Support Our Troops!

Following the success of the troop surge, the media has largely stopped covering the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. However, this does not mean that they are over. America continues to have major contingents of troops serving extended deployments to the Middle East.

As the war has dropped off the radar screen of the main stream media, efforts to support the troops have faded away . However, this is not so for one organization: Move America Forward.

Veteran radio host Melanie Morgan and internet journalist  Andrew Breitbart are sponsoring a Troopathon, to encourage ordinary citizens to send care packages to our American troops.

Ron Winter, a Vietnam veteran and conservative activist from Hebron is participating in the troopathon. I have agreed to join his team, the Greyhawks, which was what his unit in Vietnam was nicknamed

You can send a care package to our American troops by clicking this link. It will direct you to the page that Move America Forward has set-up for sending care packages.

Please take a moment to thank our armed services personnel for their bravery.

 

A Leader Emerges: Sam Caligiuri Challenges Chris Dodd

Waterbury State Senator Will Hold Fundraiser In Enfield

James Bailey Brislin
The Carpet City Chronicle

The Enfield Press, June 11, 2009

“With our nation and our state at a crossroads, Connecticut needs a Senator committed to reform, grounded in principle, and with the courage to do the right thing— regardless of pressure from the left or the right. Simply maintaining the status quo will not make life better for people.”

—State Senator Sam S.F. Caligiuri (R-Waterbury)

If one theme has been constant in recent elections, it has been the need for change. In the 2007 municipal elections, Enfield voters expressed their desire for fundamental change and turned control of the Town Council and Board of Education over to the Republicans. Voters rejected the punitive tax increases that marked six years of Democratic rule and signaled their desire for fiscal responsibility and a thorough reform of municipal government. The 2008 victory of Barack Obama was likewise driven by a public dissatisfaction with the Bush administration and desire for change.

Next on the hit parade is U.S. Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT). As Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Chris Dodd played a crucial role in events leading up to the economic collapse. Dodd was one of the leading recipients of political contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Dodd obstructed the efforts of Republicans to regulate these government sponsored entities, which guaranteed the lion’s share of home loans against default. In the face of imminent collapse, Fannie and Freddie were nationalized by the federal government in 2008. It was under Dodd’s not-so-watchful eye that the federal government embarked upon a program of bailouts and partial nationalization for troubled banks and bankrupt automakers.

Dodd’s reckless approach to public integrity has likewise caught up with him. In June of 2008, Portfolio Magazine published a story about how Dodd and other public officials received sweetheart loan deals from Countrywide Mortgage. The “Friends of Angelo” program provided below-market interest rates to cronies of Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozillo. Since that time, Countrywide has collapsed and been taken over by the Bank of America. Last week, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Mozillo with fraud and insider dealing. This winter, Hartford Courant columnist Kevin Rennie reported that Dodd helped Edward R. Downe Jr. obtain a “midnight pardon” from then-President Bill Clinton. Downe is the business partner of William Kessenger, then co-owner of Dodd’s Irish cottage. Additionally, Rennie reported that Dodd chronically underreported the value of the Irish cottage in his annual financial disclosures. The situation became worse when it was reported that Dodd was the architect of a loophole that allowed nationalized insurer AIG to pay exorbitant bonuses to executives.

By then, it had become clear that Dodd had lost touch with the people he had been sent to serve. Dodd went to Washington as a public servant and in time became the servant of special interests: Wall Street banks, mortgage lenders, pay-day lenders Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, along with GM, Chrysler and their unions. Chris Dodd has let the people of Connecticut down. He no longer stands for the common-sense Main Street values of ordinary people from places like Enfield. Dodd has come to represent values bred of a toxic affair between Wall Street and K Street. It is these values that have brought us the twin follies of corporate bailouts and stimulus spending.

It is during times of crisis that leaders emerge, often from the places where they are least expected. It was unexpected that the son of a humble carpenter from Nazareth to be the Messiah sent to redeem mankind by dying on a cross. Who would have thought that a silversmith and a tanner could martial a colonial militia of citizen-soldiers to stand up to the British Army at Lexington and Concord and fire “the shot heard ‘round the world”? Who would have expected that a president born in a log cabin would preserve the Union and free the slaves amidst the worst war in national history? Who would have expected that a one-time B-movie actor and PR front man would become president and implement policies responsible for slaying inflation, restoring prosperity, and defeating communism?

In the face of this crisis, one such leader has emerged. His name is State Sen. Sam S.F. Caligiuri (R-Waterbury). Let me repeat that name, “Sam Caligiuri”. Study it carefully; you will be hearing it often in the coming months. At the end of March, Caligiuri announced his intent to take on U.S. Senator Christopher Dodd. Caligiuri is currently serving his second term as a State Senator representing a district that includes part of Waterbury, Wolcott, Southington, and Cheshire.

In his time in the legislature, Caligiuri has established himself as a vociferous advocate for fiscal responsibility and criminal justice reform.

He was the only state senator to vote against the 2007 state budget, which violated the state spending cap, relied on pie-in-the-sky revenue projections, and has left the state facing a major deficit for this year.

Following the brutal home invasion in Cheshire, Caligiuri led the charge to pass a Three Strikes Law, which would require individuals guilty of three violent felonies to face life in prison.

Caligiuri has also been a strong voice for religious liberty and family values. He opposed S.B. 1098, the unconstitutional proposal of Judiciary Committee Co-Chairs Mike Lawlor and Andrew McDonald to force the Catholic Church to operate contrary to its apostolic nature. When the State Senate considered a bill to codify the same-sex “marriage” ruling, Caligiuri worked hard to make sure that the bill included appropriate religious liberty protections. Throughout his time in the legislature, Caligiuri has consistently opposed same-sex “marriage” and abortion.

Previously, Caligiuri served as Acting Mayor of Waterbury. President of the Board of Aldermen from 1997-2001, he unexpectedly ascended to the mayoralty following the arrest of then-Mayor Philip Giordano. As Acting Mayor, Caligiuri was not afraid to make the hard choices necessary to root out municipal corruption and ensure the city’s recovery. This began with a decision that he would not run for his own term as mayor, freeing him to make the tough choices needed to ensure long-term recovery. He negotiated an agreement where Giordano would resign as mayor in return for the continuance of salary and health benefits. Caligiuri reformed the patronage system under which towing and legal work were awarded. He negotiated collective bargaining agreements with municipal unions that included major concessions. This experience has left Caligiuri a staunch supporter of ethics in government and term limits.

Prior to election to the Board of Aldermen, Caligiuri was Deputy Legal Counsel in the Governor’s Office from 1995-1997. Caligiuri has a B.A. from Boston College, and M.A. in Religion from Yale Divinity School, and a J.D. from The Catholic University of America.

Caligiuri currently is a partner with the Hartford law firm of Day Pitney. He lives in Waterbury with his wife Lori and children Owen and Grace.

Make no mistake about it: This is a watershed moment for the people of Connecticut. For far too long, Connecticut politics has been dominated by the same old tired faces and their same old tired ideas. No one exemplifies that problem more than Chris Dodd, who has made a career of his time in Congress and the Senate. In Sam Caligiuri, we have a candidate who is not part of the plutocracy that has dominated state politics in recent decades. For once, we have a chance to elect a candidate who understands the values and concerns of ordinary people and will honestly and earnestly represent them in Washington. However, it is up to people like us to raise the money necessary to for Sam to run for the Senate. It will be an expensive race, particularly given Chris Dodd’s access to the Wall Street fundraising machine. For that reason, it is imperative for all of us to give early and to give often. If anything, Chris Dodd’s tarnished record shows us why it is imperative for Main Street to have a voice in the Senate.

- – - – - – - – - -

Mark your calendars: Local businessman Dominic Alaimo and I are holding a fundraiser for Sam Caligiuri at the Mt. Carmel Society Hall on Friday, June 26 at 6:30 PM. Tickets are $50. For more information or to RSVP, please call me at (860) 305-4751 or Dominic at (860) 748-8617.

 

Greed In A Time of Sacrifice

James Bailey Brislin
The Carpet City Chronicle

The Enfield Press, April 16, 2009

“For greed, all nature is too little.“
—Seneca

“A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.“
—George Bernard Shaw

Our country faces an economic crisis unseen in decades. The “affluent society” is no more. Unemployment has reached a generational high. Household indebtedness is at unprecedented levels. Many families are on the edge of default, foreclosure, and bankruptcy.

In the face of economic challenge, many Americans are making unprecedented sacrifices. Many are sacrificing vacations, raises, and furlough days to save the jobs of colleagues. Some have even agreed to accept a pay reduction. Small business owners are taking little or no pay to keep their businesses afloat.

It is clear that this is an age of sacrifice. Gone from the public discourse and media is the greedy, self-indulgent attitude so prominent a few years ago. This crisis contains many important lessons for the members of my generation. It is a wake-up call to see how tough things are in the real world. It will be a long time before we ever experience the kind of prosperity experienced by my parents’ generation. We will likely experience hardships similar to those borne by the Greatest Generation.

At long last, the crisis and its effects have come home to roost at Town Hall. Tax collections are down for the year and are projected to decrease further, next year. These anticipated revenue declines of $4 million and contractual increases of $6 million have left the town facing a $10 million deficit.

As a consequence, painful budget cuts are on the table, including dozens of teacher layoffs and the possible closure of an elementary school. Town Council and Board of Education officials have approached employee unions for concessions. The paraprofessional union and the school nurses union have agreed to a wage freeze. However, the Enfield Teachers’ Association has obstinately refused to negotiate concessions.

The Carpet City Chronicle recently obtained an email sent by Enfield Teachers’ Association President Mary Lombardo to Board of Education Chairman Andre Greco. The e-mail, sent at 1:07 PM on Monday, March 30 states:

Dear Andre,

I did not return your phone call from Friday because I assumed you want to discuss concessions to our new contract. The Executive Board has already given you the answer that there will be no concessions and we will continue to work under the conditions outlined in our current contract.

We do not plan to make any public statement. Past practice has proved that to be a mistake. Rather, the members of the Executive Board and all of Enfield’s teachers will continue to concentrate on providing an excellent education for the students of Enfield and to serve all of our members with vigor and enthusiasm. As teachers, we are always mindful that the children come first. As a union, supporting our contract is our primary concern.

Thank you,
Mary Lombardo

Could the contrast be any more clear? At a time when many Enfield residents face layoffs and pay-cuts, the Teachers’ Association will not sacrifice raises (wage and step increases). Mary Lombardo and her fellow union bosses could care less about the difficulties faced by the Enfield residents who employ them. All they care about is collecting their raises, even if the cost is larger class sizes, a closed elementary school, and fewer programs at the high schools. They are so obstinate in the pursuit of this objective that they refuse to engage in sensible negotiation.

This email should make clear to parent advocates that the ETA’s primary interest is negotiating and upholding contracts, not educating Enfield’s children. For the union, education is simply a pretext used to manipulate and co-opt concerned parents into lobbying for their objectives. But when push comes to shove, the educational veneer tarnishes to reveal the union’s real motive: contractual greed.

However, greed is not what motivates the vast majority of Enfield teachers. Many of them would gladly make the sacrifices necessary to save jobs and reduce the number of layoffs, but have been stopped from doing so by the obstinacy of union bosses. The teachers on the list of 103 should ask themselves why they have been paying union dues. What does union brotherhood mean when union bosses like Mary Lombardo willingly throw 103 teachers to the wolves? It would appear to be nothing more than a false shibboleth, invented to get rank-and-file teachers to buy into the union’s protection racket.

The obstinacy of Lombardo and the other ETA bosses exemplifies the failure of leadership that is now evident in Big Labor, Big Business, and Big Government. At a time of crisis, many major organizations find themselves governed not by leaders, but instead by figurehead managers incapable of leading men and women. Frequently, these “leaders” are more interested in finding others to blame for their problems than they are in contributing to constructive solutions.

Unfortunately, the reality is that the budget deficit must be closed through either concessions or layoffs. In an organization where 85% of the budget funds salaries, it is impossible to cut costs without touching labor. A sensible employee will say to himself, “I am better off sacrificing raises, vacation, and even some pay so that my coworkers can hold onto their jobs.” However, the Connecticut Educational Association and the Enfield Teachers’ Association have used their monopoly powers to stop teachers from making this rational choice. It illustrates the extent to which these unions have compromised their mission for the sake of money, power, and greed.

It should be known that Enfield’s teachers are fairly compensated for the work they perform. For a new teacher with a bachelor’s degree, starting pay is north of $42,000 a year and includes health and retirement benefits. Moreover, that salary ramps up significantly over a twelve-year period. A teacher who has graduate studies and a bevy of experience under their belt can earn a salary in the 70’s or 80’s. It should be apparent that the town is not asking Enfield’s teachers to shoulder an undue burden.

Last, it should be abundantly clear that the town cannot increase property taxes. Even a Keynesian will recognize the contractionary effects of tax increases. This situation is further complicated by the relationship that housing and foreclosures have to the economic crisis. Already, many homeowners are on the verge of foreclosure. An increase in property tax would simply increase their already sky-high mortgage payments and thus increase the foreclosure rate, here in town.

Moreover, the general public is in near-unanimous agreement that spending cuts, not tax increases are the answer. A recent Quinnipiac poll shows that 67% of Connecticut residents would like to see the state budget balanced through spending cuts, not tax increases.

The time has come for elected officials to pull together and put the interest of the general public ahead of special interests. We cannot allow the unchecked expansion of the educational budget to increase taxes or crowd out other vital services, like public safety and law enforcement. Enfield cannot tax its way out of this crisis- we must grow our way out of it. Now is the time for us to get it right- to recognize that public services and schools do not drive real estate and business development. Rather, it is the growth of commerce and enterprise that makes possible the population and grand list growth that are the hallmark of a healthy community.

 

Debates Over T-Ville Firehouse Continue

Many residents received an email from Thompsonville activist Sue Read outlining a number of zoning concerns about the Thompsonville Fire Commission’s Proposal to build a new fire station in Thompsonville. Currently, the Fire Commission is looking to obtain stimulus funding for the new station.

Below you will find Read’s email and the Commission’s response.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

This is an FYI–not from Voices For Thompsonville but as a concerned Thompsonville citizen:
PLEASE BE AWARE

The Thomposnville Fire Department has once again put its cart before the horse in trying to obtain special conditions for moving forward on the Firehouse location on the Trioano Property, the country store lot.

Apparently this site should not even be considered for this site for 2 reasons:

1. The Town of Enfield adopted as law the 1992 Report/proposals of what this property could be used for; mixed use ex: store fronts below; housing above

2. All the efforts the Town of Enfield, The Planning and Zoning, The Enfield Revitalization, and other community groups call for Revitalization of the area; Reseach done and local adopted ordinances show that would include reinstalling shops along this section of Pearl St, thus creating an economic strenght for the area, as it had been for many years offering Thompsonville as a retail destination, an economic stronghold and as an additional tax revenue base. Please see material from the 1992 report which will indicate illustrations of these adopted plans.

The Firestation has not invited the public again for any discussions on this process and are quietly approaching each agency with requests to make changes, variances, etc to the site for their use. Actions which need to come after there is a change in the local law, and a concensus of public opinion on location/purpose, Revitalization needs and tax issues.< br>
Without community discussions people cannot get educated fast enough on what the current protocal is for this block, (the law on this subject) as the Fire department is doing what they call “due diligence”, howver due diligence does not include leaving the public out as was done before.

Be reminded the Thompsonville Fire Department is shrouded under a special ordinance which can either give them the power they need to what they want or to be accountable to the District 2 taxpayers …

You may learn more by contacting our assistant Town planner, talk to your councilman on the subject, ask our State Representative to explain the special ordinance or ask the Fire Department what actions they have taken since the debacle of the summer of 2008 to include a public discusiion — when they forced a public vote on the people with less than a week to decide the right answer and to the tune of over $7 million dollars.

Current actions go against what has already been set forth by the Town and in some cases material is being used to sway or suggest support for their purpose; for example in one VFT meeting, Sir Frank Alaimo reprinted a portion of a page from the VFT newsletter with their heading on it, along with the articles editor- and passed it around with the firehouse materials to the crowd–with no reason or explanation but to seemily suggest that the VFT supported this action without their consent. A dsiclaimer had to be made that his reprint di d not in any way suggest their rubber stamp on this proposal.
My disclaimer: as a Thompsonville activist, I support the Thompsonville Fire Department for their services and their value to the Thompsonville area but would support their concerns/needs unconditionally if their plans were discussed with community input and reverence for the legal use of this critical block.

–Sue

Please learn more and understand the ramifications of what is happening here, get informed….please talk about it with your Thompsonville neighbors…

PLEASE find analysis from the 1992 adopted standards
Analysis: The proposed use and structure is not permitted under the current Zoning Ordinances Section 5.40.4 Sub-Area Regulations, sub-section A. Core Area; core areas as defined under Section 1.40.1 (A & B). Restrictions are further discussed under references in Section 5.40.3 Design Standards, in particular to the clear design restrictions for the block under proposal as stated in subsection 5.40.3Aiii (a-c), inclusive, most notably sub-section (b). Height is restricted to a minimum of two stories (5.10.1 Notes to Area and Bulk Requirements, table, note 10: The maximum front yard in the TVC, BL-H and BG-H districts is 25 ft. The minimum building height is two (2) stories. (BL-H and BG-H amended 9/8/03)) Maximum height is set at 40 feet, but may go up an additional 24 feet maximum depending on increases of building setbacks.
1.40.1 Thompsonville Village Center Zone
The boundary of the Thompsonville Village Center Zone is depicted on the Town of Enfield Zoning Map. Within this district there are two sub areas, which together do not include the entire Thompsonville Village Center Zone, as follows:
A. Sub-Area A: “Core Area” defined as the immediate properties abutting the following streets: the west side of North Main Street from Church Street south to Pearl Street, both sides of Pearl Street from North Main Street south to the parcel on the south side of Walnut Street (on the east side of Pearl Street) and south to the parcel on the south side of South Street (on the west side of Pearl Street), both sides of High Street from Spring Street to Wallace Street, also including the building in the northeast corner of High and Wallace Streets, and the south side of Main Street from North Main Street to the Railroad right-of-way as shown on the Town Zoning Map.
B. Sub-Area B: “Freshwater Brook Access Area” defined as properties abutting the south side of Main Street, from North Main Street to the Railroad right-of-way as shown on the Town Zoning Map.

5.40.4 Sub-Area Regulations
A. Core Area
i. The first floor of all buildings shall be restricted to retail, service, small professional and medical offices, recreation, government, and similar uses which in the opinion of the Commission are part of active, pedestrian oriented shopping district.
ii. The following uses shall specifically be permitted only above the first floor:
a. residential;
b. offices other than small professional and medical offices;
c. dance studios; and
d. business and trade schools
B. Freshwater Brook Access Area: New developments, additions and renovated buildings within the Freshwater Brook Access Area shall provide public access adjacent to the Brook which access shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide unless waived by the Commission. Such public access shall be dedicated as such in the deed of the property. Access shall be provided from the public street as deemed necessary by the Commission.
5.40.3 Design Standards
A. Building Design
i. No changes shall be made to the architectural features (including, but not limited to, window treatment, door locations, roof design, changes to siding material, architectural trim and features) of any building in the Thompsonville Village Center Zone without approval of the Commission. The standards of this section shall apply to renovation of existing building as well as new construction.
ii. In addition to the architectural elevations required under Section 9.10.2 of these Zoning Regulations, each applicat ion shall include a drawing at a scale no smaller than 1/8″ = 1′ showing the following information:
a. Design type, style and color of materials for building façade and roof;
b. Details of window and door treatment;
c. Details and description of other architectural trim and features;
d. Details of types of awnings, building mounted lighting and signs (or sign theme for a multi-tenant building); and
e. For building containing a mix of commercial and residential uses, information will be provided to demonstrate how noise transmission will be minimized between different uses to the satisfaction of the Commission.
iii. In reviewing and approving the building elevations, the Commission shall use the following criteria:
a. Compliance with the objectives of the Thompsonville Revitalization Strategy ;
b. Compliance with the theme set forth in the design schematics contained in the Thompsonville Revitalization Strategy and as shown in Figure 1; and,
c. A statement or drawing to show how the proposed design encourages the pedestrian oriented “shopping street” environment at the street level.

Analysis (cont.)
The “theme set forth in the design schematics contained in the Thompsonville Revitalization Strategy” is shown in the zoning ordinance elevations in the design guidelines on line. These clearly dictate a minimum of 2-story buildings with the required “retail, service, small professional and medical offices, recreation, government, and similar uses which in the opinion of the Commission are part of active, pedestrian oriented shopping district”, with the 2nd or higher floors reserved for the permitted uses, and a “pedestrian oriented ‘shopping street’ environment at the street level.”
These are minimum standards that must be used as the starting point of what is allowed in the core areas. Although applicants would be allowed to submit substantially different uses (fire department) within the first floor, there is no allowance to waive the two story requirement with only the permitted uses stated above within those spaces. The commission may not vary, by law, their own regulations.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

Below (in italics) is the point by point response of the Commission:

The Thomposnville Fire Department has once again put its cart before the horse in trying to obtain special conditions for moving forward on the Firehouse location on the Trioano Property, the country store lot.

This is necessary due to the availability of funding pursuant to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. The act madates that any projects funded are shovel-ready prior to June 1. As of right now, the principle impediment to being shovel-ready is the land-use regulatory process: Revitalization Strategy Commission, Inland Wetlands Commission, and the Zoning Board of Appeals. All of these are public meeting where public participation is permitted and encouraged.

It should be noted that the land in question remains owned by the Troiano Family, and is being sent through the land-use regulatory process in case stimulus funding becomes available for its acquisition. If the District does not obtain stimulus funding, it would become a bond issue subject to a referendum.

Apparently this site should not even be considered for this site for 2 reasons:

1. The Town of Enfield adopted as law the 1992 Report/proposals of what this property could be used for; mixed use ex: store fronts below; housing above

The legal status of this report is ambiguous- it is unclear if it was adopted as part of the zoning code or simply a best practice. These issues should be resolved by the Zoning Board of Appeals

2. All the efforts the Town of Enfield, The Planning and Zoning, The Enfield Revitalization, and other community groups call for Revitalization of the area; Reseach done and local adopted ordinances show that would include reinstalling shops along this section of Pearl St, thus creating an economic strenght for the area, as it had been for many years offering Thompsonville as a retail destination, an economic stronghold and as an additional tax revenue base. Please see material from the 1992 report which will indicate illustrations of these adopted plans.

The location has been vacant for over a year and a half. No businesses have expressed interest in occupying the space.

The Firestation has not invited the public again for any discussions on this process and are quietly approaching each agency with requests to make changes, variances, etc to the site for their use. Actions which need to come after there is a change in the local law, and a concensus of public opinion on location/purpose, Revitalization needs and tax issues.< br>

Without community discussions people cannot get educated fast enough on what the current protocal is for this block, (the law on this subject) as the Fire department is doing what they call “due diligence”, howver due diligence does not include leaving the public out as was done before.

We not “quietly approaching” land-use regulatory commissions- we are submitting our application for a public hearing, just like any and every other project. You are most welcome to attend public hearings before regularly-scheduled Inland Wetlands Commission and Zoning Board of Appeals meetings.

Also, our Fire Commission meets monthly on 2nd Wednesday in the Town Hall. The agenda always includes public communication… residents of the Thompsonville Fire District are always welcome to come and share their thoughts and concerns.

Be reminded the Thompsonville Fire Department is shrouded under a special ordinance which can either give them the power they need to what they want or to be accountable to the District 2 taxpayers …

You may learn more by contacting our assistant Town planner, talk to your councilman on the subject, ask our State Representative to explain the special ordinance or ask the Fire Department what actions they have taken since the debacle of the summer of 2008 to include a public discusiion — when they forced a public vote on the people with less than a week to decide the right answer and to the tune of over $7 million dollars.

The Thompsonville Fire District is governed by a Special Act of the Legislature. We are completely accountable to the public. Our commissioners are elected to staggered three-year terms by the district taxpayers at the our annual meeting, which will occur this year on May 14. Our annual budget is subject to public referendum. All of our meetings are open to the public.

Moreover, it should be noted that the District must comply with all federal and state laws and is subject to an annual audit submitted to the Office of Policy and Management.

Current actions go against what has already been set forth by the Town and in some cases material is being used to sway or suggest support for their purpose; for example in one VFT meeting, Sir Frank Alaimo reprinted a portion of a page from the VFT newsletter with their heading on it, along with the articles editor- and passed it around with the firehouse materials to the crowd–with no reason or explanation but to seemily suggest that the VFT supported this action without their consent. A dsiclaimer had to be made that his reprint di d not in any way suggest their rubber stamp on this proposal.

This was part of a multi-page packet assembled to show why the artist’s rendition in the Shapiro report could not be fulfilled for this parcel: specifically the existence of a sewer easement that could not be built over.

Analysis: The proposed use and structure is not permitted under the current Zoning Ordinances Section 5.40.4 Sub-Area Regulations, sub-section A. Core Area; core areas as defined under Section 1.40.1 (A & B). Restrictions are further discussed under references in Section 5.40.3 Design Standards, in particular to the clear design restrictions for the block under proposal as stated in subsection 5.40.3Aiii (a-c), inclusive, most notably sub-section (b). Height is restricted to a minimum of two stories (5.10.1 Notes to Area and Bulk Requirements, table, note 10: The maximum front yard in the TVC, BL-H and BG-H districts is 25 ft. The minimum building height is two (2) stories. (BL-H and BG-H amended 9/8/03)) Maximum height is set at 40 feet, but may go up an additional 24 feet maximum depending on increases of building setbacks.

The artist’s rendition in the Shapiro report does not account for the existence of a sewer easement which prevents the construction of a contiguous block on the parcels in question.

The proposal varies from the setback requirement due to Federal OSHA and FEMA regulations which mandate a minimum apron of 60 feet for fire stations. In this case, local zoning regulations must yield to these mandated federal safety standards.

Regarding height regulations, the proposed tower would compliment the towers on Caronna’s Market, the existing fire station, and various church steeples scattered throughout the village.

Although much of the proposed station is only one story, it will be nearly as tall as a two-story building, thus complimenting the streetscape.

Analysis (cont.)
The “theme set forth in the design schematics contained in the Thompsonville Revitalization Strategy” is shown in the zoning ordinance elevations in the design guidelines on line. These clearly dictate a minimum of 2-story buildings with the required “retail, service, small professional and medical offices, recreation, government, and similar uses which in the opinion of the Commission are part of active, pedestrian oriented shopping district”, with the 2nd or higher floors reserved for the permitted uses, and a “pedestrian oriented ‘shopping street’ environment at the street level.”
These are minimum standards that must be used as the starting point of what is allowed in the core areas. Although applicants would be allowed to submit substantially different uses (fire department) within the first floor, there is no allowance to waive the two story requirement with only the permitted uses stated above within those spaces. The commission may not vary, by law, their own regulations.

We are applying to the Zoning Board of Appeals to have this zoning issues resolved by a variance.

We encourage citizens who have concerns about the proposed fire station to attend our meetings and to contact the Commissioners. We are your elected representatives: your voice in the governance of this district

Marge Perry
(860) 749-0645
sperry20@cox.net

Mike Helechu
(860) 745-9938
mhelechu@aol.com

Dominic Alaimo
(860) 748-8617
freshwat.store@sbcglobal.net

Please be sure to include “Thompsonville Fire” in the subject line of any emails that you send.

 

A Bill Too Far: Judiciary Co-Chairs Lawlor and McDonald Must Be Removed

James Bailey Brislin
The Carpet City Chronicle

The Enfield Press, March 26, 2009

“Noli Irritare Leonem.” (Do not irritate the lion.)
—Archbishop Peter Richard Kenrick

“All power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely.“
—Lord Acton

In the month of March, the agenda of the Judiciary Committee has been marked by the anti-family, anti-Catholic agenda of committee co-chairs Rep. Michael Lawlor (D-East Haven) and Sen. Andrew McDonald (D-Stamford). Nary a weeks has passed without the consideration of one or another bill that would trample religious liberties and basic cultural norms.

The month began with a hearing on S.B. 899, the bill to codify the now-infamous Kerrigan ruling, in which the State Supreme Court imposed homosexual “marriage” by judicial fiat. Lawlor and McDonald brought forth a bill that reached far beyond the confines of Kerrigan. It would have eliminated conscience rights protections everyone but the clergy. Additionally, it sought to overturn a 1991 law that banned public schools from teaching homosexuality as morally acceptable behavior.

Deacon Dave Reynolds, Legislative Liason to the Connecticut Catholic Conference pled with the Judiciary Committee to extend the conscience protections in the civil union bill to homosexual “marriage”.

Without these protections, individuals involved in the wedding business would be forced to perform and service homosexual weddings or be found in violation of civil rights laws. The individuals and organizations that would be affected by this include justices of the peace (who are self-employed), photographers, caterers, florists, and organizations that rent halls, including Catholic fraternal organizations like the Knights of Columbus and the Mt. Carmel Society.

The right to conscientious objection has long been recognized as an important aspect of our first amendment rights. It is the height of arrogance for legislators to think that the long arm of big government can coerce people into abandoning their consciences.

The public hearing occurred at a time and location where it could not be televised by CT-N. Peter Wolfgang, executive director of the Family Institute of Connecticut has publicly speculated that this may have been intentional. In 2007, the overtly anti-Catholic tone of questioning at one public hearing led to the denunciation of Rep. Lawlor by William Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Civil and Religious Rights.

Although no video record of the hearing exists, audio recordings were made so that the hearing could be transcribed. In response to a Freedom of Information request, Judiciary Committee staffers provided me with a copy of the audio recording of the hearing. You can hear the testimony of Deacon Dave Reynolds and Peter Wolfgang by visiting my blog: http://carpetcity.wordpress.com/.

That week also saw the introduction of S.B. 1099. This bill would have completely removed the authority of pastors and bishops in the governance of Catholic churches. Of course this measure was blatantly unconstitutional as it contravened Catholic doctrine and canon law.

It is a sad day in the Constitution State when legislators introduce a measure that makes such a mockery of our state moniker, through the wholesale trampling of our First Amendment rights. Yet again, the arrogance of Sen. McDonald and Rep. Lawlor is evident in this blatant attempt to advance their anti-Catholic agenda with such an unconstitutional measure.

However, McDonald and Lawlor failed to anticipate the firestorm that this bill would raise. It provoked a response that lawmakers had not seen in years. The Legislature was deluged with so many telephone calls that the switchboard crashed in both the House and the Senate. Staffers struggled to keep up with the email traffic on the issue. With less than a week’s notice, more than 5,000 people showed up to protest the measure at a rally that will be long-remembered in the annals of state history.

It was not long after the rally that we discovered that yet another vile bill had been introduced. S.B. 1138, “Dying With Dignity” would have legalized assisted suicide. Yet again, outcry over the measure caused Lawlor and McDonald to pull the plug on the measure.

Last week, both “Dying with Dignity” and the Catholic Church bill were killed or “boxed” by Judiciary Committee at the insistence of Sen. John Kissel and Rep. Art O’Neil, the ranking Republicans on the committee.

However, the public hearing on H.B. 6452, the transgender bill continued as scheduled. And yet again Judiciary Committee members were open in their disrespect to pro-family advocates. One, Rep. Gary Holder-Winfield (D-New Haven) wrote on Twitter, “Peter Wolfgang, my favorite (sarcasm), is testifying on the transgender bill.”

Yet the reality is that some Judiciary Committee members are extremely disrespectful towards those who testify. This disrespect goes to show the degree to which some legislators have lost touch with the general public. It is a situation akin to that which existed in our town government during the Tallarita administration, in which the public was frequently bullied

Peter Wolfgang has called on House Speaker Chris Donovan and Senate President Donald Williams to remove Lawlor and McDonald from the chairmanship of the Judiciary Committee. This is a move that is long overdue. For far too long, these lawmakers have used their perch atop that committee to advance their anti-family, anti-Catholic agenda over the objections of ordinary people- Republicans and Democrats alike.

In addition to removing Lawlor and McDonald, Donovan and Williams also need to look at term limits for committee chairs. The general populace is unaware of the influential role that these committee chairs play in the legislative process. They are the secret power brokers at the Capitol, possessing the power to prevent legislation from ever seeing the light of day. This is one of the major reasons why Connecticut has become a plutocracy. Legislators come and go, but the committee chairs stay the same. The purpose of having a citizen legislature is to prevent long-term concentrations of power. The imposition of term limits would signify a return to these populist roots.

 

Concession Rejection Exposes Teachers’ Union Greed: Anticipated Layoffs Have Roots In Controversial Contract

Concession Rejection Exposes Teachers’ Union Greed

Anticipated Layoffs Have Roots In Controversial Contract

James Bailey Brislin
The Carpet City Chronicle

The Enfield Press, March 19, 2009

“If we were to simply do nothing and let this crisis manage us, the tax burden for an Enfield taxpayer would need to increase by 13.4 percent. In today’s economic climate, I do not believe that the residents and businesses of Enfield can afford any tax increase.“
—Scott Kaupin, Mayor of Enfield

“I believe that until the Democratic Party breaks ties with the teachers unions, we are not going to see the true reform in this country that we need.“
—Michelle Rhee, Chancellor of the DC Public Schools

Recent weeks have been marked by sobering news for Enfield residents. Anticipated cost increases and revenue decreases have left the town facing a deficit of more than $10 million in its 2009-2010 budget.

Last Tuesday, Mayor Scott Kaupin and Council Minority Leader Patrick Crowley appeared at a Board of Education meeting to tell the Board that it must cut $6 million in expenses to close the deficit. Kaupin and Crowley informed the Board that this deficit was a function of the global economic crisis and that they could not raise taxes by the 13.4% needed to fill the gap. Rather the deficit would be closed by unfortunate, yet necessary budget cuts.

Kaupin and Crowley are to be commended for approaching the issue in a bipartisan manner. Petty partisan politics must not obscure the pursuit of the common good, particularly in this time of global crisis.

In the face of challenges unseen in generations, Americans are making unprecedented sacrifices for the sake of the common good. Many have agreed to pay cuts and furlough days in hopes that these measure will save their jobs and the jobs of their coworkers. Others find themselves in the unemployment lines.

In the hope of preserving jobs, the Town Council and Board of Education have sought wage and benefit concessions from employees in all bargaining units. Wanting to save jobs, many of these unions have agreed to modest concessions. Generally, these unions have agreed to forgo their raises and take several furlough days in light of the economic circumstances facing the town.

For the Board of Education, potential cuts include a school closure, redistricting, larger class sizes, and teacher layoffs. Given the serious cuts anticipated in the education budget, it was disappointing to learn of the Enfield Teacher’s Association’s unwillingness to make any wage or benefit concessions to the Board of Education.

Last Thursday, Republican and Democratic leaders of the Board of Education and the Town Council met with representatives of the ETA to discuss a last best offer for concessions. The bipartisan proposal rejected by the union included a wage freeze, a step freeze, and five furlough days. Together these measures would have yielded a cost savings of $2.9 million. This is substantial money- particularly when your goal is the closure of a $10 million budget deficit.

It was made clear to the union that a failure to make concessions will likely result in the layoff of 50-65 teachers. Nonetheless, the ETA executive board has persisted in its refusal to grant concessions.

Where is the spirit of union brotherhood? Why does the ETA think that they need not make sacrifices comparable to those being offered by other bargaining units in town?

Officials at the National Education Association and Connecticut Education Association want a unified front in the denial of concessions, even if it means the layoff of union members. As a consequence, the ETA’s executive board refused to submit the concession request to a democratic vote of the membership. Undoubtedly, they feared that their rank-and-file would put the interests of fellow union members in Enfield ahead of national negotiating strategies and directives from political apparatchiki in Washington and Hartford.

This incident dramatically illustrates what I have long argued: unionism has declined because unions have ceased to represent the concerns and values of rank and file workers. Instead, they have become a protection racket in which dues are funneled into the coffers of the Democratic Party and national union organizations in Washington, DC. Instead of representing family values, unions have abandoned Catholic allies and in favor of an unholy alliance with the abortion industry and the homosexual lobby.

The seniority system used to determine the order in which employees are let go has tarnished the reputation of unions in the eyes of young people. By refusing concessions, it is cannibalizing its young. Why would a young man wants to join a union if it is run by folks that they would sooner strip him of his job than make modest sacrifices for the general good? What kind of a “team” is that?

ETA President Mary Lombardo’s comments in The Journal Inquirer show the degree to which she and her fellow union bosses are tone-deaf to changing times. “We are all feeling the pinch as well”, she said. How are members feeling the pinch? Now that the price of gasoline has markedly decreased, there really is not much for her members to complain about. Her claim rings hollow in comparison to the plight of the unemployed and underemployed. She should try telling that to the young men and women who will soon find themselves without teaching jobs- ‘you don’t have a job because we’re feeling the pinch’.

More outrageous is her assertion that, “We feel we negotiated in good faith.” Nothing could be farther from the truth. Her union’s controversial contract was a corrupt bargain rammed through the Board of Education and Town Council in the waning days of the Tallarita administration.

The chief negotiator for the Council was Councilman William “Red” Edgar (D-District 2), a former Enfield police union president. By appointing Edgar to lead the negotiation, the Tallarita administration left the impression that they desired a negotiation in which the interests of labor would be preferred to those of management.

The contract was ratified by a party line vote, in which Democrats supported it and Republicans opposed it, reflecting the partisan and polarized tone of the Tallarita era.

Documents obtained from the State Elections Enforcement Commission shed additional light on the circumstances surrounding the 2007 ratification of the Enfield Teachers’ Association’s three-year-contract. These documents show that the Enfield Democratic Town Committee failed to report a $1,000 campaign contribution made by the Enfield Teachers’ Association PAC days after the ratification of their controversial three-year contract.

The Enfield Teachers Association operates a political action committee known as the Enfield Teachers Association PAC. The PAC has provided the union with a channel by which it can funnel money to political candidates and committees, including the Enfield Democratic Town Committee. By law, the PAC is required to submit quarterly campaign finance filings to the State Elections Enforcement Commission.

The ETA PAC’s filing for the fourth quarter lists a campaign contribution of $1,000 to the “Enfield Democratic Committee”. The check is dated 10-31-2007, two days following the ratification of the contract by the Democrat-controlled Council. Clearly, this creates the appearance of a quid pro quo- that the ETA contract would be ratified in exchange for a campaign contribution.

An ETA contribution to the Enfield Democratic Town Committee should appear on the EDTC’s campaign filings as a receipt. However, the EDTC has failed to report this contribution on its filing for the period beginning 10/24/2007 and ending 12/31/2007. It cannot be found in any filings for the following period. Nor was it reported in any amendment filed with SEEC.

This is an extreme impropriety. The purpose of the quarterly campaign finance filing process is to provide citizens with transparency about campaign contributions and receipts. How could the EDTC “lose” or “forget” about a $1,000 check- the largest contribution made during that election cycle? Such an assertion seems disingenuous at best and mendacious at worst.

Undoubtedly this generous contribution helped fund the Democrats’ election-eve attack ads against now-Deputy Mayor Ken Nelson Jr. There is some tragedy to the use of union funds to spread calumny and falsehood, as education is a profession dedicated to the pursuit and transmission of truth in all forms.

However, the greatest irony of this story is the role that this contract is now playing in the anticipated layoff of dozens of teachers. By refusing to concede the raises secured with thirty pieces of silver, Mary Lombardo and the ETA bosses are killing the careers of their fellow teachers with a poison of their own making.

James Bailey Brislin is a member of the Enfield Republican Town Committee. The views and opinions expressed in this column are his own. CarpetCityChronicle@gmail.com.

 

Audio of Testimony by Deacon David Reynolds and Peter Wolfgang Against S.B. 899

Earlier today, Peter Wolfgang, the Executive Director of the Family Institute of Connecticut addressed Catholics and Christians gathered in Hartford to protest S.B. 1098, the Lawlor-McDonald bill to wrest control of parishes away from pastors and bishops. In his remarks, Peter Wolfgang suggested that S.B. 1098 was a smokescreen for S.B. 899 the bill codifying the State Supreme Court ruling in the Kerrigan Case. Moreover, he added that the public hearing was not televised by CTN… and that he saw a repeat of the anti-Catholic sentiments expressed to Brian Brown in 2007.

 

Photos Of The Hartford Tea Party

Photos Of Friday’s Tea Party In Hartford

These photos were taken at the Tea Party held Friday to protest the “American Recovery and Reinvestment Act” AKA the porkulus. (Photo / James Bailey Brislin

 

Sunday Liquor: Campaign Filings Document Extensive Liquor Contributions To Colapietro

James Bailey Brislin
The Carpet City Chronicle

The Enfield Press, February 26, 2009

“Government is a trust, and the officers of the government are trustees; and both the trust and the trustees are created for the benefit of the people.“
—Henry Clay

“Public officers are the servants and agents of the people, to execute laws which the people have made and within the limits of a constitution which they have established.“
—Grover Cleveland

Documents on file with the State Elections Enforcement Commission illustrate an influential state senator’s ties to the liquor industry. Campaign finance filings show that Senator Thomas Colapietro (D-Bristol), the powerful chairman of the General Law Committee, has accepted thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from liquor distributors, retailers, and lobbyists.

Colapietro has extensively benefited from contributions made by liquor retailers associated with the Connecticut Package Store Association (CPSA) and Caroll Hughes, their executive director and lobbyist. Campaign finance records dating back as far as the fourth quarter of 2001 show Colapietro receiving extensive contributions from CPSA officers, liquor stores all over the state, and Hughes. The CPSA is an anti-Sunday liquor sales trade group, representing less then half the package store owners in the state. However, they are among the most vocal up at the Capitol.

This is due in no small part to their retention of Hughes, an experienced Capitol lobbyist who boasts on his website about running, “the first independently established lobbying firm in Connecticut.” Hughes’s client base includes police chiefs, liquor dealers, Catholic hospitals, and trade associations. According to sources within the Capitol, Hughes is a close associate of Colapietro, who wields immense power as chairman of the General Law committee.

Whenever a bill opposing the interests of CPSA comes under consideration in the legislature, Hughes trots out the same old lines. In 2006, a bill was considered to allow package store owners to pass discounts onto their consumers. Hughes and CPSA representatives were among the most vocal opponents. In oral testimony, he expressed his belief that thee bill would probably put 200-250 stores out of business. He stated, “This bill has every earmark to destruction of Connecticut’s liquor industry.” This quote is laughable when juxtaposed against his quote against Sunday liquor sales in The Hartford Courant, “The cost just to keep a store open to try to stay competitive could put about 200 stores out of business, he said. ‘We don’t believe there is any extra revenue from any stores being open a seventh day,’ Hughes said. Whenever a bill threatening the anti-free enterprise agenda of CPSA is brought under consideration, it threatens to close at least two-hundred stores. The overuse of this line makes one wonder whether Caroll Hughes is the boy who cried wolf.

For years, both Colapietro and Hughes have profited handsomely from this association. Hughes has gained the ready assistance of a legislator sympathetic to the interests of his lobbying clients. Meanwhile, Colapietro has benefited handsomely from campaign contributions funneled by Hughes and the trade groups represented by him.

For example, Colapietro’s filing from the fourth quarter of 2001 shows several thousand dollars in contributions by liquor interests, including a $250 contribution by CPSA. During the same quarter, Colapietro received $200 in contributions from the “Life Underwriters PAC”. Caroll Hughes is listed as the PAC treasurer. Additionally, Hughes made a $300 personal contribution to Colapietro’s campaign committee. His wife, Jean Cronin, donated $200. What is extraordinary is that this is ordinary.

Nary an election cycle goes by without the liquor lobby making substantial contributions to Colapietro. In the most recent cycle, Colapietro received more than $2500 in contributions from liquor stores from outside his district and his region. Why would liquor retailers from East Lyme, Vernon, Marlborough, and Tolland contribute to Colapietro’s campaign, except to garner the support of the chairman of the General Law Committee?

It is Colapietro’s staunch opposition to Sunday liquor sales that brings these multitudinous contributions into stark contrast. It is not illegal for Colapietro to accept campaign contributions from liquor dealers located throughout the state. However, it creates an appearance of impropriety, particularly given his role in single-handedly stopping legislation legalizing Sunday liquor sales.

As the Co-Chairman of the General Law Committee, Colapietro controls which items appear on the committee’s agenda. Colapietro has used procedural tactics to prevent the Sunday liquor sales bill from emerging from committee for a full floor vote. It is an undemocratic concentration of power, that has put the interests of a vocal minority of liquor stores and their lobbyists ahead of consumers and the common good.

 

Kissel Pays His Dues to Working Families: Paid Sick Leave Bill Would Increase Labor Costs, Hinder Job Growth

James Bailey Brislin
The Carpet City Chronicle

The Enfield Press, February 19, 2009

“It sends a message to the entire country that Connecticut is not a business-friendly state… [o]f course, we’d love to be able to give everybody 50 sick days a year. But the reality is we can’t.“
—State Senator Dan Debicella (R-Shelton)

Last week, state lawmakers unveiled a bill that would require businesses with more than fifty employees to provide paid sick leave. The proposed bill is a poorly designed, ill-advised measure that will hurt businesses in a time of unprecedented economic crisis.

It is supported by a coalition of left-wing groups that include the Working Families Party, ACORN, the Connecticut Citizen Action Group, the Connecticut chapter of the National Organization for Women, the Permanent Commission on the Status of Women, and a number of labor unions. Its chief legislative exponents include State Sen. Edith Prague (D-Columbia)- an avowed socialist, and our own State Senator John A. Kissel (R-Enfield).

The measure is staunchly opposed by the Connecticut Business and Industry Association (CBIA) and the Connecticut State Council of the Society for Human Resource Management (CT-SHRM).

If approved, the measure would require employers to provide one hour of paid sick leave for every forty hours of work. Put another way, it would effectively raise real wage rates by 2.5%. For a worker making the Connecticut minimum wage of $8.00 per hour, that is $0.20 per hour. That may not seem much… but for someone working forty hours a week, fifty-two weeks a year, that is an annual benefit of $416. Again, that may not seem like much. But for an employer with one-hundred employees, that adds up to an annual cost of $41,600. That’s enough money to hire an additional employee with benefits.

It is counter-cyclical to raise wages in the middle of a recession. In a recession, wages should naturally decrease to adjust to the reduced cost of goods and services. During the 1930’s, the government lengthened and aggravated the Great Depression by implementing policies that artificially propped up wage rates. Although this boosted the real value of compensation, it also increased the unemployment rate.

This bill would disproportionately affect a population whose wages cannot adjust downward. As a consequence, hiring would decrease, particularly in the retail and service sectors. In effect, this would reduce employment opportunities for those at the lowest rung of the economic ladder.

We live in an age in which the mantra is, “jobs, jobs, jobs”. Given that reality, it seems counterintuitive to push a measure that would hinder the expansion of payrolls.

Perhaps the larger reality at play here is the death of employer paternalism. Traditional healthcare and retirement benefit plans have become a major liability to corporations and government alike. Exhibit A is the degree to which legacy healthcare costs have impacted the costs structures of the Detroit Three automakers. New businesses, generally small businesses, need the agility to structure compensation and benefit plans free from government meddling. This measure would deter small businesses from expanding beyond fifty employees, as they would now become responsible for an unfunded “paid sick leave” mandate.

No other state has implemented a measure like this. There could not be a worse time to embark upon this experiment, particularly given the overall economic climate. Businesses are struggling to avoid layoffs and keep their doors open. This is no time for a measure that would increase labor costs and impede employment growth.

Many have been mystified by Senator Kissel’s support for this measure, as he is usually a Republican stalwart. However, a closer examination of the political scene yields some clues as to why Kissel is co-sponsoring legislation with Edith Prague.

In order to understand these political dynamics, it is necessary to comprehend the nature of The Working Families Party. The Working Families Party is a front for a number of labor organizations seeking to push the Democratic Party leftward. They generally endorse Democratic candidates, but withhold their endorsement when the Democrat candidate will not support their left-wing labor agenda.

Working Families gained a major boost in the ascension of House Speaker Chris Donovan (D-Meriden), a union organizer. Donovan’s more moderate predecessor, James Amman (D-Milford) clamped down on the anti-business legislation of the Loony Left, such as the paid sick days bill. However, Amman’s retirement has paved the way for the passage of this legislation.

The Working Families party explains its cross-endorsement strategy on its website, “Jane Doe knows she owes her victory to the Working Families Party-she couldn’t have won without those additional votes. She is held accountable to our agenda, (fair wages, universal healthcare, affordable housing, and so on) because she knows if she doesn’t support the issues we care about, we won’t support her the next time.”

In the 2008 recent election, Senator Kissel actively sought the endorsement the Working Families Party. They endorsed Kissel over George Colli, a conservative Democrat from Suffield. That endorsement played a crucial role in Kissel’s electoral victory. It gave him a second ballot line on which to run and yielded 2,161 votes. That is 49% of the 4,336 vote margin by which he beat Colli.

These are the dynamics at play on the paid sick leave issue. Having secured the endorsement of Working Families and triumphed over Colli, Kissel now must pay his dues to them. Working Families now expects him to support their legislation, even if it means throwing conservative principles to the curb. Then again, why should we concern ourselves with mere principles when electoral victory is at stake?

James Bailey Brislin is a member of the Enfield Republican Town Committee. The views and opinions expressed in this column are his own. CarpetCityChronicle@gmail.com.

 

Welcome To Enfield!

 

This sign greets Enfield visitors traveling down Route 5 from Longmeadow, Massachusetts.

 

Sunday Liquor: For Colapietro Protectionism Trumps Consumers, Open Government, Rule of Law

Sunday Liquor: For Colapietro, Protectionism Trumps Consumers, Open Government, Legal Precedent

James Bailey Brislin
The Carpet City Chronicle

The Enfield Press, February 13, 2009

“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.“
—Thomas Jefferson

Last Thursday’s column, regarding the legalization of Sunday liquor sales, provoked a firestorm of controversy. On Thursday, Bristol Press political reporter Steve Collins featured it on his blog. This provoked a great number of heated comments both on Collins’ blog and on my blog. Many of them came from liquor dealers and Bristol residents frustrated with the stonewalling of State Senator Thomas Colapietro (D-Bristol).

Over the weekend, major media outlets have picked up on the topic. The Journal Inquirer, The Hartford Courant, and Fox 61 all produced pieces about Sunday liquor sales. On Monday, Journal Inquirer managing editor Chris Powell savaged Colapietro in his column stating, “The liquor lobby’s main tool at the state Capitol is state Sen. Thomas Colapietro, D-Bristol, co-chairman of the General Law Committee, who won’t allow a hearing on the Sunday sales bill. Colapietro claims to be the tribune of working people even as his Internet site boasts of the many honors he has received from the Connecticut Package Stores Association. Working people who can’t buy a six-pack on Sunday should know whom not to toast.”

In an interview with The Bristol Press, Colapietro made some rather tart remarks about my column and about Dominic Alaimo, the Enfield liquor dealer spearheading the Sunday sales push, “Colapietro also assailed an Enfield blogger, James Bailey Brislin, who accused him of telling Enfield to ‘drop dead’ because of the senator’s opposition to opening the door to Sunday liquor store sales. He said the blogger, a GOP town committee member in Enfield, listened only to ‘one little weasel’ for his information and got it wrong.” The following day, Colapietro admitted that he was wrong to label Alaimo a ‘weasel’. However, he has yet to personally apologize to Alaimo.

In the course of his interview with The Bristol Press, Colapietro attempted to defend his opposition to Sunday liquor sales, “He [Colapietro] said he feels sorry for some store owners near the state borders who might lose some sales on Sunday, but it’s his responsibility to answer to the majority of package store owners across Connecticut. ‘My job is to be fair,’ Colapietro said. ‘We live in a democracy.’”

In his response, Colapietro shows that he has forgotten why he was elected to the State Senate. He is not the elected representative of Caroll Hughes and the Connecticut Package Store Association (CPSA). The voters of the 31st State Senate District elected Colapietro to represent their interests in Hartford.

In the 31st State Senate District and every other State Senate District in Connecticut, liquor consumers far outnumber the package store owners. If governing in a democracy were a matter of pure mathematics, Colapietro should be standing on the side of liquor consumers, who will benefit from the convenience of legal Sunday sales.

The plight of the consumer has thus far been grossly overlooked in the discussion of Sunday liquor sales. Ultimately, package stores exist in service to their customers, not their owners. It should be eminently clear that consumers benefit from legalized Sunday liquor sales. By opposing the legalization of Sunday liquor sales, Colapietro makes consumers play second fiddle to protectionist interests.

Colapietro claims to be standing up for democracy. Yet scrutiny of his conduct shows it to be anything but democratic. Colapietro refuses to allow the bill to come to an up-or-down floor vote. In an interview with Fox 61, he said, “I just don’t want to listen again. I don’t want to put my committee through a few hours of listening to the same stories that we’ve been hearing.”

If Colapietro were really interested in following a democratic process, he would allow his thirty-five other colleagues in the State Senate to vote on the legislation. He was elected to be one of thirty-six equals, not the king of the General Assembly. Certainly it is antithetical to the principles of democracy and open government for one member of a legislative body to single-handedly stifle speech and debate about legislation.

Colapietro’s supposed respect for democratic principles is contradicted by his blatant disregard for the rule of law. Legal precedent makes it all but certain that this law will be overturned in litigation. In Fair Cadillac-Oldsmobile v. Bailey, the State Supreme Court ruled that laws banning Sunday auto sales were unconstitutional. Specifically, they violated the due process and equal protection rights of the auto dealers. Put simply, the State could close all businesses for a day of common rest. However, it was unconstitutional to allow some businesses to open and force others to close. The precedent in that case makes it all but certain that liquor dealers would prevail in court. Repealing the Sunday sales law would save the hassle of costly, time-consuming litigation for all parties.

No longer can we allow 18th century nostalgia to trump 21st century economic realities. We now live an open society. Our states have porous borders and our country is engaged in unprecedented levels of global trade and global interaction. We cannot resist this openness or believe we can revert to the ways of the past. It has brought with it unprecedented competition and unprecedented opportunities.

In order to succeed, businesses need the agility to pursue opportunities free from the shackles of Big Government. Never has there been a worst time for protectionism and mercantilism- in any form. At its core, the law prohibiting Sunday sales is a protectionist measure. This issue- Sunday liquor sales- effectively illustrates the opportunities and challenges that come hand in hand with this new economy. Now is the time for Connecticut to embrace this new economic reality and legalize Sunday liquor sales.

 

Sunday Liquor Sales News and Commentary Trail

Blue Laws: Easing Up on Sunday Liquor Sales
http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/national/2008/07/08/easing-up-on-sunday-liquor-sales.html

Shop Owners Revive Fight Against Blue Laws
http://www.wfsb.com/news/18609793/detail.html

Sunday Suds In CT
http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/Sunday-Suds-in-CT.html
http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/local/Sunday_Suds__Hartford.html

Bristol State Senator to Enfield: Drop Dead!
http://carpetcity.wordpress.com/2009/02/04/sunday-liquor-sales/

Enfield Liquor Stores Don’t Like Colapietro
http://bristolnews.blogspot.com/2009/02/enfield-liquor-stores-dont-like.html

Colapietro Asks For Fairness
http://bristolnews.blogspot.com/2009/02/colapietro-asks-for-fairness.html

Colapietro Angry At Blog Commenters
http://ctlocalpolitics.net/2009/02/07/colapietro-angry-at-blog-commenters/

Liquor Store Owners Want To Sell On Sunday, Will Bring Court Action If Legislature Doesn’t Act
http://www.journalinquirer.com/articles/2009/02/09/connecticut/doc498ce8491c47f531106312.txtC

Liquor May Be Sold On Sundays
http://www.fox61.com/pages/video/?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=3425498

Proposal To Allow Sunday Liquor Sales Back On Table
http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-liquor0209.artfeb09,0,6520338.story

Sunday Liquor Sales Makes ‘Cents’ For State
http://media.www.dailycampus.com/media/storage/paper340/news/2009/02/10/Commentary/Sunday.Liquor.Sales.Make.cents.For.State-3621851.shtml

GOP Lawmakers Propose Sweeping Budget Cuts
http://www.courant.com/news/local/hcu-gopbudgetplan-0211,0,5581047.story

Sunday Booze Sales Stir Debate
http://www.norwichbulletin.com/news/regional/x114013312/Sunday-booze-sales-stir-debate

Sunday Liquor Sales Proposed In Conn.
http://www.wwlp.com/dpp/news/wwlp_local_sundayliquorsalesproposedinconn200902091530

Enough Piling On DCF; And A Liquor Lobby Tool
http://www.journalinquirer.com/articles/2009/02/11/chris_powell/doc4990482084e36287156874.txt

Editorial: Sunday Alcohol Prohibition Needs To Go
http://www.registercitizen.com/articles/2009/02/13/opinion/doc499505425fcb9448609991.txt

Owners Of Liquor Stores Disagree With Legislators On Having Sunday Sales
http://www.bristolpress.com/articles/2009/02/21/news/doc49a0c09072ace834737379.txt

Package Stores Protest Against Sundays— Proposal of 7th Day Liquor Sales
http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/news_wtnh_hartford_package_store_owners_protest_200902251653_rev1

Lawmakers Consider Lifting Ban on Sunday Liquor Sales
http://www.rep-am.com/News/396873.txt

THE SUBURBAN LIFE: A Dry Sunday in Connecticut
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/19/opinion/19thu4.html

Last Of The Blue Laws: PACKAGE STORES – Open Them on Sundays
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/editorials/hc-alcohol.art.artfeb22,0,501710.story

Will the Recession Doom the Last Sunday Blue Laws?
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1880340,00.html

Battle Brews Over Booze Sales
http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/state_capitol/battle_brews_over_booze_sales.php

Sunday Liquor: Campaign Filings Document Extensive Liquor Contributions To Colapietro
http://carpetcity.wordpress.com/2009/02/25/sunday-liquor-contributions/

Renewed Debate on Sunday Alcohol Sales
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/01/nyregion/connecticut/01liquorct.html

NBC 30’s CT Newsmakers: Tom Monahan Interviews Tallarita, Jarmoc, Alaimo About Sunday Liquor Sales
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/k7n887bkTT6NesY8u2

 

Bristol State Senator to Enfield: Drop Dead!

Political Intrigue and Lobbying Impede Efforts to Legalize Sunday Liquor Sales

James Bailey Brislin
The Carpet City Chronicle

The Enfield Press, February 5, 2009

“When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators.“
—P.J. O’Rourke

This year, Connecticut liquor dealers are mounting a strong push to legalize Sunday liquor sales. They are seeking to repeal one of few remaining blue laws in Connecticut, prohibiting Sunday liquor sales at package stores and supermarkets. In the course of these efforts, border-town liquor dealers have locked horns with a powerful state senator and a lobbyist representing liquor dealers in the interior of the state.

The push to legalize Sunday liquor sales is being led by liquor dealers and elected officials from Enfield. Liquor dealers here in town face stiff competition from stores in Longmeadow, East Longmeadow, and Springfield, where taxes are lower and Sunday liquor sales are legal. The two other states on Connecticut’s border- New York and Rhode Island also permit Sunday liquor sales.

These efforts have provoked a fight with liquor dealers in the interior of the state who do not face the same competitive pressures faced by those in border towns. They are represented at the Capitol by a liquor lobbyist named Carol Hughes.

Bills to legalize Sunday liquor sales have been introduced by Senator John A Kissel (R-Enfield) and Rep. Kathy Tallarita (D-Enfield). However, lobbying and political machinations have thus far prevented them from being brought to an up-and-down vote.

The bill to allow Sunday liquor sales remains bottled up in the general law committee. According to a recent Channel 3 report on the topic, “State Sen. Thomas Colapietro (D-Bristol) said he thinks that if stores have the option, smaller establishments won’t survive because people will prefer the stores that stay open all week long. ‘I don’t believe for one minute the state’s going to make any more revenue, so why make people work when they don’t want to- they’re legitimate business people,’ he said.”

Colapietro’s statement illustrates the lengths that advocates for Sunday sales have been forced to go to, in order to plead their case. It is not enough that Sunday liquor sales will increase profits to struggling local businesses and increase the Gross State Product. Liquor dealers have been forced to plead their case on the basis of increased tax revenue to Connecticut’s bloated state and municipal government system.

How can Colapietro be so certain that there will be no revenue increase? Has he ever seen the many cars with Connecticut plates in the parking lots of Massachusetts liquor stores on Sundays? Besides, why should Hartford political hacks be calling the shots about when businesses open and close? Aren’t business owners best positioned to know when it is in their interest to open and close? If so, shouldn’t they be able to choose when they open and close? Who is Colapietro to stand in the way of this bill? If he is so certain about his position, why doesn’t he have the courage to let the bill out of his committee for an up-or-down floor vote?

If we accept the reasoning expressed by Colapietro, consumers will prefer 7-day-a-week liquor stores in Massachusetts to their six-day-a-week counterparts in border towns like Enfield. In essence, Colapietro is condemning liquor dealers in Enfield and other border towns to struggle and fail in the face of stiffer competition from liquor stores in Massachussets, New York, and Rhode Island.

By not permitting Sunday liquor sales, lawmakers are flaunting the rule of law and inviting a lawsuit. Back in the 1990’s, the Connecticut Supreme Court overturned the blue law prohibiting Sunday auto sales. The precedent set by that case strongly suggests that the rights of liquor dealers would be vindicated by litigation. It is wasteful to force liquor dealers to pursue their case via costly litigation. Moreover, this litigation would be an unnecessary drain on the coffers of our already cash-strapped state.

Nor is there a moral issue at stake in this case. Connecticut state law allows restaurants, bars, and taverns to serve liquor on Sundays. Surely, if there is no moral problem with Sunday liquor service at dining establishments, there can be no moral problem with Sunday liquor sales at package stores.

This is a matter that should upset all of us. We are living through a period of unprecedented economic crisis. It is no time to continue the rule of protectionist blue laws that stifle competition and harm Enfield businesses. The package stores in Enfield are mom-and-pop businesses that operate on thin margins. In these lean economic times, we should be giving them the opportunities they need to flourish and prosper, not forcing them to fight with one hand tied behind their backs.

James Bailey Brislin is a member of the Enfield Republican Town Committee. The views and opinions expressed in this column are his own. CarpetCityChronicle@gmail.com.

 

Politics In The New Year: Issues and Legislation To Watch For In 2009

James Bailey Brislin
The Carpet City Chronicle

The Enfield Press, January 8, 2008

“Religious liberty is enshrined in the First Amendment and cannot be trespassed upon lightly, and certainly not by abortion zealots. Those who support FOCA must realize that if Catholic hospitals are ever required to perform abortions, the bishops will close every one of them; no one would be hurt more than the poor.“
—William Donohue, President of the Catholic League

A new year has dawned upon us and it brings with it a new administration and a new political agenda.

However, politics remains subject to the old adage , “The more things change, the more they stay the same.” A prime example of this is the large number of Clinton administration staffers who have been tapped to serve in Barack Obama’s “change” administration. Although the guard may change, the problems facing the country remain the same. Obama will be forced to exercise leadership on issues that President George W. Bush has addressed as a caretaker.

Watch for the following issues and legislation:

Senate Controversies To Abound

Expect to see continued controversy over contested and vacant U.S. Senate seats.

In Minnesota, Al Franken currently leads recounts by 50 votes. The recount has been marred by a number of irregularities, including the double counting of some ballots and the disqualification of absentee ballots. It is anticipated that Senator Norm Coleman to contest these irregularities in court, possibly leading to a prolonged period of vacancy.

Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid has stated his intent to bar Roland Burris from assuming Barack Obama’s Senate seat. This issue has the potential to create legal headaches for the Democrats, as Burris has indicated that he will sue to be seated. Burris appears to have the law on his side. Numerous legal precedents, including the case of Rep. Adam Clayton Powell, support the argument that Constitutional qualifications (e.g. citizenship, residency, age, etc.) are the only grounds on which Congress can refuse to seat a duly elected or duly appointed official.

The appointment of Burris by disgraced Gov. Rod Blagojevich (D-IL) has been a setback and an embarrassment to Illinois Democrats. The Democrat-controlled legislature declined to set-up a special election to replace Obama, largely to prevent a potential Republican victory. The Burris appointment is a poison pill that contains within it the seeds of revenge. Blagojevich’s enemies now find their reputations stained by rank incompetence and mismanagement. Faced with near-certain demise, Blagojevich’s cunningly planted land-mine will bloody Harry Reid and has already made fools of his legislative enemies.

Meanwhile, controversy has ensued about the prospective appointment of Caroline Kennedy to Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat. Kennedy’s biggest cheerleader is New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who believes that the appointment of an Obama confidant would strengthen the City’s ability to obtain federal aid. However, the potential Kennedy appointment has left much of New York’s Democratic establishment feeling miffed. They are incensed at the idea of an Obama loyalist succeeding Clinton and question Kennedy’s ability to win election in 2010. A weaker appointee will be challenged by Republican heavyweights like Long Island Rep. Peter King.

Controversial Legislation

Among the pieces of controversial legislation expected to emerge from the Obama administration are two standouts.

The first of these is the poorly named Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), also known as “Card Check”. The EFCA would dramatically change the unionization process to benefit Big Labor. It would eliminate the right to a secret ballot in union elections. As a consequence, if union representatives “persuade” enough employees to sign union cards, management is forced to recognize the union. Countless books and articles have documented the high-pressure intimidation tactics that unions use to get people to sign union cards. This coercive system stifles the conscience rights of workers and makes it easier for unions and management to retaliate against those who disagree with them.

If that were not enough, the card check bill would also force employers to accept a federally arbitrated contract, if they cannot come to an agreement within 120 days. This unfairly stifles the ability of companies to engage in collective bargaining. If labor does not like the offers being made by management, nothing stops them from striking. Likewise, management has every right to implement a lockout in the face of pie-in-the-sky union demands. However, government-imposed contracts are nothing more than an un-American form of socialist wage-fixing. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Workforce Fairness Institute are leading the charge against this measure.

The second controversial measure is the so-called Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA). This bill would eliminate every state restriction on abortion and foist abortions on Catholic hospitals. Even the most modest restrictions like mandatory abortion counseling and parental notification requirements would be overturned by FOCA. Additionally, it would overturn the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban. It would supercede the Hyde amendment, which banned taxpayer-funded abortions. Another provision would force states to allow non-physicians to perform abortions. Lastly, it would foist abortions on Catholic hospitals, impinging on their religious liberties. Chief opponents of FOCA include Americans United for Life the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

A third measure that will garner significant controversy is the second installment of the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP), better known as the Wall Street / Detroit bailout. By the time that Obama is inaugurated, the first $350 billion installment of the bailout will be near depletion. It is expected that Obama and his Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, will ask Congress to authorize the remaining $350 billion installment. Many of the Congressmen and Senators who initially voted for bailout did so because they believed that the stock market would collapse if they did not. In the face of the automaker bailout, anti-bailout sentiment has reached fever-pitch. Expect to see a number of previous supporters use the second installment as an opportunity to recant their support.

Economic Crisis, Wars Loom Large

The most significant issues Obama will face are the economic crisis and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The planned “economic stimulus” bill puts short-term gain ahead of long-term prosperity. A desperate attempt to avoid the downside of the business cycle, it pins recovery on government spending at a scale previously unseen. The “economic stimulus” strategy sets the stage for another bubble, which this time will be accompanied by rip-roaring inflation. Additionally, the measure would dramatically increase national indebtedness and further weaken the dollar.

Most people do not want to see another bubble; they want to see American return to long-term prosperity. The path to recovery involves three components: (1) tax cuts, (2) spending reductions, and (3) sound money. The final two measures are incredibly unpopular. The second prevents politicians from promising programs to buy votes. The third prevents government from inflating away its indebtedness. This is the hard medicine prescription. However, it is the only way to long-term prosperity.

Likewise, in the area of foreign policy, we must chart a judicious course. Our foreign policy should seek to achieve peace through strength and should be guided by non-interventionist principles. We should avoid a precipitous and de-stabilizing pullout from Iraq and Afghanistan. However, our activities in those countries must be guided by realism, prudence, and caution. We should endeavor to quickly complete our mission in the Middle East. To limit future involvement in the affairs of that region, we should move quickly to achieve energy independence by expanding all forms of energy production, particularly nuclear and natural gas. At all costs, we should avoid intervention in the current conflict between Israel and Palestine. We should continue to promote commerce and free trade with all nations and avoid attempts to engage in protectionism.

Expect this year to mark a renewed focus on domestic policy. The past two presidencies have been dominated by major foreign policy initiatives. With the economic crisis, we will see domestic policy debates of a kind that have not been seen in twenty years.

 

James Bailey Brislin is a member of the Enfield Republican Town Committee. The opinions expressed in this column are his own. Email: CarpetCityChronicle@gmail.com

 

For Healthcare Workers, An Early Christmas Present from the Bush Administration

James Bailey Brislin
The Carpet City Chronicle

The Enfield Press, December 24, 2008

“Your institution will be permitted to govern itself according to it’s own voluntary rules, without interference from the civil authority, whatever diversity of shade may appear in the religious opinions of our fellow citizens, the charitable objects of your institution cannot be indifferent to any; and it’s furtherance of the wholesome purposes of society…cannot fail to ensure it the patronage of the government it is under. Be assured it will meet all the protection which my office can give it.“
—Thomas Jefferson, to the Ursuline Sisters of New Orleans, 1804

“Over the past few years, we have seen a variety of efforts to force Catholic and other health care providers to perform or refer for abortions and sterilizations, including… efforts by state governments to undermine the conscience rights of health care providers.“
—Sr. Carol Keehan, President of the Catholic Health Association

“Health care providers shouldn’t have to check their consciences at the hospital door.“
—Admiral Joxel Garcia, M.D., Assistant Secretary of Health & Human Services

Last week, the Department of Heath and Human Services released new regulations protecting the conscience rights of healthcare workers.

The new rules clarify and strengthen healthcare workers’ rights to decline participation in morally objectionable procedures, such as abortion and sterilization.

Healthcare providers’ right to conscientious objection has been recognized by legislation dating back to the Church Amendments of the 1970’s. However, the new regulations now give those laws teeth, forcing medical institutions to certify compliance or risk the loss of federal funding.

These new regulations put the damper on a 2007 state law, which foisted the abortifacient Plan B on Catholic hospitals.

Of course, this has left Attorney General Richard Blumenthal in a tizzy. Blumenthal, a major ally of the abortion lobby, has filed a lawsuit to have the regulations overturned.

In recent months, Blumenthal has shown himself to be a staunch opponent of conscience rights. This is disappointing. Connecticut residents deserve an Attorney General who puts their civil and religious liberties ahead of personal ambitions and the agenda of the Loony Left.

These new regulations were prompted by laws like Connecticut’s Plan B Bill and deliberations within the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists that would have forced healthcare providers to choose between abortion and loss of hospital privileges.

The release of these guidelines closely follows the release of a new Vatican document on biomedical ethics that would have likely prompted a legal challenge to the Plan B Bill. This instruction, “On the Dignity of the Person”, categorically forbids Plan B and other morning-after pills.

One of the quotes at the top of the page is taken from a letter that President Jefferson wrote to an order of sisters running a hospital in the newly-acquired Louisiana Territory. In it, Jefferson promises them protection from government interference.

As many of you may recall, Enfield’s legislative delegation supported the Plan B Bill trampling the religious liberty of Catholic hospitals. To add insult to injury, the Democratic Attorney General is advancing the argument that “convenience” trumps conscience.

Of course, this begs the question, “How far has the apple fallen from the tree?” Thomas Jefferson founded the Democratic Party. Surely, Blumenthal, Jarmoc, and Tallarita have betrayed Jefferson’s promise. It says something sad about the “progress” of the Democratic Party when conscience rights are trampled to appease the abortion lobby.

HHS Secretary Mike Leavitt and his staff are to be commended for their efforts to protect the conscience rights of healthcare workers.

* * * * *

This weekend’s snowfall has certainly set the stage for a “White Christmas” here in Enfield. I hope that this Christmas proves to be a time of reflection, fellowship, prayer, and rejoicing. Merry Christmas to all!

James Bailey Brislin is a member of the Enfield Republican Town Committee. The opinions expressed in this column are his own. Email: CarpetCityChronicle@gmail.com

 

The Bridge Loan To Nowhere: When What’s Good for GM Is Bad for the Country

James Bailey Brislin
The Carpet City Chronicle

The Enfield Press, December 18, 2008

“For years I thought that what was good for our country was good for General Motors, and vice versa.“
—Charles Erwin Wilson, GM President 1941-1953

“This is a bridge loan to nowhere.“
—Senator Richard Shelby

Last week’s defeat of a proposed $14 billion automaker bailout is a triumph for the general public and good government advocates. The senators who defeated the bailout are to be commended for putting constituent interests ahead of powerful corporations and labor unions.

Earlier in the month, a combine of automakers, auto dealers, and autoworker union representatives appeared in Washington to request a $34 billion bridge loan from the federal government. This was the automakers’ second attempt at securing aid. Their previous request for $25 billion went up in flames following revelations that CEOs of the Detroit Three automakers had traveled to Washington in private jets.

The gutting of the Detroit Three did not happen overnight. Fundamentally, GM, Chrysler, and Ford are in their current position because of decades-long mismanagement.

Their first warning came during the Arab oil embargo of 1973. My parents and their contemporaries abandoned the “big boat” cars produced by Detroit for fuel-efficient imports. This failure to respond to market forces wrought by higher oil prices reinforced Detroit’s reputation for tone-deafness.

During the 1980’s the Detroit Three brands were damaged by persistent quality control problems. As a child, I remember being told, “Make sure you buy a car that was built on a Tuesday or a Wednesday.” Although many of the problems have been corrected by the introduction of robots and automation, GM, Chrysler, and Ford have yeoman’s work ahead of them in convincing people that their product quality is comparable to that of the Japanese automakers. The fact that many of my contemporaries rank the Detroit Three below Toyota, Honda, Nissan, and Volkswagen should be of particular concern.

However, there is a reason why Detroit avoided the economy market courted by foreign automakers. Detroit aggressively pursued opportunities in the luxury and SUV markets to deliver the profit margins needed to cover high operating costs. Luxury cars and SUVs selling for $30,000-$40,000 delivered substantially higher profits than economy cars. The cost of labor played a major role in this. Craven executives made bad deals with unions to buy labor peace. Eventually, these deals would contribute to the instability of the Detroit Three.

The average Big Three worker is paid $73.26 an hour in wages and benefits, while the average import worker is paid $44.20 in wages and benefits. Of that amount, cash wages are nearly comparable, generally ranging from $27-30 an hour. The principal difference is in the cost of healthcare, retirement, and legacy benefits.

Demand for SUVs was dulled by price spike that began following Hurricane Katrina and accelerated into 2008. Demand has been stifled by the credit crunch, as buyers found themselves unable to obtain the financing necessary to buy new vehicles. Rock-bottom consumer confidence further imperiled auto sales, as buyers found themselves clamping down on expenses.

This problem was aggravated by gross mismanagement. Poor cash management practices left automakers with a credit rating of “junk”. Declining demand for SUVs ended the gravy train funding gold-plated retirement and healthcare benefits.

If automakers are to be loaned money, taxpayer interests need to be protected. Automakers must make painful changes to planning, design, production, and distribution to return to profitability. All stakeholders: management, labor, stockholders, creditors, and dealers need to make sacrifices.

Senate negotiations showed that some stakeholders were more willing to make sacrifices than others. Senator Bob Corker (R-TN) attempted to negotiate a plan in which creditors would receive get 30 cents on the dollar and shares of common stock. Management would accept wage concessions, with Big Three CEOs working for $1 a year. The main sticking point in negotiations was that UAW officials refused to agree to a “date certain” for wage and benefit concessions. The UAW made clear that it would negotiate wage cuts prior to the expiration of its contract in 2012. This is why the bailout was voted down. The UAW showed that it was not serious about making the changes to return the Detroit Three to profitability.

I have consistently asserted that this bailout was a UAW bailout, not an automaker bailout. Corporate bigwigs and UAW officials saw a bailout as a shortcut to avoid the drubbing that would occur in bankruptcy court. Unfortunately, their intransigence effectively torpedoed a plan that was likely the best bet for avoiding a bankruptcy filing.

The Detroit Three could enter bankruptcy and emerge as profitable entities… at substantial cost to autoworkers, dealers, stockholders, and creditors. Under Chapter 11 Bankruptcy, the Detroit Three could have their contracts invalidated by a judge and negotiate new contracts.

Of course, what no one is talking about is where the money for a bailout will come from. Quite frankly there are three options: (1) future tax increases, (2) money borrowed from China, Saudi Arabia and other countries that really do not like us, or (3) the printing press. None of these are comfortable choices. I do not want to see future tax increases and do not want to see inflation. Neither do I want to see us become further indebted to unfriendly nations.

Free-market capitalism was one of the bedrock principles upon which America was founded. Corporate bailouts are a fundamental violation of this principle. Senators Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Bob Corker (R-TN), John Ensign (R-NV), and Jim DeMint (R-SC) showed leadership in rebuffing the automakers’ attempts to raid the public treasury.

James Bailey Brislin is a member of the Enfield Republican Town Committee. The views represented in this column are his own. Email: CarpetCityChronicle@gmail.com.

 

A Sentimental Journey: Christmas Parade, Tree Lighting Provoke Reflection

James Bailey Brislin
The Carpet City Chronicle

The Enfield Press, December 11, 2008

“For an affluent society, a further obstacle to an encounter with the living God lies in the subtle influence of materialism, which can all too easily focus the attention on the hundredfold, which God promises now in this time, at the expense of the eternal life which he promises in the age to come… Without God, who alone bestows upon us what we by ourselves cannot attain, our lives are ultimately empty.“
—Pope Benedict XVI

“In God we trust.“
—Motto of the United States

A blanket of snow and punishing wind did not dampen enthusiasm for the annual Christmas parade. The parade featured fire trucks from throughout the region decked up in Christmas lights. A Buildings & Grounds vehicle pulled along Santa and Mrs. Claus’s sleigh. The light poles of Thompsonville Village were decked up with snowflake lights.

Following the parade, a crowd gathered on the town green to sing some Christmas carols. Excitement was palpable as folks counted down to light the Christmas tree.

Also, on Sunday, Santa visited my neighborhood escorted by a couple fire trucks.

These two experiences conjured up sentimental memories of past Christmases. When I was a child, I always looked forward to having Santa visit on the fire engine. I was thrilled to see Santa… the lights and sirens of the fire engine simply added to the excitement. If that were not enough, Santa would give out candy. My parents would put a few bucks in the boot for charity.

In my teenage years, I participated in the carol sing as part of the JFK Chorale. Under the baton of Mr. Bungard, we sang a medley of traditional Christmas carols and a Hannukah song to honor those celebrating the Jewish Holidays. Traditions such as this give the town its distinctive character.

The Christmas Tree Lighting conjured up other memories. During my junior and senior years of college, I would camp out on the Ellipse with college buddies to get tickets to the White House Christmas tree lighting. That was an incredibly enjoyable experience! Of course, it was exciting to see President Bush… but there were always a number of first class musical acts. The “President’s Own” Marine Corps Band would play a number of patriotic and Christmas songs. This would be complemented by performances by contemporary recording artists. Many of the musical selections reflected the president’s Texas roots and taste for country music. Each state would also send a smaller Christmas tree to decorate the Ellipse. I always made a point of visiting the Connecticut state tree.

Although Enfield’s tree lighting lacks the glamour of the Rockefeller Center tree lighting and the excitement of the ceremony at the White House, it more than makes up for it in authenticity. Enfield’s ceremony is the real McCoy… organized by ordinary people to benefit a real community. We may not have national musical acts, but we have the gusto of people who love their neighbors. Visible on the town green were the aspirations, hopes, and fears of ordinary families.

In this year of economic turmoil, it is good for parents and children to set the troubles of the world aside to spend a few hours making merry.

However, the crumbling of corporations and investment portfolios should be a clarion call on why we need to Keep Christ in Christmas. We must place our trust in God and not in men.

Never was there a better year to remember what Christmas is ultimately about. It is not about receiving lots of gifts or lavish parties with colleagues, friends, and family. Indeed, the season of Advent, which immediately precedes Christmas is meant to be a time of prayer and penance. On Christmas, we celebrate the Nativity of the God who deigned to enter the world as a tiny baby, so that mankind could be redeemed by the sacrifice of the cross. He did not come to promise the perpetual progress of material fulfillment in this word, but oneness with the Godhead in the next.

 

Fire Commission Meets to Buy Parcel for New Station

On Monday, at 5PM, the Fire Commission will meet at the Thompsonville Fire Station to decide whether to purchase property for a new fire station.

Last I heard, they were eying the Little Country Store property, on Pearl Street.

According to land use records on file with The Town of Enfield, the parcel is owned by “TROIANO ANTHONY SR ETAL DBA ANTHONY TROIANO”.

The most recent property assessment occurred in 2006, at the height of the real estate bubble. According to that assessment, the property’s fair market value (FMV) is $308,500.

Thus, I would expect to see a sale price of $305-325k.

On an unrelated note, I wish that the  Thompsonville Fire Commission did more to publicize this meeting… publishing a legal notice is not enough.

With an issue like this, there really needs to be more public outreach… emails to the town list-server… press releases.

This is the legal notice that appeared in Friday’s paper:

Office of the Fire Commissioners
Thompsonville Fire District 2
Enfield, CT 06082

December 5, 2008

Mrs. Suzanne Olechnicki
Town Clerk
820 Enfield Street
Enfield, CT 06082

Mrs. Olechnicki,

May this letter serve as Notice of a Special Meeting to be held at Thompsonville Fire Department, 11 Pearl St on Monday, December 8, 2008 at 5pm. The Agenda is as follows:

1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Executive Session:
• Discussion of Possible Selection of a Site/ Purchase of Real Estate Property/ Documents Exempt from Disclosure under Conn. Gen. Stat. 1-210 (Appraisal and Property Feasibility Evaluation Report)
4. Possible Action Concerning Executive Session – Possible Purchase of Real Estate Property/ Authorization to Execute a Purchase Contract.

 

Smyth Breakfast Feeds 600, Raises $14,000

James Bailey Brislin
The Carpet City Chronicle

The Enfield Press, December 4, 2008

“Charity begins at home and justice begins next door.“
—Charles Dickens

“But if any man have not care of his own, and especially of those of his house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.“
—I Timothy 5:8

“For of the soul the body form doth take: For soul is form, and doth the body make.“
—Edmund Spenser

Last Saturday’s pancake breakfast to benefit Sam Smyth was a success by all measures.

When I arrived at St. Bernard’s, shortly after 9:00, only a handful of open spots were left in the parking lot. Rows of tables spanning the length of Fitzmaurice Hall were filled with people feasting on pancakes and sausages. When the totals were tallied, nearly 600 people had been fed and over $14,000 had been raised.

The breakfast was a grand reunion of sorts- with many people commenting that they had run into folks that they had not seen in months or years.

In a broader sense, the pancake breakfast was a window into the soul of our community.

In Enfield, when something needs to be accomplished, a corps of eager volunteers will step up to get the job done.

“Remember the Plan of Conservation and Development meeting, two weeks ago?”, quipped Charlie Ladd.

At that meeting, discussions about the town’s character had focused on the extensive civic participation and strong community spirit of Enfield residents.

I did not appreciate these qualities until I left for college in Washington, DC. The contrast between that city and ours could not be starker. (That’s a column topic of its own, “What’s Right About Enfield and Wrong About Washington”.) For the moment, I would remark that Enfield is a place where people selflessly look out for their neighbors.

I had the opportunity to sit down and chat with Michael Smyth, Sam’s father. Along with his wife Dale, Michael Smyth owns and operates Smyth’s Trinity Farm, located at the intersection of King Street and Oliver Road. According to Mr. Smyth, dairy farming was a family tradition, passed on to him by his father and grandfather.

Sam, the youngest of their five children always intended to follow in his father’s footsteps. He recently graduated of Suffield High School’s Vocational-Agricultural (Vo-Ag) Program and is a freshman in UConn’s Animal Science program. At Suffield High School, he was involved in the FFA and other programs for aspiring farmers. In the afternoons and evenings, he would work on his parents’ farm.

The past year has been a very difficult period for the Smyths. Last year, a DOT contractor recommended their farm as the site of a future rest stop. Poor communication by DOT, the contractor, and the Planning Department further aggravated the situation. Can you imagine what it is like to suddenly discover a website indicating that the state wants to seize your business by eminent domain and turn it into a parking lot? Fortunately, an intervention by Sen. John A. Kissel put a halt to the rest-stop plans.

However, Sam’s accident has been the worst tragedy to befall the Smyth family. Back in October, a nine-hundred pound bale of hay fell on Sam Smyth, severing his spinal cord and leaving him paralyzed from the neck down. The Smyth family faces mounting medical bills and must retrofit their home to accommodate Sam’s disability.

The pancake breakfast at St. Bernard’s is the second held to benefit the Smyth family. Earlier in the month, there was a pancake breakfast at St. Martha’s to benefit the Smyth family.

According to Michael Smyth, “The community has been absolutely wonderful… there are many very faithful people who have been praying for Sam, and sent letters and cards.”

Something that you can do to help the Smyth family is to make a habit of buying their milk, which is produced using an organic process. “All we would need is for people to support our business… The best thing anyone can do is to walk in and buy our milk,” said Mr. Smyth.

I can personally recommend the milk from Trinity Farm for being a cut above the rest. They have all kinds of milk, including chocolate milk and coffee milk. Additionally, they offer several kinds of milk products including butter and six different kinds of yoghurt. During the Christmas Season, they will make egg nog in stock. Something that you might find interesting is that Trinity Farms is one of the few places left where you can buy milk in a glass bottle. Their hours are M-F 2:30-5:30 PM, and from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM on Saturday.

• • • • • • • • • •

Mark your calendars. On Sunday, Enfield’s traditional Torchlight Procession will depart Enfield Street School at 6 PM and wind its way down to the town green. The procession is being routed through Thompsonville Village and will culminate with the annual Christmas Tree Lighting and Carol Sing.