. Harrison wants to destroy that wealth while the developers want to exploit it, but like all these social projects, both sides will work out a deal to their mutual benefit.

Church Street, as envisioned by Eagle Ventures and SJP Properties

UPDATE: A reader has sent these thoughts:

Also, something rarely pointed out, but so offensive to me, is the choice of naming for their organization: "Desegregate CT". It's an offensive, loaded name that automatically projects the worst of Jim Crow as an image of our state, which could not be further from the truth. Obviously, it was selected for maximum shock and awe value. And of course, whomever opposes them MUST be FOR segregation, n'est-ce pas? It's a combative, aggressive name that immediately puts everyone else on defense.

The only true "segregation" even remotely open to a philosophical debate on the topic of housing is economic segregation. But even in such a debate, nuance matters. Are they advocating on behalf of kids in Bridgeport that wish to go to school in Fairfield? Or folks who currently live in a poorly maintained 2-family house in Norwalk who wish to live on an acre in Westport? Or someone like me, who wishes to enjoy the quiet life on 10 acres in backcountry Greenwich? In all three cases, some folks are "segregated" from certain areas or lifestyles. Are Bridgeport schools that bad? Is the two-family that unsafe? Is my own situation in a 1959 Garrison Colonial on 2 acres so untenable?

I suspect the answer, as always, is "it depends". But the thorny problem is, who gets to decide? And are there to be quotas, to make sure the "right" kind of people are distributed "fairly"?

At the Zoom hearings last year on the TOD proposal, your own Fiorello asked very pointedly of the young guy from Desegregate CT: "Do you feel as if you have a right to housing?" He answered yes, and she disagreed. But the unspoken detail of his philosophy, lost in this quick banter, seems to to be: "People have a right to housing, in the location they wish and at a price they deem satisfactory". I really wish that would be touched upon very clearly in these debates.

Cheers,

"A Reader Up North"