Thomas uses a lot of sources throughout her article. In my opinion, by showing the percentage of subsidized homes being built in exclusionary zones and projects like Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers created to provide poor people with better options of housing, presents an ongoing pattern of a non-inclusive system that confines people with low income in segregated areas. It also states that the only places available for rentals in Section 8 are in most cases vulnerable areas, and that this situation only aggravates the actual problem rather than ameliorate it.

This part caught my attention because I think the author could have inquired about the meaning of "character" appointed by these town officials. After noting their affirmations, she gave her own understanding of the definition of "character". I could have given her more credibility if she had asked them more profoundly about their statements and maybe that she had narrated how they reacted to her question. By presenting the town officials' opinion in this matter is very important, but their opinions can not be generalized as the opinions of all the local officials.

This part really captured my attention. How is it possible that Gov. Ned Lamont changed his mind so radically. From being totally agree with the idea that housing access should be equally offered by the authorities to the community and called them "nuts", to being neutral about this reality and did not want to interfere with these laws at all. Thomas also appeals to Ethos, as she cited The Connecticut Mirror, as a source of reference for her article, in which she is a reporter dedicated to educational and housing affairs. She is using Gov. Lamont's opinion to describe the lack of attention to the subject of housing inequality by main authorities. Readers would consider this as an impolite attitude towards the subject.

The article mentions "Jim Crow laws" as another way of segregation. It is a mechanism of restricting housing developments, including the people that need it, in wealthier towns such as Weston, Wilton, or Westport. Thomas cited the argument of a developer, as another example of how difficult is to receive the approval from authorities to construct multifamily housing for vulnerable residents. The author uses a lot of testimonies from people who has had trouble trying to build affordable complexes. By doing this, she gains more credibility from the reader and gets a real connection, appealing to the value of justice. This is the writer's pathos.

In this paragraph, the author contrasts how the same Weston's officials that were in favor of BLM protests, then blocked development projects for multifamily housing. It looks like Murray was right and after all "It was a photo opportunity" for Weston's lawmakers. Through this first example of the town's strategic plan, Thomas is showing one more time that local housing authorities want to remain essentially the same; by offering only one option for single-families that can afford high prices for homes. The author also remarks the absence of opportunities in those measures, especially for Black residents.

In Weston, one of the wealthiest' town in Connecticut, there is not a majority of developments for low-income families. The author quotes Brian Murray, who affirms that the town does not have any Black teacher, police officer or board member. Murray's testimony appeals to Logos because is going to support Thomas' argument, as she is trying to demonstrate that there are exclusionary housing laws. Therefore, to show the credibility of her article, she cites someone that totally agrees with her and that through his personal experience is in the position of proving his statement.