The General Assembly’s Housing Committee sent a diverse package of bills to the floor or to other committees with joint favorable reports Tuesday afternoon.

Renter and landlord issues, housing affordability and availability and an act establishing a right to housing, among other related measures, are covered in the legislation that made it out of the Housing Committee.

The right to housing bill seeks to “establish a right to housing for all residents of the state and a right to housing committee,” according to its summary.

“It shall be the goal of this state to implement policies that will respect, protect and fulfill a right to affordable, decent, safe and stable housing for every resident of this state,” the proposed bill language reads. State agencies would be compelled to “consider the right to housing” when implementing policies and to “give priority to assisting families of low and moderate income.”

In public testimony for the bill, Evonne Klein, the CEO of the Connecticut Coalition to End Homelessness, said that in Connecticut "we believe that housing is a human right.”

“Today, we have the opportunity as a state to codify those words and those beliefs in S.B. 168,” Klein said in her testimony. “Ensuring the right not to be evicted unfairly, the right to safe and decent housing, the right to live in communities with good schools, and supports for health and safety, the right to equal access regardless of race, gender, disability or other status.”

Deb Monahan — executive director of the nonprofit Thames Valley Council for Community Action, which assists low-income and disadvantaged residents in southeastern Connecticut — said Tuesday that “It would be great to pass something like this, but there are two things people need: The money to pay the rent, and the availability of the housing stock.”

“Sometimes those are the biggest barriers,” Monahan continued. “It’s great to say we all have a right to safe and stable housing, and I couldn’t agree with that any more. But sometimes the barrier is if the rents are too high, and there’s an affordability issue, or there’s an availability issue.”

The Connecticut Conference of Municipalities said in its testimony that it is in favor of the intent behind the bill but is concerned about the possibility of “unfunded mandates.”

The CCM said the bill “would require municipalities to consider the right to housing and the components established under the bill.”

“Some of these components include the right to 1) protection from housing loss, 2) safe housing that meets basic needs, 3) housing affordability, 4) rehousing assistance for those who have become homeless and 5) the recognition of special circumstances,” the CCM wrote, adding that it supports providing affordable housing and combatting homelessness.

“With that being said, the bill as currently drafted is vague and potentially opens the door to burdensome unfunded mandates,” the CCM added in its testimony. “The financial commitments regarding the components listed are unknown. CCM would ask the committee to clearly state the responsibilities of the municipality as it relates to the committee establishing a right to housing.”

The bill also is supported by the Connecticut Coalition Against Domestic Violence, which includes Safe Futures of New London. “This piece of legislation expresses the need to progressively implement policies to respect, protect, and fulfill a right to affordable, decent, safe, and stable housing,” the coalition wrote in its testimony.

State Rep. Kimberly Fiorello, R-Greenwich, referenced the right to housing bill during a tense exchange with a member of the public testifying on a separate bill — which would allow for greater housing development density near the state’s train stations — on Monday.

"Housing is not a right because housing is built by other people. It's a want, and there's a variety of different housing people may want," Fiorello said. "But housing is not a right, you don't have a right to other people's labor. People offer it at a certain price, and then you are either willing to pay for it or not."

DesegregateCT, an advocacy coalition composed of nonprofit groups, responded to Fiorello on Twitter.

“Rep. Fiorello is wrong. Housing is not a 'want.' Housing is a need,” the organization wrote, adding, “young, diverse people want to live in CT but cannot because there are few options and skyrocketing prices. We should listen when we hear about the need for affordable housing.”

Several landlords submitted testimony in opposition to the bill.

"My wife and I operate a small business that we have invested our life savings into as well as countless hours renovating old or abandoned buildings thereby improving the quality of rental housing in north central CT," wrote Paul Januszewski, a landlord. "I urge you to oppose this bill because it sounds well intended but will lead to extended collection losses and drive up rental prices if tenants get extended non-payment opportunities."

The state Judicial Branch also submitted testimony asking that the bill language be changed in order not to include the branch.

“This bill requires all state agencies to develop programmatic policies and procedures consistent with this goal. The language in the bill is in direct conflict with the constitutional role of the Judicial Branch,” the testimony reads. “It is fundamental to the Judicial Branch’s mission that the judiciary remain fair and impartial in all proceedings before the courts, including summary process actions. The courts cannot take an affirmative position or advocate for one side over the other in adjudicating these cases.”

Protection for violence victims

Another bill given a joint favorable report by the committee on Tuesday is the “Housing Protections for Victims of Family Violence” act, which would prevent landlords from evicting a tenant, increasing rent or deem that a tenant violated a rental agreement “if such violation is a result of family violence.”

“It seeks to prohibit a landlord from taking certain adverse actions against a tenant based on such tenant's family violence victim status,” the CCADV wrote in its testimony about the bill. “Our intention is that it will serve as one tool that can increase a survivor’s ability to remain safely in her or his home. Domestic violence is the leading cause of homelessness for women and children. Survivors face many unique barriers to finding safe and affordable housing because of the actions of their abuser.”

Needs assessment

Another act passed out of committee on Tuesday is “A Needs Assessment and Fair Share Plans for Municipalities to Increase Affordable Housing.” The bill would “require (1) an assessment of the state-wide need for affordable housing and an allocation of such need to planning regions and municipalities, (2) the creation of affordable housing plans for each municipality, and (3) a study concerning the municipalities' performance in meeting the requirements of such plans,” according to its summary. Opponents of the bill, including municipal interests such as CCM and Republican members of the committee, expressed concerns that the legislation would put an undue burden on municipalities.

“I’m past the point of trying to convince people that we have to do something about affordable housing in the state,” Sen. Gary Winfield, D-New Haven, said Tuesday, referencing past debates between Republicans and Democrats on the topic of affordable housing.

House Majority Leader Jason Rojas, D-East Hartford, who is a co-sponsor of the bill, said in his testimony that the bill “allows Connecticut to address its affordable housing and housing segregation crises all while ensuring that individual towns remain in the driver's seat when it comes to how and where they build more housing.”

s.spinella@theday.com