Contributed by Graduate Student Adrian Chavarria

This is a short synthesis of my understanding of this past weekend’s discussion on housing: The U.S. The Chamber of Commerce estimates a national 4.7 million home shortage.1 According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC), 73% of extremely low-income renter households are severely cost-burdened.2 In addition, the NLIHC also highlights that in the State of Connecticut a household must earn $73,664 annually in order to pay 30% or less of their income in housing.3 The panelists highlighted that most working–class Latinos cannot reach this. They point out that Latino families face alienation, discrimination, and predatory practices in both rental and ownership markets. For example, new Latino landlords are often sold neglected properties, creating cycles of debt and poor housing conditions. The state as a whole is facing millions in cuts to already appropriated funding which is anticipated to severely disrupt ongoing community-based affordable housing development. 4 One could expect the state to step in and fill these gaps caused by federal cuts, however, State Representative Antonio Felipe emphasized that over 70% of Connecticut’s housing committee is composed of landlords or their lawyers, skewing legislation in their favor. Despite this, the house and senate passed HB 5002 “An Act Concerning Housing And The Needs Of Homeless Persons” which went on to be vetoed by Governor Ned Lamont which demonstrates the gap between policy need and political will. Policy recommendations exist, the question becomes, how can the legislature avoid another veto without compromising the effectiveness of the bill?

Nonetheless this is my perception of the policy recommendations the panel provided though they are not officially endorsed by El Instituto or the summit organizers:

1. Implement Rent Stabilization and Cap Increases
   1. Why it matters: Without rent caps, renters face unaffordable and volatile increases (e.g.,30–80%).
   2. Policy Example: Adopt rent stabilization laws similar to CA or NY to protect tenants from excessive increases and promote housing stability.
2. Expand Community-Based Home ownership Programs
   1. Why it matters: There is no clear bridge from college graduation to home ownership for Latinos.
   2. Policy Example: Scale and better fund programs like “Time to Own” and provide grants—not just loans—to first-time buyers from historically underserved communities.
3. Invest Surplus and Rainy Day Funds into Affordable Housing at Scale
   1. Why it matters: State surpluses should be redirected to directly address structural housing deficits in marginalized communities.
   2. Policy Example: Fund large-scale, place-based neighborhood revitalization initiatives with housing, parks, transportation, and safety infrastructure.
4. Create Tenant and Small Landlord Protection Reforms
   1. Why it matters: Small Latino landlords need support, and tenants need better protections.
   2. Policy Example: Regulate AI-driven rent pricing, prohibit predatory property sales, and offer repair grants and tax incentives to small landlords committed to affordability and quality.
5. Democratize Housing Policy Governance
   1. Why it matters: Legislative bodies overrepresented by landlords cannot fairly legislate for renters.
   2. Policy Example: Establish independent housing equity commissions, increase

Panelists:
❖ Maribel La Cruz- CT Dept. of Housing
❖ Fernando Betancourt-The San Juan Center
❖ Wildaliz Bermudez-Executive Director of Fair Rent New Haven
Moderator: State Representative Antonio Felipe
Notetaker: Adrian Chavarria-UConn’s El Instituto

Closing thoughts:

---