• NEWS...
• CT Majority Party happenings;
  
• Click above far left for "About Town" analysis of  issues we will be watching especially hard or...next, Click on foggy Capitol (C.G.A.);  INFO LINKS - Analysis of bills by:  Office of Legislative Research (OLR);  Office of Fiscal Analysis (OFA).

---

In a session where Democrats hold a veto-proof majority in both houses, they still can't pass a budget...
Story of how the CT Senate Democrat leadership came up with their proposals...

Regionalization move by Governor:  http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/TOB/H/2009HB-06389-R00-HB.htm
With editorial support around the state, Governor Rell takes the lead in tackling the economic crisis...Dems look under the bed for more $$.  Engorged?  How about the death penalty...taxing shopping bags.  Our question:  why did it take so long to add the chimp?  Was it because of this 2007 event?

Rell, Lawmakers Agree To Meet On State Budget
By SUSAN HAIGH, Associated Press Writer
June 27, 2009

NEWINGTON

Gov. M. Jodi Rell and legislative leaders have agreed to meet Sunday at the governor's residence and attempt to hammer out a budget deal, possibly before the fiscal year ends Tuesday.

There have been no formal talks between Democrats and Republicans since the General Assembly adjourned on June 3. Rell and the General Assembly have been at odds for months over how to cover a massive budget deficit, estimated to be as high as $8.8 billion over the next two fiscal years beginning July 1.

Despite the decision to meet, there's no guarantee they will reach a compromise.

On Saturday, Rell made it clear she does not like the direction that Democrats have been taking with their tax and spending plans. Appearing at Phillip and Sarah Bucchi's kitchen in Newington, Rell signed her impending veto of the Democrats' two-year budget, which was passed on Friday.

She did not date the document, so her veto won't be official until she receives the budget bill, possibly on Monday.

"It is quite simply unbalanced, unaffordable and unfinished," said Rell, who criticized the two-year, approximately $37 billion proposal for raising state taxes and fees by $2.5 billion and lacking what she considers "real spending cuts."

Democrats, however, maintain the plan is a good blueprint and preserves many key state services and programs, such as funding for nursing homes.

Even though the Bucchis -- a teacher and a stay-at-home mother -- won't be affected by the Democrats' plan to raise income tax rates on higher income earners, Rell said the proposal will still hurt the middle class because it does not reduce the size and cost of government and will ultimately lead to more red ink and higher taxes.

In her veto message, Rell said the "abject failure" of the Democrats' budget is that it does not reduce state spending in any meaningful way.

The two top Democratic leaders held a counter event Saturday at the Life Star emergency medical helicopter landing pad at Hartford Hospital. Some funding for Life Star was cut in Rell's original February budget and Democrats have held a series of appearances highlighting those types of reductions in recent weeks.

"As we begin earnest negotiations with the governor, starting tomorrow, one of the things that we're going to be fighting for are the critical services that in many cases save lives in the state of Connecticut," said Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr., D- Brooklyn, pointing out how the Democrats' budget restored funding for Life Star.

Williams maintains that Democrats and Rell are not far from reaching a deal.

"My optimism comes from my hope that when folks get in the room, we have the governor in the room, the legislative leadership in the room, that we will check the politics and the rhetoric at the door and we will get down to the business of getting a complete and responsible budget for the people of Connecticut."

If both sides don't reach an agreement by Tuesday, that means no budget will be in place for the new fiscal year beginning July 1 and Rell will likely have to run the state by executive order, choosing which bills to pay.

House Speaker Christopher Donovan, D- Meriden, said the smoothness of that process will likely depend on how well budget negotiations go over the coming days.

"My hope is that when we get together tomorrow, there will be a beginning of us working together, and in that case, should the deadline pass -- and I hope it doesn't -- but if it should pass, I hope we work together on what the next step is."

---

Rell says she will veto budget bill 
DAY
Published on 6/27/2009

Governor M. Jodi Rell announced today she will veto upon receipt the legislative Democrats’ budget bill that passed the state Senate on Thursday and the House of Representatives on Friday.

“The flaws and failures of the tax and spending proposals contained in the Democrats’ budget are obvious and they are a recipe for disaster,” Rell said in a statement issued late Saturday morning. “It is neither balanced nor remotely realistic in its assumed ‘savings’ and ‘spending cuts.’"

Rell said the budget “does nothing to reduce the size of a government that has outgrown the taxpayers’ ability to pay for it. By not reducing the size or cost of state government now, the Democrats’ budget sets the stage for further – and larger – deficits in the years to come.”

Rell said there is still time to develop a budget before midnight Tuesday and she called for legislative leaders to meet with her Sunday afternoon at the Executive Residence to work on a budget.

At the same time, the governor said, she is preparing an executive order to run the state government in a new budget’s absence.

---

Towns Worried About Getting State Aid If Budget Impasse Continues
The Hartford Courant
By DON STACOM
June 27, 2009

HARTFORD —

Connecticut towns are banking on getting millions of dollars in state aid payments when the new fiscal year starts Wednesday, but what happens if the state has no budget by then?

Gov. M. Jodi Rell says she'll use emergency powers to make necessary payments — including state payrolls — to keep Connecticut's government operating, regardless of a budget impasse. Beyond that, though, spending will be at her discretion.

"Anything that, by law, must be paid will be paid," Rell spokesman Rich Harris said Thursday.

Rell's staff declined to say exactly what she'd consider legally necessary, so theoretically payments to local school systems, town governments and nonprofit agencies might not make the cut.

"At this point, the governor doesn't want to discuss theoreticals," Harris said. "If it comes to that, we'll address those issues. But we're still hoping to have a responsible, affordable budget by July 1."

The first state-aid payments to towns are due on July 1 to pay for millions of dollars of road repairs; those grants represent major income for rural towns with small tax bases but plenty of highways to maintain. James Finley Jr., executive director of the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities, said it's essential that towns get paid on time because they're operating on tight cash flows with little room to maneuver.

"In this economy, they're handicapped because they've tapped their reserve funds, their investment income is practically nil and it's tough to go into the bond market," Finley said.

He said Rell's staff has informally assured him that municipal aid will qualify as "essential" if she must issue week-by-week spending orders.

There is no threat of a government shutdown this year, and it appears that Rell has the upper hand — at least in the short term — if the impasse with the Democratic General Assembly goes past Tuesday night, when the current budget expires. Attorney General Richard Blumenthal concluded during a protracted budget stalemate in 2003 that governors have legal authority to temporarily run the state's expenses by executive order, with wide latitude to decide what money must be spent and what expenses may be deferred.

Democratic lawmakers in 2003 balked, publicly complaining that then-Gov. John G. Rowland was deliberately shortchanging nonprofit mental health agencies and social services as he doled out his weekly payments. In late July of that year, he infuriated Democrats by announcing a 48-week executive spending order — effectively giving him one-man control of all state spending for the year until lawmakers adopted a new budget. The next day, lawmakers worked out a deal, and by mid-August the state had a new budget.

Blumenthal's staff said Thursday that the attorney general's legal opinion from 2003 still stands, and Rell's staff has cited it when announcing her preparations for an executive order to take effect Wednesday.

Copyright © 2009, The Hartford Courant

---

READ more here (on our "list of bills" subpage)...which Senator didn't vote?  Senator Len Fasano (R.) from towns around New Haven...which Majority Party Senators voted "no?"
Senate Approves Income, Cigarette, Estate, Biz Tax Hikes
Hartford Courant
By Christopher Keating on June 25, 2009 4:51 PM

After months of deliberations, the state Senate voted Thursday to raise the income, cigarette, estate, and corporate profits taxes in an attempt to close the state's growing budget deficit over the next two fiscal years.

Through a combination of spending cuts and $2.5 billion in tax increases over the next two years, the bill would shrink the ever-growing deficit that has been caused by a deep recession and a collapse in stock prices on Wall Street.

After nearly three hours of debate, the Senate voted, 19 to 16, for a budget that will now go to the state House of Representatives for another vote on Friday. Although Democrats hold a veto-proof majority in both chambers, the Senate Democrats were unable to provide the necessary 24 votes that are needed to override an expected veto by Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell.

The bill includes $1.5 billion in increased income taxes, plus about $125 million in new fee increases that are virtually the same as the fee and fine increases proposed in February by  Rell.

Rell is expected to veto the plan because she believes that the tax increases are too high. She unveiled an original plan in February and then a supplemental plan several months later that both contained no tax increases.

Five fiscally conservative Democrats voted against the budget: Robert Duff of Norwalk, Joan Hartley of Waterbury, Gayle Slossberg of Milford, Paul Doyle of Wethersfield, and Ed Meyer of Guilford.

The bill calls for raising the state income tax to 7.5 percent for couples earning more than $750,000 annually - which would be a 50 percent rate increase on the income above that level. Any couple earning less than $500,000 annually would see no change in their state income tax.

The increase is part of a multi-pronged package for a graduated income tax that Democrats have sought for nearly a decade. Currently, the maximum rate is 5 percent, but because of the complications of the tax, relatively few taxpayers in the state actually pay 5 percent now.

The Democratic plan calls for a 6 percent rate for couples earning more than $500,000 annually and individuals earning more than $265,000 annually. The rate would increase to 6.5 percent for the portion of income earned by couples over $600,000, and then the top rate of 7.5 percent would kick in for income above $750,000.

As a result, couples earning more than $750,000 would pay five different rates on various portions of their overall income: 3 percent, 5 percent, 6 percent, 6.5 percent, and 7.5 percent.

Rell opposes the tax-hike plan, and a veto is expected soon after the detailed bill reaches her desk. Rell's budget director says the tax hikes are unacceptable to Rell, but Rell herself has not yet spoken the word "veto'' regarding the latest package.

"Here we are passing a budget that the governor is not going to sign,'' said Senate Republican leader John McKinney of Fairfield. "We have been told, we have been lectured, we have been press-conferenced to death that the only honest budget is a budget that meets'' the Office of Fiscal Analysis' latest deficit estimate of $8.85 billion over the next two years. "Finally, we've moved off that, and I hope that represents progress.''

McKinney and other Republicans complained that few people had seen the details of the Democratic budget until Thursday morning - saying the plan should be open to public scrutiny for at least 24 hours in advance.

"Let the press write about it, and let the people know,'' McKinney said.

Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams, the highest-ranking senator, said the global recession has impacted virtually every county in the world and all 50 states have had fiscal problems.

"We know that we must shrink state spending, and it has not been easy'' making cuts, Williams said. "We have found billions of dollars of savings. ... On the revenue side, no one likes to talk about taxes or tax increases. ... Yes, the wealthy should be at the table as well.''

Even with the tax hikes, Connecticut would still have lower income-tax rates than New York and Rhode Island, among others, he said.

The bill would also hike the state's cigarette tax by 75 cents per pack, pushing the rate to $2.75 per pack - tying Connecticut with New York for the highest in the nation. Rhode Island would still lead the nation at $3.46 per pack, while Connecticut prices would be far, far higher than in South Carolina - where the tax is the lowest in the nation at only 7 cents per pack.

The Democratic plan also calls for a 25 percent surcharge on the corporate profits tax for the next three years, which is lower than the original plan for a 30 percent surcharge that was approved in April by the tax-writing finance committee.

The plan also calls for a 30 percent surcharge for three years on the estate tax, which is paid by the families of those who die with more than $2 million in the estate.

On a party-line vote at about 4 p.m. Thursday, the Senate approved the revenue estimates by a vote of 24 to 11. The overall package will be about $38 billion over two years, but the bill Thursday did not include the state's separate transportation budget. Sen. Andrew McDonald, however, said the budget will not include any bus or train fare increases.

Sen. Eileen Daily, a Westbrook Democrat who co-chairs the finance committee, said that members of the state's business community had preferred the surcharge to other forms of taxation.

"In meeting after meeting after meeting, this is what the business community asked us to do,'' Daily told members of the finance committee on Thursday.

"Business leaders, small and large ... wanted to do their part,'' Daily said later on the Senate floor. "They said the best way for us to do it was to tax their profits'' rather than taxing their ability to make a profit.

But CBIA, the state's largest business lobby and a constant presence at the state Capitol for months, has never publicly endorsed the tax plan.

Sen. Toni Boucher, a Wilton Republican, said the changes in the income and estate taxes represent "one of the biggest tax policy changes since 1991.''

"We may be acting too hastily, I believe,'' Boucher said.

On the Senate floor, the budget debate started at about 1:45 p.m. with the document being explained by Sen. Toni Harp, a New Haven Democrat who co-chairs the budget-writing appropriations committee. The Democratic plan is $97 million below the governor's initial submission for the first-year of the two-year budget, she said.

The Democratic plan includes more than $1 billion in cuts, closes two unidentified prisons to save $25 million in the first year and $45 million in the second year, preserves taxpayer-paid dental coverage for adults, maintains state subsidies for the LifeStar medical helicopter, implements a SAGA waiver for welfare recipients, reduces executive branch management, and reduces the department of public safety fleet by 20 percent, lawmakers said. The prisons could be closed over the next two fiscal years because the prison population is currently down by about 1,000 inmates.

"We sought to reinvent government,'' Harp said on the Senate floor.

Sen. John Kissel, an Enfield Republican who has six prisons within his Senatorial district with more than 8,000 inmates, said that closing two prisons is a "preposterous'' and "haphazard'' idea as some of the top prison officials are taking advantage of the state's retirement incentive program and the prison leadership will be changing at the highest levels. The state currently has 18,865 prison inmates, and officials have been fighting through the years to keep the number at less than 20,000 inmates.

With veteran prison guards taking the retirement plan and leaving their jobs, the prisons could be short-handed in the near future and any idea of closing prisons is "specious and completely without grounding,'' Kissel said, adding that the idea is "extraordinarily shortsighted'' at a time when the prisons are still crowded.

The Democratic budget proposal would consolidate the administrative hearing functions of the Department of Children and Families, Department of Transportation, and Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities into a new Office of Administrative Hearings.

The tax increases, Daily said, are about $700 million lower than the level approved by the tax-writing finance committee. A wide variety of fee increases includes a tire fee increase of $3 per tire.

Sen. Dan Debicella, a Shelton Republican, said a person who smokes two packs a day will pay an extra $600 per year in cigarette taxes. The bill also cannot be deemed as simply a tax on the rich, he said.

"It is an attack on the middle class through the largest tax increase in Connecticut history,'' Debicella said. "The average family in Connecticut will pay an average of $500 to $1,000 more per year. ... Even if the middle class isn't paying the tax to the government, they're the ones who will be paying the increased corporate tax.''

"If you're unlucky enough to pass away and you live in Fairfield County, we're raising your taxes, too,'' he said.

"President Obama has said raising taxes in a recession is the wrong thing to do,'' Debicella said. "Why are we taking the opposite from what the national Democratic Party and Democrats in other states are saying?''

The bill includes more than $100 million in the sale of assets, but no assets are identified.

"Without specifics, it's just a gimmick,'' Debicella said.

"My plea is to the moderates in the circle,'' Debicella said.

The budget keeps high-earning employees at various commissions, including the Permanent Commission on the Status of Women, but some line-items are reduced by 20 percent for the commissions.

Sen. Andrew Roraback, a Goshen Republican, said the bill had only "three hours of sunlight'' as Republicans were largely unaware of the details of the bill until Thursday morning. In response to Roraback, Daily said there is a possibility that the budget will still be $263 million in deficit at the end of the two-year budget.

He noted that Democrats had ''repeatedly, emphatically'' called for months for the budget to balance as outlined by the legislature's non-partisan fiscal office.

"I am a zealous guardian of transparency in government,'' Roraback said at one point. "I do think we can do much better by the people of the state of Connecticut. ... We have to balance our budget'' without $2.5 billion in new taxes and fees.

Noting the rate of taxes, Boucher said that her estate-tax lawyer in Fairfield County has told her that some citizens have moved to Wyoming because that state has no income or estate taxes.

"What we're doing today is huge,'' Boucher said, adding that lawmakers in Maine have dropped their highest income tax rate because the state was losing jobs.

Sen. L. Scott Frantz of Greenwich said, "Connecticut has been an incredible place to do business'' for financial services firms, private-equity funds, hedge funds, and other businesses.

"Are our golden days over?'' Frantz asked. "Arguably, possibly, yes. ... In my neck of the woods in southwestern Connecticut, we will lose billions and billions in capital. ... Maine gets it. Maine says we want to hang on to what we have here.''

For some people who see a 30 percent surcharge on the estate tax, Frantz said, "They will leave the state in a heartbeat.''

The bill includes $112 million in asset sales, $1.4 billion in transfers from the rainy day fund for fiscal emergencies, and about $2 billion in federal stimulus money - all so-called "one shots'' that will not be available when the two-year budget is over.

"The corporate taxes in here hit the middle class,'' McKinney said.

---

Senate approves budget 
DAY
Published on 6/25/2009
 
Hartford — A deeply divided state Senate approved a new two-year budget plan this afternoon that would raise taxes on high-income individuals and corporations while making what its supporters described as major cuts in spending.

The Senate voted, 19-16, to back the budget bill, with four of the 24 Democratic senators breaking ranks to vote against the package, which now proceeds to the House of Representatives.

But though the bill's passage in the lower chamber is a virtual certainty, so too is a veto from Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell. And the divisions among Senate Democrats highlight the lingering disagreements over the proper way to close the state's projected two-year deficit of nearly $9 billion, with a core of moderates resisting what they see as insufficient spending cuts and an inappropriate dependence on income tax revenue raised from the wealthy.

Thursday's vote comes after months of wrangling in Hartford over how best to close an expected deficit now projected to reach nearly $9 billion over the next two fiscal years. That wrangling appears unlikely to end soon.

Serious misgivings who remain about the spending and tax proposals among some members of the Senate's 24-member majority caucus have long meant that it will be impossible for Democratic leaders to assemble enough votes to override the governor.

Democrats have adopted some of the most recent spending cuts proposed by Rell, who has continued to insist that the state can close its deficit without resorting to income and business tax increases.

But the bill approved Thursday comes in at higher levels of spending than that proposed in Rell's most recent budget offering, and seems to skip over some of the most pressing budget questions altogether.

The package has a net bottom line of $35.7 billion over two years, but that figure does not include the state's Special Transportation Fund, which lawmakers said would be dealt with in budget implementation bills if Rell agreed to sign the bill. Including the transportation fund, which funds state road and highway programs, would bring the bottom line of the budget to over $37 billion.

The income tax changes make the following changes to the current 5 percent maximum tax rate on income:

— 6 percent for couples filing jointly with $500,000 or more of taxable income;

— 6.5 percent for those with $600,000 or more;

— 7.5 percent for those with $750,000 or more.

The bill also adds a three-year, 25-percent surcharge on the corporation income tax, and a three-year, 30-percent increase on the estate and gift tax on those with estates worth $2 million or more.

The bill would raise the per-pack tax on cigarettes to 75 cents.

Democrats “sought to reinvent government” in assembling their bill, said Sen. Toni Harp, D-New Haven, the co-chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, anticipating objections from Republicans that the budget was sure to be vetoed, and thus more a negotiating tactic than an attempt to actually set a new two-year budget in place.

“This budget is not an intellectual exercise,” she said. “It is not about numbers. It is about the people.”

Republicans, like Sen. Dan Debicella, R-Shelton, the committee's ranking member, were unimpressed.

Debicella called the tax increases in the proposal “an attack on the middle class,” rejecting the assertions by Democratic lawmakers that the hikes would primarily fall on the wealthy who can best afford to pay.

Business tax hikes would be passed on as costs to consumers, Debicella noted, and along with others noted that Democrats had included more than $100 million in anticipated revenue from increased state fees — a tactic also used by Rell in her budget proposals — but gave no indication what fees would be raised, or by how much.

The legislature “haven't made real cuts in this budget,” Debicella said.

---

Dems huddle on budget as deadline looms
By Ken Dixon, STAFF WRITER
Posted: 06/19/2009 10:27:02 PM EDT
Updated: 06/19/2009 10:34:53 PM EDT

HARTFORD -- While rank-and-file lawmakers easily approved bills that would fund summer jobs and provide expanded unemployment benefits, majority leaders Friday gathered Democrats behind closed doors to explain options for a new two-year budget.

Speaker of the House Christopher G. Donovan said that he expects to debate a budget sometime next week and that he intends to reach out to Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell over the weekend to try to get a negotiated deal by the June 30 end of the fiscal year.

He declined to say what the minimum threshold would be for a higher income-tax rate on Connecticut's wealthiest.

But Senate President Pro Tempore Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, told reporters late Friday afternoon that the proposed progressive income tax will raise rates starting at joint incomes of $500,000. The top tax rate would be 7.9 percent, compared to the current 5 percent maximum rate, he said.

Williams said while much of the package is still "under negotiations," the Democratic budget would raise taxes by $2.9 billion over the biennium.

Democrats rule the House by 117-37, but Senate Democrats have a razor-thin two-thirds majority -- 24-12 -- needed to override a potential Rell veto.

Rep. John C. Geragosian, D-New Britain, co-chairman of the budget-writing Appropriations Committee, said the two-year $37.9 billion package is down from the $38.2 billion approved in committee in April, which included $3.3 billion in new taxes.

Rell proposed a $38.4 billion budget with no new taxes in February, then, amid rising deficits, revised it in late May to $37.2 billion.

Geragosian said the Democratic budget includes about $800 million in undefined, year-end savings in various state departments called "lapses," plus $300 million in spending reductions. If approved, the lapses would put the onus on the governor to make the spending cuts.

During House and Senate action, lawmakers, during a couple hours of mid-afternoon debate, agreed to take funding from a variety of state departments and use the money in the fiscal year that starts July 1.

Another part of the bill would take $30.3 million in federal stimulus funds for the state Department of Labor under the federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Included in the funding is $11 million for summer youth jobs, $4.3 million for job training and $14.8 for added unemployment benefits.

A second bill, left over from the regular legislative session that ended June 3, would change teacher qualifications and require professional development among the state's teachers' corps. If signed by Rell, the bill would allow the state Board of Education to grant extensions of time for teachers seeking provisional and professional certification requirements.

House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero, R-Norwalk, criticized Democrats for saying items were in the education bill that were not in it and warned that the more important issue is completing a budget by the start of the next fiscal year.

"We thought the bills we were going to handle today were necessary for us as a state to move forward," he said.

Sen. Dan Debicella, R-Shelton, attempted to split the jobs legislation out of the overall bill, but his effort failed along party lines. He said the budget juggling within the Democratic legislation used revenue estimates from 2007, when the state had a billion-dollar surplus instead of a billion-dollar deficit.

"This just strikes me as us saying you know what? Let's ignore the fact that we do have a $1.2 billion deficit and let's turn the clock back 24 months to when the budget was in balance and let's actually use those revenue figures to say whether this is a go od idea or not," he said.

"We know there's a huge deficit today that this will add to."

---

State workers flock to early retirement 
DAY
By Ted Mann 
Published on 6/19/2009 

Hartford - When they conceived the state's latest retirement incentive program as a means to save money in a recession, Connecticut officials hoped to entice 3,000 government employees to retire.

They've already broken that threshold, budget analysts said Thursday, with nearly 3,500 state employees opting to retire so far and more potentially to come before July 1, the deadline to apply for the state incentives.

So far, 3,460 employees have either retired or announced their intention to do so by July 1, staffers for Gov. M. Jodi Rell announced, adding that the departures will help the state save on personnel costs, including salaries and health care benefits.

”My goal is to reduce the size and cost of state government - and the RIP is turning out to be a very effective tool in achieving that goal,” Rell said in a written statement, referring to the incentive program by its common acronym. “The state employees who are retiring are helping us to resolve the enormous financial issues facing Connecticut. The fact that we will achieve an even greater cost savings than anticipated is good news for our state and its taxpayers.”

Projected savings from the early retirement program were among the largest components of a roughly $700 million concession deal negotiated between the Rell administration and a coalition of state employee unions earlier this spring. Using an estimate of 3,000 employee retirements, the governor's budget office projected savings of nearly $111 million in the 2010 fiscal year, and more than $108 million in each of the next two budget years.

Rell also said she expects that restrictions on rehiring to fill some vacated positions will help hold the state's workforce down permanently.

Through those restrictions, “we can ensure that our government is permanently smaller - and less expensive,” Rell said.

The announcement about the surge in retirements was positive news for the state's fiscal affairs. Connecticut faces a two-year deficit projected to be as high as $8.7 billion, and Rell and legislative Democrats remain far from a deal on the biennial budget, with the governor insisting on deeper spending cuts as Democrats hold out for the preservation of some programmatic expenses through higher taxes on the wealthy, middle class and businesses.

On Thursday, the eve of a relatively non-controversial vote to appropriate millions in federal stimulus program aid for seasonal employment programs, Democratic leaders claimed they had achieved a modest breakthrough, agreeing to $1.1 billion in new spending cuts that would enable them to reverse a proposal to cut the state property tax credit, a benefit that Democrats have previously said was a boon for middle-class homeowners.

But through a spokesman, Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, and House Speaker Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden, refused to identify those new spending cuts, drawing a skeptical response from Rell's office.

”We want a chance to reach out to caucuses first,” said Derek Slap, the spokesman, in an e-mail message. But “rest assured we will be doing that as soon as possible.”

”I think the pressing question is, 'What are the cuts and where are the cuts?' “ said Christopher Cooper, a spokesman for the governor who is himself one of the most well-known state employees planning to retire July 1.

Democratic leaders plan to put a proposed budget bill before their respective caucuses as soon as today and are widely anticipated to bring a budget to a vote next week, even without agreement with the governor's staff. 

---

Legislative Democrats Say They'll Vote On Unilateral Budget Plan
The Hartford Courant
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING
June 17, 2009

With budget talks with the Republican governor stalled, the Democrat-controlled General Assembly is expected to vote as soon as next week on its own budget plan, which would raise the state income tax on Connecticut's wealthiest residents.

House Speaker Christopher Donovan said the vote will be taken because Democrats and Gov. M. Jodi Rell are still far apart on a budget compromise that the governor would be willing to sign.

"If we don't have an agreement, we'll certainly vote for something before June 30," Donovan said Tuesday. "We haven't had really focused discussions with the governor as of yet."

Donovan said the Democrats will drop their plan to eliminate the sales tax exemption on some computer and data-processing services, something that had prompted complaints from information technology companies.

Donovan said the budget package would include "a progressive income tax," but he declined to provide details on the rates. At the committee level, Democratic lawmakers voted in April for increased income tax rates for couples earning more than $250,000, but some legislators have recently been pushing to boost the income threshold to $500,000 per couple so that fewer people would be subjected to tax increases.

In addition, the tax-writing finance committee voted for a 30 percent surcharge on the corporate profits tax, but some lawmakers are pushing to drop that figure to 25 percent.

The House of Representatives will meet in special session Friday on other issues, but Donovan said that that would be too soon to vote on the Democrats' budget plan.

Rell's spokesman, Christopher Cooper, criticized the lack of details in the Democratic proposal. Rell has criticized proposed tax increases and offered her own budget with no tax increases, but large reductions in spending.

"The Democrats should put their cards — and their taxes — on the table," Cooper said. "Why all the mystery? It's like a game of three-card monte. Unfortunately, the taxpayers are the victims."

"This is like going on a blind date and finding out that Freddy Krueger is who is picking you up," Cooper said. "When the Democrats are ready to close their Off-Broadway production of ' Wicked' and negotiate a budget that is in the interest of all the people of Connecticut, Gov. Rell will be glad to sit down with them."

Copyright © 2009, The Hartford Courant

---

Democratic legislative leaders committed to income tax hike
Greenwich TIME
By Brian Lockhart, Staff Writer
Posted: 06/15/2009 09:52:26 PM EDT

HARTFORD -- The idea has proven unpopular with Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell and even some of their own rank-and-file members, but Democratic legislative leaders said they intend to include income tax increases in the new budget proposal they hope to unveil in the coming weeks.

"In order to avoid decimating state services altogether, we're going to have to have some new revenues, and the income tax is our 'workhorse tax,' " said state Sen. Majority Leader Martin Looney, D-New Haven.

To help address a potential $8.7 billion deficit, legislative Democrats in early April proposed a two-year budget that hiked income tax rates on wealthier households earning more than $250,000.

But the revenue package was immediately opposed by some Democrats, including many from lower Fairfield County, and leadership has since been retooling the proposal.

Looney and House Speaker Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden, said the hope is to vote on a new budget before the start of the 2009-10 fiscal year July 1.

"We'll have a new tax package," Donovan said. "The one (proposed in April) was a trial balloon."

Donovan agreed that some form of a "progressive income tax" will be included in the proposal, even if some Democrats are unhappy about it.

"We try to get as many votes as possible," Donovan said. "I've seen some ugly budget votes and some very unified ones. I'm hoping we end up with a unified one."

Asked if lawmakers might be upping the minimum household income limit from $250,000 to make it more palatable for some Fairfield County legislators, state Sen. Eileen Daily, D-Westbrook, a chairwoman of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee, said, "I'll tell you truthfully, we have looked at about 16 different combinations."

"We have asked for runs that go lower (than $250,000), and we have looked at runs that would raise the threshold," Daily said.

She said the risk in raising the threshold is that the percentage increases would have to be higher in order to capture enough revenue.

Jeffrey Beckham, spokesman for Rell's budget staff, said one reason the governor wants to hold the line on tax increases is to keep Connecticut competitive with neighboring states, which are raising taxes to address their own budget woes.

"We might actually attract residents and business," Beckham said.

Looney said that is an appropriate goal, but it does not mean Connecticut lawmakers cannot enact some percentage income tax increase.

"Everybody wants to make sure whatever the highest rate, is it's still lower than the maximum rates in neighboring states," he said.

Looney said the Democrats' package also is going to contain major cuts -- something some members of his own party complained was lacking in the April proposal.

"In the end, there will be significant, painful cuts and tax increases," Looney said. "No one will be happy."

Some area Democrats remained skeptical about voting for income tax increases.

State Rep. Peggy Reeves, D-Wilton, said, "I'm not going to vote for anything that is going to hurt disproportionately my community."

But state Rep. Christopher Perone, D-Norwalk, said he could be convinced.

"At a higher (household income) level, it makes it a little more palatable in our neck of the woods," Perone said.

---

Special Session:  House on Thursday, or maybe now Friday, Senate on Friday and/or Saturday (?)
State Prepares For Life Without Budget 
DAY
By Susan Haigh 
Published on 6/15/2009

Hartford - Connecticut's budget standoff at the state Capitol has Kim Beauregard worried.

She runs InterCommunity Inc., a nonprofit agency that offers numerous social services including outpatient mental health care and substance abuse treatment to more than 2,000 people in East Hartford, Newington, Rocky Hill, Wethersfield, Glastonbury and Marlborough.

If an agreement on a new two-year budget isn't reached before June 30, the end of the fiscal year, Beauregard fears payments from the state may not arrive.

Bipartisan budget talks ended when the General Assembly adjourned its regular legislative session on June 3. Gov. M. Jodi and her fellow Republicans have been at odds with the majority Democrats about whether higher taxes are needed to cover the state's budget deficit, estimated to be as much as $8.7 billion over the next two fiscal years.

There are signs that the rhetoric may be softening. Gov. M. Jodi Rell e-mailed all state legislators on Wednesday, asking them to study both of her budget proposals and give her input on what cuts they can live with.

Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, said he welcomed Rell's effort to reach out and urged her to sit down with legislative leaders to review what their respective negotiating teams have already accomplished in closed-door talks.

However, there is a chance that the Democrats may try to vote out their budget this week, likely garnering a veto from the governor. Williams set aside possible special sessions for Friday and Saturday. The House of Representatives scheduled a session day for Thursday.

In the meantime, Rell's budget staff is working on possible plans for how Rell will run the state without a budget beginning July 1.

”The law provides for her, as the chief executive of the state, to carry out the essential functions of government, and we will be providing her with options on how to do that,” said Jeffrey Beckham, a spokesman for the Office of Policy and Management.

Even without a budget, there still are laws that require taxes and fees to be paid. Federal funds are also expected. So that means money will be coming into the state's coffers.

Beckham stressed that while research and some preparation is under way, the governor's budget office still hopes to reach a deal before June 30.

Former Govs. John G. Rowland and Lowell P. Weicker Jr. both had to run the state without budgets in 2003 and 1991 respectively. In Rowland's case, he issued several executive orders to continue essential government operations.

During the 1991 budget crisis, Weicker and the General Assembly were able to agree on several mini budgets that covered two weeks apiece. Those were more detailed than the executive orders that Rowland issued during the 2003 budget impasse.

Like this year, there were concerns in 2003 - when the deficit was just about $1 billion - regarding state funding delays and how they'd affect municipalities and programs ranging from AIDS counseling to Dial-A-Ride programs. Rowland wound up releasing some money at one point to keep mental health and addiction programs operating.

This time around, officials at nonprofit agencies say the stakes are higher. The economic recession has lead to increased caseloads - they're up 14 percent from last year at InterCommunity Inc., mostly for mental health care. Meanwhile, these agencies have been flat-funded by the state in recent years and many already face financial troubles.

Additionally, some agencies with lines of credit at banks have seen those lines reduced by half.

”They're not all that trusting that the state is going to come through,” said Diane Manning, president and CEO of United Services Inc. in Dayville. Her agency is negotiating a line of credit with a new bank.

At this point, Manning doesn't expect any layoffs. She said she'll be able to cover the July payroll if there isn't a state budget in place.

”But after that,” she said, “it is pretty hairy.” 

---

Rell wields veto pen early 
DAY
By Susan Haigh 
Published on 6/5/2009

Hartford - Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell on Thursday issued her first veto this year, nixing legislation that Democrats claim is needed to help reach an agreement on a new budget.
Her veto comes a day after the regular session adjourned.

Meanwhile, a select group of legislators and budget staffs from the General Assembly and governor's office are expected to regularly meet behind closed doors during a special session to break the impasse over the two-year budget that begins July 1.

The legislation called for a new procedure for reaching a consensus on the state's estimated revenues. Under the measure, if the governor's and legislature's budget offices could not reach agreement on a figure, the elected state comptroller would decide what it would be.

The two offices have been at odds over the size of the deficit the state will face over the next two fiscal years. While Rell's office estimates the figure at $7.9 billion, the legislature's Office of Fiscal Analysis predicts it will be closer to $8.7 billion.

But Rell noted Thursday that the two offices have been able to eventually agree on a figure.

”I see no reason why this process, which has served us so well in good times and bad, cannot serve us equally well in 2009 and beyond,” she said.

Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, said he hopes Democrats, with a veto-proof majority in the General Assembly, will try to override the veto.

”The legislation the governor vetoed will fix a fundamental problem - the lack of recognition by the governor of the state's true deficit,” he said.

Meanwhile, Williams and other Democratic leaders made it clear they plan to vote on a budget before the fiscal year ends June 30. They vowed to approve a budget with or without Rell's involvement.  Democratic leaders made the pledge at a post-session news conference held in New Britain to call attention to Rell's recent supplemental budget cuts to the Small Business Incubator Program that assists startup technology companies.

”One way or another, we want to put a budget on the governor's desk before July 1,” said House Speaker Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden. “We are digging our heels in right now because we need to respond.”

He said Rell's supplemental budget includes draconian cuts to services for the elderly and needy and to small businesses.  Williams said Democrats feel they must work to protect the values of the state.

”It really is about the heart and soul of our future,” he added.

Republican legislative leaders remained steadfast in their belief that talk of raising taxes to cover the state's deficit is premature. House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, said he hoped legislators would now return to their districts and hear from constituents who can't afford tax increases.

”Maybe they'll listen to those real people,” he said. 

---

Legislative Session Ends Without Adopting A Budget
The Hartford Courant
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING, JON LENDER, And DANIELA ALTIMARI
June 4, 2009

The 2009 legislative session may be remembered more for what lawmakers didn't do than for what they managed to accomplish.

As lawmakers stumbled toward a midnight adjournment Wednesday to finish five months worth of work, both the House of Representatives and the Senate debated relatively minor bills that were not among the year's most pressing issues, such as the sales tax liability of asphalt manufacturers.

The biggest failure was clearly the lack of a state budget, as Republicans and Democrats have been stuck in gridlock over how to close a deficit projected as high as $8.7 billion over the next two fiscal years.

Gov. M. Jodi Rell and Republican legislators have offered separate budget plans that would not raise taxes, while Democrats have offered more than $3 billion in tax increases to close the gap. But there has been little movement toward a compromise, and a special session is likely later this month.

Besides the budget, the legislature was unable to pass several high-profile bills that were debated this year, such as banning smoking in the state's two casinos, decriminalizing marijuana, outlawing the "zone pricing" of gasoline, and requiring employers to provide paid sick days to their workers.

Lawmakers also could not reach agreement on banning open alcohol containers in automobiles or allowing citizens to both register and vote on Election Day. One of the year's most controversial bills — to change the legal and financial structure of Roman Catholic parishes — was withdrawn almost immediately after it was introduced.

And one of the most significant measures of the session — the abolition of the death penalty in Connecticut — faces a certain veto by Rell.

"The bottom line is, our state is dying, and these guys are handing out Band-Aids," said Republican State Chairman Chris Healy. "At some point the public is going to figure out that they have wasted six months of valuable time."

To mark the lack of a budget, Rell declined to deliver the traditional end-of-the-session speech that governors have delivered in the House chamber for decades. At different times through the years, Govs. Lowell Weicker and John G. Rowland skipped the speech to show displeasure with the legislature's unfinished business.

Instead, Rell released a statement that focused not on the bills that have passed but on the work ahead.

"The legislative session is now a page of Connecticut history," Rell said. "It is time to turn the page, to move forward with commitment and resolve to work together to deliver to the people of this state a budget that will meet their needs now and in the future."

Health Care

But House Majority Leader Denise Merrill, a Storrs Democrat, cited a major package of healthcare bills, including the controversial SustiNet universal health-care proposal and a controversial "pooling" bill that would allow small businesses, municipalities, and nonprofit agencies to join the state's gigantic healthcare pool.

"One of the biggest things we did this session is try to address health-care reform," Merrill said. "The last five years or so, it's increasing in urgency. ... We're one of the first states to take action on coverage for children with autism."

But the fate of health reform remained unclear at the session's close with no funding for any major initiatives and Rell's support in question.

Other lawmakers said the General Assembly clearly had some noteworthy bipartisan accomplishments that included reforming the state's antiquated probate court system and prohibiting the use of machine guns by minors following a tragic accident in Massachusetts that killed a Connecticut boy.

Democrats passed other bills they considered top priorities, but it was not clear Wednesday night how many of those bills Rell might veto. Those include the listing of calories on menus at major fast-food restaurants and ordering a special election to fill a U.S. Senate vacancy — overturning a 64-year precedent that allowed the governor to make the appointment.

Senate Democratic spokesman Derek Slap said lawmakers passed important bills this year that will improve life in Connecticut, even if they do not generate front-page headlines. Those include measures to create so-called "green" jobs and establish an enterprise zone at Bradley International Airport in Windsor Locks in an effort to create jobs.


Wild Animals, Farms

In bipartisan moves on the final night, the House approved bills on wild animals and dairy farms.

Lawmakers decided to ban the private ownership of chimpanzees following a vicious attack that blinded a woman in Stamford earlier this year. The watered-down bill calls for banning gorillas, chimpanzees and orangutans, but does not cover the huge list — such as alligators and pythons — that had been in the original legislation. The maximum civil penalty for violating the law will be $1,000.

The House also approved a bill by a vote of 133 to 16 to provide relief to the state's $1 billion dairy industry. The measure, which the state Senate approved Tuesday, creates a special fund to help beleaguered farmers. The money will be raised through a $10 increase in the $30 fee for recording municipal land documents.

Connecticut's 151 dairy farms face enormous economic pressures, as 19 have sold off their cows and closed within the past year.

The bill's boosters say the benefits go beyond helping farmers. They say dairy farms provide jobs, and their bucolic pastures make Connecticut a nicer place to live. And with a renewed emphasis on locally grown food, the 351 million pounds of milk provided by local cows in 2008 are even more crucial, said state Rep. Terry Backer, D- Stratford.

"We are … divorced from where our food comes from," he said.

Rell, a strong proponent of the measure, announced she would sign the bill about an hour after it received final legislative approval.

The Democrats' decision to put off adopting a state budget until a special session meant that the pace of the last day was not as frenetic as in past years.

Late Wednesday night, the chamber passed a resolution apologizing for slavery in Connecticut that had previously passed in the House.

But time ran out in the Senate on a teacher certification bill that would have made it easier for qualified professionals to make a mid-career shift and enter the teaching ranks. They would still have needed a teaching certificate but would no longer have to take content-area classes on subjects they already know.

Also, one public school in Granby had been seeking an exemption from the state's 180-day school requirement because of amount of time it had been closed because of the swine flu outbreak. But time ran out before the exemption was approved.

Earlier in the evening, Senate Republicans stretched out debates on bills to make a political statement about what, in their view, was the relative insignificance of the business that the Democrat-controlled General Assembly was conducting in the absence of adopting a budget.

Senate Republicans, for example, engaged in an obvious stall for hours on a bill that might otherwise have been discussed for 15 minutes and approved unanimously. It would have required the heads of the state's administrative services and social services departments to consult with the state comptroller and other officials and develop a plan for the state to buy prescription drugs in bulk for its health plans.

Sometimes members of a party stretching things out won't admit what they are doing. But on Wednesday, Healy acknowledged what was going on.

"Obviously, sure, why not?" Healy said.

By stretching out debates and in effect running out the clock, "we're stopping a lot of bad stuff from becoming law," he said. "They should have basically adjourned when they came in and decided that they're not going to do the one thing they're elected to do, which is to adopt a fair, sustainable state budget."

Copyright © 2009, The Hartford Courant

---

Rell: Holding Down Taxes Is Key To State's Recovery 
DAY
By M. Jodi Rell 
Published on 5/31/2009

The Connecticut General Assembly is just days away from its deadline for finishing its work. Yet we still do not have a state budget for the next two years.
In February, I proposed a two-year budget that would cut state spending, consolidate or merge dozens of state agencies, maintain state aid to cities and towns so burdens would not fall on property taxpayers and give those municipalities much-needed relief from costly state mandates - all without raising taxes.

Tax increases, I said, would be the worst thing we could do in the middle of a national recession.

And Connecticut's economy has been terribly battered by this national recession. Thousands of families - thousands of lives - have been disrupted by job losses, foreclosures, Wall Street turmoil and lingering uncertainty. Employers, many of them mainstays of Connecticut's economy, have been forced to lay off dedicated workers.

Since I released my recommended budget in February, the economic picture has only gotten darker. Our state has lost 18,100 jobs. We have seen more than 4,000 businesses shut their doors forever. More than 7,500 families have lost their home to foreclosure.

And still - four months later - we have no budget. The legislature has not even held a vote on a budget in the Senate or the House.

Because of the recession, we face enormous deficits for the next two fiscal years, as well as a persistent deficit in the current budget year that ends June 30. I have been working with lawmakers on a new budget for several weeks - but it has become increasingly clear that some do not have the will to make the spending cuts necessary to close those budget gaps without raising taxes.

So this week I took the unusual step of offering another budget - a second budget - that, once again, contains no tax increases.

Like my budget in February, this new budget makes deep and painful spending cuts. They are not cuts I relish making. But the families of Connecticut are counting on their elected leaders to make those cuts and to finish their business on time.

Like my February budget, this proposal preserves municipal aid so that tax increases are not passed on to local property taxpayers. It merges and consolidates agencies to make Connecticut's government smaller and more efficient - just like my budget in February did.

And most importantly, this budget is in line with what the people of our state can afford - just like my budget in February. That means it contains no tax increases and in fiscal-year 2010 reduces spending from current levels.

I did this because the bloat of bureaucracy is no more affordable now than when I first spoke of it in February; because families have not stopped struggling since February; and because the underlying truths of our economy have not changed since I laid out my original budget: Connecticut residents cannot afford massive tax increases. Connecticut businesses cannot afford massive tax increases.

Consider that nearby states like New York and New Jersey are raising their income taxes while Massachusetts is raising its sales tax. The top income tax rates in New York and New Jersey are now 8.97 percent (in New York City it's an astonishing 12.62 percent!), while the top bracket in Rhode Island is 9.9 percent.

Connecticut's top rate is currently 5 percent.

By holding the line on taxes and making the tough decisions now, we will make Connecticut a beacon of oportunity - our state will become comparatively more affordable for business and more appealing for investment.

Job creation will climb as more and more companies move to - or grow in - a business-friendly Connecticut. We can reverse the “brain drain” and keep our college graduates in good-paying jobs right here in Connecticut. Our housing market will rebound as those graduates and people attracted to our state seek new places to live.

This is not economic theory - it's economic fact.

Frankly, tax increases are the easy choice. But all they do is “feed the beast” - and two years later the beast is back, hungry again, and always a little bit larger. Now is the time to make the difficult decisions.

I am not looking for a battle, but I am willing to fight one because it's a battle worth waging. The families and people of Connecticut are always worth fighting for. Please join me in the remaining days of this legislative session by urging your lawmakers to join me in making the difficult, but necessary choices to pass a budget that contains no tax increases. 

---

As Legislature Acts On 3 Bills Likely To Be Vetoed, Rell Castigates Democrats
The Hartford Courant
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING and JON LENDER
May 31, 2009

The legislature, in a rare Saturday session, passed three controversial budget and health care bills that Republicans want Gov. M. Jodi Rell to veto. Meanwhile, Rell ripped Democratic lawmakers for failing to reach a deal to close the state's huge budget deficit.

Before adjourning for the day, legislators also voted to schedule a special session for later in June, officially admitting that they don't expect to craft a budget compromise by midnight Wednesday — the constitutionally mandated deadline of the legislature's regular session.

Rell blasted Democrats over a lack of action on the deficit, which has been projected as high as $8.7 billion over the next two fiscal years.

"Some may call this a surrender, and some may call it a failure of leadership," Rell said. "It is both, but more importantly, I believe it is a shameful abdication of constitutional responsibilities. After nearly five months, the Democrats have done nothing to address Connecticut's fiscal crisis, nothing to help create jobs or help working families through these difficult economic times, and nothing to address unemployment."

Looking back over her 25-year career as a legislator, lieutenant governor, and governor, Rell said the legislature's lack of action is unprecedented.

"In all my years of government, I have never seen a more disorganized group of lawmakers than these Democrat leaders," Rell said.

Democrats fired back, saying Rell caused months of delays in the budget negotiations.

"The unfortunate fact is that throughout the entire legislative session, the governor failed to submit a balanced budget," said Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams, the highest-ranking senator. "Families and businesses across Connecticut want solutions, not angry rhetoric. In addition, she failed to abide by her own promise four months ago that pain in the budget would be shared fairly by all, and not balanced on the backs of the elderly, the sick, students and the middle class."

"Democrats in the legislature are working night and day to protect the very same people the governor is willing to sacrifice in order to protect the wealthy," House Speaker Christopher Donovan said. "We just learned on Thursday that the governor wants to close technical schools in Stamford and Bristol, six courthouses in Manchester, Derby, Meriden, Putnam, Norwalk and Bristol, a DMV office in New Britain, eliminate funding for libraries, for people with disabilities, for young people who want to go to college, and cut funding for job training. We won't do that. … Isn't it time for the governor to sit down and talk with us, to put everything on the table, to be productive?"

Budget Power

A bill passed by the House Saturday would take power away from the governor's budget office, while two others passed in the Senate cover health care reforms that Republicans say would be too expensive.

But the Democrats, who control both legislative chambers, said the bills could lead to a budget resolution during tough economic times and bring about important health care improvements for Connecticut citizens.

The bill that could take power from the budget office is directly related to the ongoing dispute over the size of the deficit. It says that if the governor's budget office and the legislature's nonpartisan fiscal office cannot reach a consensus on revenue forecasting, the task would be taken over by the state comptroller, a post now held by Democrat Nancy Wyman.

The Republican minority has only 37 of the 151 House members, but GOP leader Rep. Lawrence Cafero of Norwalk said his party opposed all three bills.

"I pray to God there are a ton of vetoes," Cafero said after the House adjourned. "If this [revenue forecasting bill] isn't the biggest stick in the governor's eye, I don't know what is."

Maintaining her traditional posture, Rell has not declared whether she would veto any of the three bills. Her spokesman declined to make any veto pronouncements on Saturday.

Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney, a New Haven Democrat, and House Speaker Donovan both said they hope to reach an agreement with Rell on the size of the deficit in order to avoid a veto override vote. Democrats have veto-proof margins in both chambers, and Looney said he believes the override votes will be there, if needed, on the forecasting bill.

Health Care Changes

After the House adjourned Saturday, the Senate approved the controversial health "pooling" bill, which would allow municipalities, small businesses and nonprofit organizations to join the state employees' gigantic health care pool. The vote was 21-12, with three members absent. Rell vetoed a similar bill last year.

The Senate passed the SustiNet universal health care bill on party lines. Democrats said SustiNet is a progressive, forward-thinking system that will vastly improve health care and position the state to become " Obama-ready" for the expected health care changes at the federal level.

Republicans denounced the bill as a costly first step toward European-style socialized medicine.

Sen. Jonathan Harris, a West Hartford Democrat who led the debate, said the current health care system needs to be improved because it is too expensive. Every year, public and private health care systems spend $22 billion to cover health care in Connecticut. The SustiNet plan, he said, will save $1.8 billion.

Harris said the bill covers the four biggest issues regarding health care: "cost, quality, access, and coverage."

"SustiNet is a self-insured coverage system," he said. "The delivery system is a very important piece of this. ... Every individual in this state should be entitled to a primary care doctor."

Harris was careful to say that the details will be worked out later.

"This bill does not implement SustiNet or any significant part of SustiNet," he said. "The General Assembly must come back to the drawing board" to implement SustiNet in the future.

But Sen. Dan Debicella of Shelton, the ranking Senate Republican on the budget-writing appropriations committee, said the bill is both bad health care policy and bad fiscal policy. It would be a huge drain on taxpayers in the future with costs not outlined in the bill, and the proposal would mirror "the gold-plated plan" that state employees now have, he said.

"The bill before us today is not the answer," Debicella said. "This bill presupposes the answer. The core of it is the wrong answer that we have presupposed. ... The bad policy in this bill says that we are going to harm the 94 percent who have health insurance to help the 6 percent of us who do not have it."

Sen. L. Scott Frantz, R-Greenwich, said he applauds the concept of improving health care, even though he opposed the bill.

"It's a noble cause," Frantz said. "The only question is: How do we get there?"

Three potential ways of reducing costs, he said, include medical malpractice reform, reducing tobacco use, and reducing obesity. If all tobacco use was eliminated, the system could save 40 percent to 60 percent of the entire health care bill, Frantz said. If obesity was eliminated, the system would save another 15 percent to 25 percent.

"I'm not sure government can take care of every need," Frantz said on the Senate floor.

Senate GOP leader John McKinney of Southport agreed with Frantz in opposing the bill, saying that a step toward single-payer, Canadian-style health care represents going in the wrong direction.

"The system we have, for all its flaws, is much, much better," McKinney said. "That's why this is the wrong bill at the wrong time."

But longtime health care advocate Tom Swan said Saturday's action will put Connecticut on the health care map as a national leader in advance of the changes expected to be made later this year by President Barack Obama's administration.

"People, nationally, understand that this is a very big deal in the national debate," Swan said.

Copyright © 2009, The Hartford Courant

---

Bridgeport Diocese sues Conn. over lobbying laws
CTPOST
ASSOCIATED PRESS
Updated: 05/29/2009 06:12:05 PM EDT

HARTFORD (AP) -- The Roman Catholic Diocese of Bridgeport is suing Connecticut officials over a requirement that it register as a lobbyist before holding any more rallies or using its Web site to oppose legislation.

The diocese filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court on Friday seeking to stop the Office of State Ethics from what it calls an unconstitutional application of state lobbying laws.

State officials said they are reviewing the lawsuit and declined to comment.

Bridgeport Bishop William Lori says the diocese is exercising its free speech rights and not lobbying.

The diocese says it was told by the ethics office that it failed to register as a lobbyist when it took part in a rally at the Capitol in March and made statements on its Web site urging its members to oppose legislation.

---

Rell gets involved in budget logjam
CTPOST
By Ken Dixon, STAFF WRITER
Posted: 05/28/2009 07:51:54 PM EDT
Updated: 05/28/2009 09:52:32 PM EDT

HARTFORD -- Gov. M. Jodi Rell, in an attempt to break a political logjam that has stalled negotiations on a new two-year budget, offered majority Democrats an alternative budget Thursday afternoon.  The two-year, $34.4 billion proposal has no tax increases and would retain current levels of municipal aid, Rell said.

"This budget is more in line with what people can afford," she said during a news conference in her Capitol office. "Connecticut residents cannot afford a massive tax increase," she added.

Rell and minority Republicans expected the legislation to originate in the state Senate, where they had already filed an amendment that would force Democrats to debate a two-year $38.2 billion spending package. 
The Democratic budget has stalled since passing key financial committees controlled by the majority in early April. In February, Rell offered a $38.4 billion budget that would take effect for the biennium starting July 1.  The GOP effort was announced shortly after noon Thursday.

It would force the majority to defend its $3.3 billion in new taxes approved in committee last month, which Democrats have failed to bring to the floor of the state's House and Senate.  Several Senate Democrats voted against the legislation in committee, including state Sens. Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, and Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford.  The bill includes tax hikes on the state's wealthiest residents and would end a popular $500 property tax credit for middle-income homeowners.

Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield, said that with less than a week in the legislative session, it's time Democrats debated their own bill, so he and other GOP lawmakers drafted it as an amendment to a controversial bill on the way the state creates budgets that Democrats had promised to debate today.

"The people of the state of Connecticut need us to pass a balanced budget," McKinney said. "The towns need to know how much municipal aid they're going to get. It seems the Democrats would rather debate a forecasting bill rather than debating a real budget, so we will offer a budget."

Democrats have a 24-12 majority in the state Senate.

---

Senate approves 'block the box' bill.  Law would allow police to ticket drivers who stop in intersections
Stamford ADVOCATE
By Brian Lockhart, Staff Writer
Posted: 05/23/2009 10:33:10 PM EDT
Updated: 05/24/2009 12:32:06 AM EDT

HARTFORD -- A bill aimed at allowing police in cities such as Stamford and Norwalk to fine motorists who stop in intersections, "blocking the box," cleared the state Senate last week.

But an amendment could lead the House of Representatives to scuttle the legislation.

Submitted by Stamford lawmakers at the request of the city's Board of Representatives, the bill would let municipalities adopt ordinances that would empower police officers to issue citations to drivers who attempt to squeeze through a green light and wind up blocking oncoming traffic.

Any municipality can implement the policy now, but state law currently does not allow police to penalize drivers.  With fines and fees combined, drivers could wind up paying $100 to $300.  Tractor-trailers and cars entering an intersection to make a turn would be excluded.  The legislation is modeled after "don't block the box" laws in New York City.  State Sen. Gary LeBeau, D-East Hartford, said during Thursday's debate of the bill that he has seen motorists impede traffic as they try to make a green light.

"Everybody's looking out for themselves," LeBeau said.

But other supporters -- including state Sens. Antonietta "Toni" Boucher, R-Wilton, and Kevin Witkos, R-Canton -- urged that the bill be amended.

As submitted, the legislation applied to municipalities with more than 50,000 residents.

Witkos, a police sergeant, said the proposal would be a good tool for police but said there are busy intersections in smaller cities and towns where it could be applied.  Boucher agreed, saying she would like to see the law, if passed, adopted in towns within her district, which are along the congested Route 7.  State Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, a sponsor of the bill, said that in previous years, the bill was defeated in the House of Representatives because it included all cities and towns.

"I think Sen. Witkos is correct. It could be useful for smaller towns with large traffic volume," McDonald told his colleagues. "But that was the basis of this legislation being defeated last time."

Ultimately, the legislation was successfully amended, and the bill was unanimously passed by the Senate and went to the House.  Witkos and Boucher, both former members of the House of Representatives, said they would seek to lobby their former colleagues to ensure the bill is passed and sent to Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell for her signature.

---

Rell: State death penalty 'warranted' 
DAY
By Ted Mann 
Published on 5/23/2009

Hartford - Gov. M. Jodi Rell vowed Friday to veto a legislative proposal to abolish capital punishment, hours after it narrowly passed the Senate, saying that some crimes can only be fittingly punished with a sentence of death.

”I appreciate the passionate beliefs of people on both sides of the death penalty debate,” Rell said in a statement released Friday afternoon.

The Senate had voted to approve the abolition bill early the same morning, after a nearly 11-hour debate riven by both philosophical and partisan disputes.

”I fully understand the concerns and deeply held convictions of those who would like to see the death penalty abolished in Connecticut. However, I also fully understand the anguish and outrage of the families of victims who believe, as I do, that there are certain crimes so heinous - so fundamentally revolting to our humanity - that the death penalty is warranted.

”I will veto this bill as soon as it hits my desk,” the statement concluded.

Rell's veto pledge came just hours after the Connecticut Network to Abolish the Death Penalty held a rally at the Capitol to highlight families of murder victims who support eliminating capital punishment. Lawmakers who backed the abolition bill had also held out hope that pressure from clergy, including the Connecticut Catholic Conference, and international attention might pressure Rell into reversing her longtime support for the death penalty.

Much of this year's debate on capital punishment in Hartford has turned as much on the practical application of the death penalty - whether, with all the safeguards required by the Constitution, it can ever realistically be applied - as on its morality.

With Rell espousing a moral obligation to seek retribution against those guilty of extreme crimes, sponsors of repeal, like Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven, are still trying to sway her on practical grounds.

Rell should ask state prosecutors and judges for “their off-the-record opinions on whether anyone will ever be executed in Connecticut,” said Lawlor, the co-chairman of the Judiciary Committee, after Rell announced her intention to veto the repeal bill. “I believe that she will be told what many of us have been told - the Connecticut death penalty is a false promise.”

Lawmakers would need two-thirds majorities in both chambers of the legislature to override Rell's veto, far more support than the bill received over the past two weeks.

The bill, H.B. 6578, passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 90-56, well short of an override but a larger margin of victory than some had anticipated. But it only squeaked through the Senate, 19-17, after the longest debate in either chamber of the current legislative session.

Rell's veto vow immediately provoked calls to reconsider from supporters of abolition, including Rep. Gary Holder-Winfield, D-New Haven, who said Rell's statement “seems to indicate that all family members of murder victims agree with her stance,” just hours after some family members who disagree rallied at the Capitol.

”I respectfully call on the governor to reconsider her stance as she looks at this issue in its complete context,” Holder-Winfield said.

Rell's veto pledge was “predictable,” Lawlor said in a brief interview, but he added, “it's not over yet.”

Senate leaders did not immediately transmit the passed bill to the governor Friday morning - anticipating it might lead her to veto it on the spot - and have hoped that in the period of codification before the bill formally reaches Rell, she might have a change of heart. It will be several days before the bill reaches Rell, perhaps as many as 10, lawmakers said...

Late in the day, a representative for William Petit, a doctor from Cheshire whose wife and two daughters were murdered in a home invasion nearly two years ago, and whose case was repeatedly invoked by Republicans in defense of capital punishment, e-mailed a message from the doctor to reporters.

”The legislators want to take years to talk about the killers and allow them to utilize our resources when these animals have broken a sacrosanct law of our society,” Petit's rambling message read in part. “Once you have broken this rule you have forfeited your right to live among us.”

---

No more "deregulation?"
Lawmakers move to scrap competition for electric customers 
DAY
By Ted Mann 
Published on 4/30/2009
 
Hartford - A key principle in the decade of reform and deregulation in Connecticut's energy markets goes as follows: If residential electric customers can choose among competitive retailers in buying their power, they'll benefit from the bidding war and ultimately pay lower rates.  But opponents of deregulation say the promise hasn't panned out.

Fewer than 10 percent of residential customers have left traditional “standard service” offered by utilities for electric contracts purchased in the competitive market.

And in the meantime, the utilities who provide that standard service have built in a “risk premium,” critics say - raising their rates in order to protect themselves against the chance that some of their customers will flee the existing system for the competitive markets.

On Wednesday, the state House of Representatives moved to close off the competitive option for residential electric customers and those using 100 kilowatts or less per month, effectively rolling back that segment of Connecticut's deregulation experiment.

The move, supporters say, will lower costs by as much as 5 percent on those who still pay utilities for standard service. And it will mean that those who stayed with utility electricity sellers do not “subsidize” competition for a relative handful of power customers.

Since retail competition was initiated, only about 8 percent of residential customers have left traditional utilities to negotiate their own contracts, said Rep. Vickie Nardello, D-Prospect, co-chair of the Energy and Technology Committee, with the vast majority remaining in standard service - but also paying the costs built into those standard service rates to cover the potential departure of customers into the competitive market.

”This isn't real competition,” Nardello said. “Why should an entire group of people pay more for a few people that have choice?”

The bill would end retail choice in electricity service for those customers with a maximum demand of 100 kilowatts or less, including all residential customers who are not yet participating in the competitive market.

It also includes language aimed at allowing major electricity users to sidestep energy re-sellers and negotiate multiyear contracts directly with utilities for power, adding a new level of competition for energy retailers and, supporters say, lowering power costs.

Supporters of the move have assembled a broad coalition, including House Speaker Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden, who helped resurrect the measure after it was killed in committee, and usually divergent groups including the Connecticut Citizen Action Group, the Connecticut Industrial Energy Consumers, the Manufacturing Alliance of Connecticut, the AARP and labor groups.

The state's electricity system is “at the edge of a precipice,” said Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, another supporter of the bill. “Deregulation has been a massive failure. Retail competition has been a farce. Our present system is a costly, baffling bust.”

The bill passed by a vote of 104-38, but it faces a more difficult test in the Senate, where Nardello's co-chair, Sen. John Fonfara, D-Hartford, is expected to try to block the bill from coming to a vote. Fonfara has already blocked the measure once this session, refusing to sign off on a motion to vote it out of the committee. It was resurrected Wednesday as an amendment with the blessing of Donovan, the speaker of the House.

”This effectively will be a rate hike on thousands of residential customers and small businesses, many of whom are struggling to stay in business,” Fonfara said Wednesday evening. “This is not some philosophical exercise. This is reality for people. It could mean some of those businesses closing their doors.”

Opponents call the measure wrong-headed and likely to increase costs on customers, and point to years of high electricity prices under the utilities' monopoly as proof that the reforms of the current proposal won't work.

”If they pass this bill, it will make prices go up,” said Chris Kallaher, the director of governmental and regulatory affairs for Direct Energy, which buys and sells electricity in deregulated markets around the country, including Connecticut's. “There is absolutely no question about it. They want to hand the system over to the same people that gave Connecticut ratepayers billions of dollars of stranded costs, and the highest prices in history adjusted for inflation.”

In a statement, the energy retailer ConEdison Solutions estimated that more than 135,000 customers in the state receive power through some form of competitive supplier and enjoy lower costs than those remaining on standard service.

Not all agree.

Purchasing power on the competitive market makes more sense for large consumers of power, like manufacturers and major commercial users, but little sense for individual customers unused to negotiating long-term power contracts, said state Consumer Counsel Mary Healey, whose nonpartisan office represents the interests of ratepayers. Healey endorsed the legislation.

”They're sophisticated” in their decisions on power contracts, Healey said of large-scale customers. “They have energy managers and they know how to buy and sell in the power market. But Mom and Dad don't.” 

---

Conn. House OKs restricting electricity choice   
DAY
Posted on Apr 29, 1:59 PM EDT

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- The Connecticut House has passed legislation requiring future residential and small business customers to sign up with one of the state's two major power suppliers.

The amendment passed on a mostly party-line, 103-39 vote, with Democrats in the majority. It now moves to the Senate, where there is strong opposition.

Supporters say the move to restrict electricity choice would reduce rates, but opponents say it's bad public policy and would stifle innovation.

More than 90 percent of residential and business customers now buy power from Northeast Utilities or United Illuminating. Supporters say those customers pay a "risk premium" for allowing a small group to choose small, alternative power companies. They predict rates could drop by five percent.

---

ESPN Fears Rules Of The Game May Change 
DAY
By Amanda Falcone 
Published on 4/22/2009

Bristol - If tax exemptions are repealed and the state imposes a tax surcharge on corporations and limits tax credits, the country's leading sports network could lose millions of dollars each year.
While Mike Soltys, vice president of communications for ESPN Inc.'s domestic networks, said he is confident that ESPN would not abandon its birthplace in Bristol, he said the budget decisions state lawmakers make this legislative session could affect the company's future.

”We would prefer to grow in Central Connecticut,” said Soltys, a Southington resident, adding that over the last 10 years, the number of Connecticut ESPN employees has doubled, as has the number of acres ESPN owns in Bristol.

ESPN, a subsidiary of the Walt Disney Co., employs 3,400 people in Connecticut, and the company has 115 acres in Bristol. It also leases property in Cheshire and owns property in Southington.

But despite ESPN's best intentions, Soltys said, operating costs play a role in determining where ESPN expands. If lawmakers make it harder to do business in Connecticut, he said, ESPN might choose to explore other options. The company owns property and has studios and offices in several states.

With the help of the lobbying firm Levin, Powers, Brennan & Shea LLC, ESPN is hoping to show lawmakers how important it is to Connecticut. State lawmakers have a standing invitation to meet with ESPN staff and tour the Bristol facilities.

”What we are doing is educating,” said Mark Brennan, the lobbyist who primarily works with ESPN.

It is important for the legislature and the administration to see how the proposed changes would affect businesses such as ESPN, he said.

ESPN's greatest worry is that Connecticut could decide to repeal tax exemptions on broadcast equipment. The company needs to keep its equipment current and taxing the equipment will make that more difficult, Soltys said. The company is also worried about the future of other tax exemptions, including the exemption on media payroll services and on non-cable services, Soltys said. Repealing these exemptions would negate some of the film tax credit, which ESPN does take advantage of, he added.

The proposed 30-percent corporation tax surcharge also worries ESPN, as does the Democrats' desire to reduce the limit on the total value of corporation tax credits from 70 percent of a company's tax liability without the credits to 65 percent for next fiscal year and to 50 percent for fiscal years 2010 and 2011.

While Soltys says the company would lose millions of dollars if some of the proposals are enacted, he would not compare what ESPN would lose to the company's overall budget. ESPN and Disney declined to release the company's operating budget figures.

Fred V. Carstensen, director for the University of Connecticut's Center for Economic Policy Analysis, suspects the impact would be tiny, in part because ESPN was the main beneficiary of a change in corporate tax law in 2000. Companies such as ESPN may determine taxable income based on the ratio of their gross receipts from sales in Connecticut to total receipts from all sales, allowing companies with lots of property and employees in Connecticut to pay lower taxes if most of its sales are outside of the state.

Even though it is giving ESPN a tax break, the state still comes out ahead, Carstensen said.

But still ESPN is concerned, and they are not the only business worried about taxes going up.

”What ESPN is saying is very similar to what we're hearing,” said Joe Brennan, senior vice president for the Connecticut Business & Industry Association.  

---

CT treasurer authorized to borrow $700M 
DAY
Posted on Apr 17, 3:15 PM EDT

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- The State Bond Commission has authorized Connecticut's treasurer to sell up to $700 million in bonds to raise cash to pay off this fiscal year's bills.

Gov. M. Jodi Rell says payments to local school districts are the largest bill due at the end of the month. And considering the state is still waiting for some federal stimulus payments, she says money from the bond sale will likely be needed.

State Treasurer Denise Nappier is calling the bond sale a "safety measure" in case the state finds itself in a cash squeeze before the fiscal year ends on June 30.

Rell says new figures show revenue from the personal income tax are down from last year. While sales taxes are also down, there's some slight improvement from the last few months.

---

Economists Send Up Red Flags On Dems' Tax Plan
The Hartford Courant
By LYNN DOAN
April 16, 2009

With the state's three-year budget deficit forecast hovering between $6 billion and $9 billion, Democrats are pushing a tax plan that economists warn will wipe out thousands of jobs both in old-line and emerging Connecticut industries.

The tax package unveiled by the state legislature's Democratic majority earlier this month includes three main hits to business: a 30 percent surcharge on the corporate earnings tax; an end to sales tax exemptions on some key purchases such as computer services; and stricter limits on tax credits, including the lucrative research and development credits that keep many startup businesses afloat.

While the higher taxes would help keep the state above water and could avert public employee job cuts, economists and business executives say the plan would also exacerbate mounting layoffs in a deep recession and drive out companies that many see as the future of Connecticut's economy.

"I don't have numbers in my computer that are going to tell me what this is going to do to jobs, but I know it's not good," said Nicholas S. Perna, economic adviser for Webster Bank and a lecturer at Yale University. "You're either going to discourage companies from staying in Connecticut by putting a surcharge on them when profits are very hard to come by, or you're going to discourage them from relocating here."

No one, in fact, has complete numbers on estimated job losses or even on exactly how much the Democrats' proposal would raise in new revenue from business.

The state is expected to collect $315 million in the next three years from the corporate earnings surcharge and $79.5 million annually from the 54 tax exemptions that would be repealed — although some of those exemptions apply to consumers.

Calculating the effect on the tighter R&D credit policy is harder because that depends heavily on company decisions that are colored by state policy. Tax reformers in Connecticut have long argued that it's impossible to gauge the effectiveness of the state's many exemptions and credits because it isn't known what a company does with the money.

"There are some sales tax exemptions, and there are some tax credits that have been there for many years for no reason except that some lobbyist is pushing for it to be there," said state Rep. Demetrios S. Giannaros, D- Farmington, an economics professor at the University of Hartford. "Really, we should let businesses compete fairly and more jobs will be created."

As proposals wend though the Capitol, debate rages over whether the money collected, which many say represents a fair share from business, would outweigh job losses in the state's private sector. Companies' decisions on hiring are impossible to predict, as they depend not only on finances but attitudes, many executives say.

But by most accounts, hundreds of millions of dollars in higher business taxes, part of the Democrats' overall plan to increase state taxes by $3 billion over the next two years, would exact a significant cost to the state's economy.

Biotech, Fuel Cells

The 30 percent surcharge on corporate taxes alone would purge 470 Connecticut jobs a year for the next 10 years, according to an analysis done by Stan McMillen, chief economist for the state Department of Economic and Community Development.

McMillen said just one of the sales tax exemptions on the chopping block — for computer and data processing services — would result in another 2,200 job losses annually for the next 10 years. He estimated that, together, the surcharge and the repeal of the computer services exemption would result in a $344 million decline in the size of the state's economy each year for the next 10 years.

"And this is just a very small part of the entire package," he said.

Business advocates say Connecticut's stalwart manufacturing sector and two key growth industries — biotech and fuel cell technology — would particularly suffer from the tax proposals. Among the sales tax exemptions to be repealed are three that allow these businesses to buy equipment, fuel and tools tax-free or at a discounted tax rate.

"Isn't that madness? We're one of the leading states in the country on fuel cell technology and they're going to increase their costs by 6 percent," said University of Connecticut economist Fred V. Carstensen. "That strikes me as being bizarre, just bizarre."

Carstensen, director of UConn's Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis, said "there is no question" that the repeals would prompt job losses and "venue shopping" among Connecticut's businesses.

But Carstensen said the Democrats' proposal to impose a 30 percent tax surcharge would cause less damage to the state economy than the spending cuts laid out in the governor's budget because it would preserve a higher level of public services and thus preserve jobs.

"Government spending generates the largest economic benefit," he said. "If the choice is between raising taxes and laying people off, then you want to raise taxes."

He added that a surcharge poses no threat to Connecticut businesses because they've become "very, very skillful at manipulating tax codes."

"There's a whole cadre of lawyers and accountants who track all these things and that's a lot easier than relocating your business," he said.

'A Chilling Effect'

Economists and executives warn about decisions companies make based on their perceptions of the state's policies — although in this recession, unlike in the past, virtually every state faces a similar bind and many are increasing taxes.

In Danbury, companies are already "acting defensively," instituting four-day work weeks and furloughs, said Stephen A. Bull, president of the Greater Danbury Chamber of Commerce. There isn't much left for these businesses to do, Bull said, but to cut jobs, relocate or simply shut down.

"They are positioning themselves," he said, "for what could transpire on the state level."

Companies currently use the tax credits to reduce their corporate earnings tax liability by up to 70 percent — but that would shrink to 50 percent for most companies over the next two years under the proposal.

This reduction would equate to millions of dollars in lost investment in Connecticut's bio-pharmaceutical industry alone, said Paul Pescatello, president and CEO of Connecticut United for Research Excellence, a trade group for the state's bio-pharmaceutical and life science companies.

"This is the most innovative industry, arguably, we've got in this country," he said. "The biotech-pharmaceutical industry spends more than any other industry on research and development, so these research and development tax credits are critical."

Pfizer Inc. is an especially sensitive example. The company employs 5,000 people at its global research headquarters in Groton and New London, and is buying and merging with a competitor, Wyeth — a merger that will lead to job reductions in places now being determined.

In a statement released Wednesday, Pfizer said it was "concerned with any proposal that may stifle innovation."

Pescatello said he is still polling his members to determine exactly how much less they would be able to invest in research under the Democrats' tax proposal.

Even without solid numbers, he said Wednesday, "it's going to have a chilling effect on how their future stands in Connecticut."

---

WORRIED MUNICIPALITIES LOOK AHEAD: Conn. Communities' 2010 Financial Outlook Is Grim
The Hartford Courant
By DON STACOM
April 15, 2009

The economic nose dive is driving Connecticut communities this year to slash services, lay off employees and raise taxes.  By next spring, could these look like the good old days?

While they struggle to balance their books through the worst year in memory, municipal and school leaders are also looking ahead to 2010 — and their projections are grim.  Communities are scrambling for short-term fixes, but many of those solutions — reserve funds, stimulus money, one-time employee concessions — won't be available next time around. And next year, municipal pension plans will start showing the real damage of the Wall Street meltdown.

"Any public official who is banking on next year being better is being, well, less than honest or is suffering from severe denial," West Hartford Mayor Scott Slifka said.

"I would predict that many programs/jobs [statewide] that are 'saved' in the current year will face elimination in the next year," he said.

Unless the state suspends mandates or boosts education aid, "we are about to fall off a cliff," cautioned Bristol Superintendent Philip Streifer.

What to do? Recommendations vary, but three points win broad consensus: Huge property tax increases won't work, local government must be permanently restructured, and the state mandates that once were merely inconvenient are now flat-out unaffordable.  Last week, The Courant contacted six municipal and school leaders who were among the first to identify the severity of the economic downturn last fall. They agree that an economic recovery would sharply improve the forecast; otherwise, the state should brace for more turbulence in 2010.

The chief problem is that the easiest-to-find savings will be gone. Much like families selling their SUVs or canceling cable service, towns are grabbing all the "low-hanging fruit" this year to make ends meet. That means tougher choices next time if more cuts are needed.  Plainville Town Manager Robert Lee summed it up this way: "Most of the 'moderately difficult savings' have been wrung out of the budget."

Some examples:

•In the midst of this economic downpour, towns are raiding their rainy day funds. But if the rain is still falling next year, that money won't be available.

•Much of the federal stimulus money should be gone by then, too. Some funding extends into 2010-11, but at lower levels.

•Many city unions are reluctantly accepting wage freezes or givebacks this year; the resistance to a second round is likely to be tougher.

•Postponing vehicle replacements and building repairs now will cluster extra expenses in 2010, when another year of delays may prove impossible.

And starting in mid-2010, many communities will have to pony up big money to cover pension fund losses. Bills for pension contributions lag nearly a year, so towns now are making up for investment losses before last summer. The worst effects of the collapse will hit next winter. Slifka projects that for many towns, the impact looks to be "staggering."

Homeowners are already under strain, so big property tax increases aren't feasible, officials agree.

"The ability for taxpayers to pay their taxes is obviously in question with high unemployment," said Bristol Comptroller Glenn Klocko. "If they can't pay today's tax levels, how can they support tomorrow's levels?"

Streifer projects his schools need annual 1-mill increases for years to keep up with mandates and special education inflation, and acknowledges bluntly, "That is unsustainable."

He questioned why the General Assembly won't suspend costly state regulations.

"The state is just not interested in acting in this arena," he said.

Change at the local level is inevitable, officials agreed. Farmington Valley towns, traditionally hard-line advocates of home rule, are open to cooperation now.

"We need to use this year to look at structural changes in government that will help us get through the future difficult years, such as regional collaborative efforts, regional dispatch systems and sharing staff," Simsbury First Selectman Mary Glassman said.

Manchester has been reducing staff for years, and is doing away with defined-benefit pensions for non-union workers.

"Municipal operations are well into a permanent state of scarce resources," Manchester General Manager Scott Shanley said. "Illusion now will just prolong the crisis. I don't mean to be negative, but also don't want to be caught unaware. The challenge is, we just don't know what's ahead."

Shanley sees a positive side: The challenges of 2010 can be predicted, unlike the sudden nationwide implosion last year.

"At least for next year we have more time to plan," he said. "We are already on it."

---

Legislative Panel Endorses Bill Directing Highway Money To Bike Paths, Sidewalks
The Hartford Courant
By DON STACOM
April 14, 2009

Cyclists and pedestrian groups won a round Monday in their campaign to direct more state highway money toward building bike paths and sidewalks, but some lawmakers warned that confusion threatens the prospect of approval by the full General Assembly.

"This is very well-intentioned, but municipalities are having a rough time keeping up with road surfacing. If we take money away from them, that's a hit on the municipalities," said Sen. Leonard Fasano, a ranking Republican on the legislature's planning and development committee.

At issue is whether 1 percent of all state highway construction and repair money should be set aside for building or maintaining sidewalks and bike paths. The proposed legislation appears to apply to municipal road-repair grants from the state, too.

Advocates dub the formula a "complete streets" plan, and say it ensures that alternative transportation isn't shortchanged in favor of roads and highways.

"This is critical to those of us concerned about urban communities," said Democratic Rep. Brendan Sharkey, co-chairman of the committee. "In this day and age, we're trying to find new solutions to our transportation problems, and pedestrian and bicycle access is something we should be doing."

Rep. Jack Hennessy, D-Bridgeport, agreed, saying that bike paths and sidewalks are important to protect cyclists and pedestrians from traffic, and to encourage alternatives to carbon-producing vehicles.

Bicyclists and pedestrian groups rallied at the Capitol earlier this year to press for more funding. Ryan Lynch, senior planner for the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, previously told lawmakers that bike and pedestrian lanes, bus shelters, bike racks at train stations and similar amenities are badly needed in Connecticut. His group maintains that Connecticut spends less than most other states on alternative transportation.

But Fasano and Rep. William Aman, the committee's ranking GOP House member, said the bill isn't clear enough about how towns would proceed in cases where they must repair roads but don't need sidewalks. Advocates couldn't answer several technical questions about the bill, and Aman said he was concerned that unclear legislation would just add more burden to towns and cities.

The committee backed the bill by a roughly 2-1 ratio, and the measure goes on to review by other committees.

---

Budget plan appears dead on arrival; Democratic proposal likely won't get vote
CT POST
By Ken Dixon, STAFF WRITER
Posted: 04/04/2009 05:50:05 PM EDT

HARTFORD -- The General Assembly's budget-writing committees passed a two-year, $38.2 billion budget, but there's no schedule to debate it in the House or Senate.

Although they're not saying one way or the other, majority Democrats who hammered it through on Thursday may never even vote on it.

With four Democratic senators rejecting the package -- including Sen. Gayle S. Slossberg of Milford, Sen. Bob Duff of Norwalk and Sen. Andrew J. McDonald of Stamford -- it's not likely that the Senate's 24-12 majority could override a promised veto by Gov. M. Jodi Rell.

The legislation might just become a cleansing and venting experience, on the way to an eventual compromise deal with the Republican governor, if not minority GOP lawmakers, in time for the next fiscal year that starts July 1.

For now, Rell and Democrats seem stalled in the harsh-rhetoric phase of the budget-making process, with nine weeks left before the June 3 legislative adjournment.

As the Appropriations Committee debated the package Thursday afternoon, led by criticism from Sen. Dan Debicella, R-Shelton, ranking member of the panel, Rell called a news conference blasting Democrats, characterizing their budget cuts "phantom" and their $3.3 billion in new taxes unacceptable.

Republicans even printed up and circulated "Phantom of the Budget" tickets, which were copied and doctored from the upcoming road production of "The Phantom of the Opera" coming to the Bushnell theater this
month.

"The governor believes they should vote on the budget," Chris Cooper, Rell's Capitol spokesman, said Friday.

"They made their two committees vote on it. Weeks ago they came up with their phony budget cuts. If they believe in it, vote on it."

The Democratic package includes a sliding scale of increased taxes on those with joint incomes of $250,000 or higher; the elimination of the $500 property tax credit for lower incomes; and a three-year, 30 percent surcharge on corporate taxes to generate an additional $320 million.  Democrats accuse Rell of underestimating the state's fiscal problems when she offered her $38.4 billion package in February that was $2.8 billion out of balance in the growing deficit.

"We put forth a balanced budget with finances equal to expenditures," Speaker of the House Christopher G. Donovan said. "There's a real contrast between our package and the one offered by the governor."

Donovan said Rell has a statutory responsibility to present a supplemental plan if her budget slips out of balance. "Two months have passed and she hasn't provided an updated package," he said.

Donovan and Senate President Pro Tempore Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, spoke at a news conference challenging Rell and Republicans to engage. Williams, reading aloud Rell's criticism of the Democrats, grew prickly.

"She said 'the most fiscally irresponsible scheme I've seen in all my years in the Capitol,' " Williams said. "It sounds to me like she's describing her own budget. She is misleading when she tells folks that her budget is balanced, when it's almost $3 billion out of balance."

When asked, though, about the opposition of Democratic senators and when he plans to bring the budget to a vote, Williams begged the question.

"I'm just very proud of all the people who voted for this," Williams said. "Let's remember what happened yesterday. We were able to pass a budget-and-tax package that were the toughest budget-and-tax packages that were ever passed in the state of Connecticut. We do have folks who do have the courage to stand up in this tough time and do what's right."

When pressed by a reporter about whether he would run the bill, Williams conceded that the budget, at this point, is just a guideline.

"What we have said all along is that we need the governor at the table," he said. "No one has ever said, as you know, that in this crisis that we expect to somehow do a budget that overrides a veto. We've traditionally reached out to the governor."

Admitting that partisan sniping is increasing, Williams said that Rell's criticism was overstated and ignored the Democrats' billion dollars in spending cuts in the first year of the proposed budget and $1.4 billion in the second-year reductions.

"We've put a balanced budget on the table," Donovan said.

On Friday, Democrats wrote a letter to Rell asking to sit down soon for bipartisan negotiations. Conspicuously left out of the letter was any reference to minority Republicans in the Legislature, who complained last week that they've been jettisoned from the process.  Asked further about the GOP complaints, Williams said that Republicans would be welcome in the talks as lawmakers try to tackle the worst budget crisis since 1991, when a billion-dollar deficit led to the state's personal income tax, and possibly the worst crisis in state history.

State Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield, said Democrats have wasted time and good will since the start of the session in January.

"Instead of working in a bipartisan way to craft a responsible budget for the state of Connecticut, the Democrats have spent the past three months behind closed doors, crafting a partisan budget proposal that turns out to be nothing more than a political document," McKinney said.

"Sen. Williams confirmed today that he doesn't plan to bring his budget proposal up for a vote, an obvious admission that he doesn't even have enough votes to pass it. If he doesn't take his own proposal seriously, how can he expect the people of Connecticut to?"

House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, told reporters that there has to be a better way than raising $3.3 billion in new taxes.

"People are angry," Cafero said. "There's saying 'we're hurting, Did you make any consolidations, decrease the size of government, do early retirement?' The answer to all those questions is no. This is not our best work and now it's time to get serious."

Senate Majority Leader Martin M. Looney, D-New Haven, may have put the whole process in perspective, complete with the stakes for failing to reach a budget agreement before July 1, such as the now-infamous legislative sessions of 1991 and 2003.

"As we all know, those of us who studied classical mythology, there was a figure called Sisyphus whose punishment was to roll a rock up the hill for all eternity, knowing that when he reached the top of the hill the rock would come rolling down," Looney said. "But he would still keep rolling that rock."

---

State Budget: Cuts and tax hikes on the agenda 
DAY
By Ted Mann 
Published on 4/2/2009

Hartford – Democrats proposed cuts to virtually every state agency, broad income tax increases, a surcharge on corporate taxes and reductions in municipal aid in the budget bills presented Thursday to the legislature’s Appropriations and Finance Committees.

The committee chairmen unveiled the broad outlines of their 2010-11 budget at a Capitol press conference ahead of what will almost certainly be lengthy committee debates on the spending and tax bills, which attempt to close a two-year deficit of more than $8.7 billion, far larger than that projected in the Feb. 4 proposal of Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell.

The budget will raise income taxes to from 5 to 6 percent on couples filing jointly who earn $250,000 per year or more.

The rate would rise to 7 percent for couples earning $500,000, to 7.5 percent for those earning $750,000, and to 7.95 percent for those earning $1 million or more.

The tax package would also add a 30 percent surcharge on the corporate tax for each of the next three years.

Meanwhile, the co-chairmen of the Appropriations Committee said the spending plan would demand meaningful cuts, including 25 percent of management overhead in the troubled Department of Children and Families, while trying to leave most municipal aid funding streams untouched. But the committee also proposed cutting $24.5 million per year out of the Mashantucket Pequot and Mohegan Fund, which distributes a portion of the state’s revenues from casino gambling to cities and towns.

“We recognize we will receive criticism from virtually every direction and we accept that,” said Sen. Toni Harp, D-New Haven, the Senate co-chair of the Appropriations panel.

But Harp and others also said they had been backed into proposing unpopular cuts and tax hikes by Rell’s refusal to acknowledge what they believe is the full extent of the state deficit.

“Nature abhors a vacuum,” Harp said, referring to what Democrats portray as Rell’s underestimate of the deficit.

The governor’s budget proposal assumed a two-year deficit of just $6 billion, and Rell has recently revised her estimate to $7.4 billion.

Rep. Cameron Staples, D-New Haven, defended the majority’s budgetary approach as similar to that used to close the two most recent major financial crises in Connecticut history, in 2002-03 and 1991-92. And he said the adoption of new income tax brackets for the wealthier end of the income tax spectrum would still keep in Connecticut in line with its neighboring states.

“Even with our increases, we would be below most of the other states in the region,” Staples said.

Republican lawmakers slammed the Democrats’ plan as irresponsible and urged a public outcry to force deeper cuts to state services in order to avoid tax hikes.

“How do you explain this to the people who voted for you?” said House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk.

Cafero also slammed the imposition of the corporate tax surcharge, saying it was likely to exacerbate some of the very problems Democrats said they sought to avoid, especially a potential increase in state unemployment.

Those companies to whom the surcharge would apply are those that have earned profits, Cafero noted: “By definition, those are the only people that are going to create jobs and we’re going to penalize them by 30 percent.”

---

This is a 20% hike for many, many Weston families - maybe as many as half...before their 401k became a 201k?
Democrats propose income tax hike.  Millionaire rate to hit 8%; bonding set to pay deficit
Stamford ADVOCATE
By Ken Dixon, STAFF WRITER
Posted: 04/01/2009 10:54:57 PM EDT

HARTFORD -- Higher income taxes and corporate surcharges will be among the legislation that the Democrat-controlled Finance Committee will approve today.

Capitol sources said Wednesday night that the plan includes a sliding scale on income taxes, with couples making more than $250,000 paying 6 percent, up to a new top bracket that will charge 8 percent on million-dollar incomes.

Those making less than $250,000 will see their income taxes stay at 5 percent under the proposal scheduled to be approved in the Finance Committee.

The Appropriations Committee will act on the spending side of the budget, including tens of millions of dollars in spending cuts at the state Department of Children and Families.

Three people familiar with the Democratic proposal said the plan includes bonding part of the current billion-dollar deficit in the budget that runs through June 30.

They said higher taxes, including a temporary three-year corporate surcharge, will exceed cuts in current spending.

Speaker of the House Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden, and Senate President Pro Tempore Donald Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, confirmed for reporters in the Capitol on Wednesday night that the Democratic budget will include enhanced revenue and long-term borrowing.  They declined to reveal details of the $38 billion budget, but claimed that it is less than the $38.4 billion package Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell proposed in February.

Donovan and Williams said the anticipated action of the two committees is two weeks ahead of the legislative deadline.

"This is a tough budget for a tough time," Williams said. "At the same time, folks have worked very hard to protect critical services: health care for children; education, to make sure the opportunity is open for our children in future; energy; transportation."

"This is a budget for Connecticut," Donovan said. "There are some things we really care about, such as education, health care and energy. At the same time we looked at waste in government and got rid of that waste."

Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield, said the plan appears to be a disappointment.

"After months of talking about working together in bipartisanship in order to address our historic deficit, the Democrats have drafted a budget behind closed doors without our input," McKinney said in a phone interview.

"We're at our best when we work together, so I'm hoping we'll still come together to reach a good budget for the state of Connecticut," he said. "I'm very afraid that the Democrats, while coming up with some cuts, haven't done the hard work of making government more efficient and smaller, while relying on increased personal income taxes."

McKinney said he's concerned with the Democrats apparent reliance on bonding the current deficit -- which Democratic Comptroller Nancy Wyman said Wednesday has reached a billion dollars -- because it will cost the state more in the long run.  House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, in a statement released Wednesday night, said Democrats ignored pleas by GOP lawmakers to take a more active role in the budget process.

"We remain willing to take on the fiscal crisis confronting Connecticut together because with each passing day the problems grow worse," Cafero said.

---

Dems warn of deep cuts, tax hikes
Greenwich TIME
By Brian Lockhart, Staff Writer
Posted: 03/30/2009 06:44:30 PM EDT

State Democrats will propose more than $2 billion in spending cuts for the coming two fiscal years, and increases in income and sales taxes are likely when they unveil their budget Thursday.  State Senate President Donald Williams, D-Brooklyn, told members of the Business Council of Fairfield County at a legislative breakfast Monday that the budget plan will include about $1 billion in spending cuts in 2009-10 and the same in 2010-11.

"There will absolutely have to be very deep cuts in spending," Williams said. "It's not going to be pretty. No one is going to have a parade for the legislature at the end of this session."

Williams did not provide details about the cuts and avoided discussing changes in tax policy. He hinted strongly that "significant revenue adjustments" are part of the plan.

"Are we raising taxes on the wealthy? What are defined as 'the wealthy?' Are we changing business taxation?" said Joe McGee, vice president of public policy for the business council.

Williams provided no insight but spoke of the Democrats' efforts to apportion the "shared sacrifice" needed to address the deficit "in as fair a way as possible." The Office of Fiscal Analysis estimates the state budget deficit at $8.7 billion for fiscal 2009-10 and 2010-11.

The legislature has to "do better" than when it cut smaller deficits in the early 1990s and 2002 using a ratio of 50 percent tax increases, 30 percent spending cuts and 20 percent borrowing, Williams said.

"That gives you some idea how Connecticut approached this in previous years," Williams said.

He would like to avoid borrowing now, he said.  He compared Connecticut's deficit problem to that of California, which boosted income and sales taxes.

"We are right up there, almost identical in terms of the scope of our problem," Williams said.  In New York, lawmakers Monday announced a budget deal to raise income taxes for three years on households earning more than $300,000.  A progressive income tax for Connecticut is "on the table, absolutely," along with "some changes to the sales tax," Williams said.

He would not say what income levels would be taxed higher.

"That's to be determined between now and Thursday," he said.

In 2007, state Democrats tried to pass an income tax on households earning more than $250,000. Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell vetoed the bill when lawmakers from Stamford and Norwalk fought the tax hike.  Williams would not discuss how the Democrats' plan might affect businesses and tax credits.

"It's fluid right now," Williams said. "We're running different scenarios."

The minority leaders, state Sen. John McKinney, R-Fairfield, and state Rep. Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk, said government should be cut as much as possible before tax hikes are considered.

"We're going to need both layoffs and concessions if we're going to emerge from this economic crisis," McKinney said. "It's the only way."

The state should stop delivering social services and turn that over to private nonprofit providers who do it well for less pay and benefits, he said, estimating that would save $300 million to $400 million.  Cafero touted Rell's budget proposals, such as merging the departments of education and higher education and eliminating several commissions. But tax increases are likely in the future, he said.

"We have to do all we can now to avoid the tax increases, knowing they're going to come down the road," Cafero said.

He is skeptical about the Democrats' claim that they want to streamline government, given they never found $220 million in savings they pledged to find to get the state out of the red in fiscal 2008-09, Cafero said.

"Here it is, the 30th of March. We've yet to find that money," Cafero said.

The Appropriations Committee has until April 6 to do that.

"That $220 million we're confident we'll find," Williams said.

---

Lyme disease bill passes hurdle
Greenwich TIME
By Brian Lockhart, Staff Writer
Posted: 03/26/2009 10:56:16 PM EDT
Updated: 03/26/2009 10:57:58 PM EDT

HARTFORD -- The legislature's Public Health Committee unanimously passed a bill about tick-borne Lyme disease Thursday that could rock the health care industry if it becomes law.

"This is a huge message," state Rep. Kim Fawcett, D-Fairfield, bill sponsor, said after the panel approved the proposal without debate.

Supporters said the proposal would validate the treatment of chronic Lyme disease in Connecticut. It clarifies to physicians, despite an opinion from the Infectious Disease Society of America that chronic Lyme disease does not exist, that they do have the right to diagnose and prescribe long-term antibiotics for the illness without fear reprisal by the state.

"The thing that's important to us is we send a clear message, 'It's OK to go outside the Infectious Disease Society of America guidelines,' " said Fawcett, who is not a member of the health panel. Discovered in the mid-1970s in Connecticut, Lyme disease is transmitted to humans by the bite of infected blacklegged ticks.

Symptoms include fever, headache, fatigue and a rash. If untreated, infection can spread to joints, the heart and the nervous system.  The commonly accepted treatment is up to 28 days of antibiotics. But some patients are convinced they suffer from chronic Lyme disease and need longer courses of antibiotic treatment.  But the Infectious Diseases Society, which in 2006 developed updated treatment guidelines for doctors, dismisses chronic Lyme disease as a myth.

"There are no convincing published scientific data that support the existence of chronic Lyme disease," Anne Gershon, president of the Virginia-based society, wrote lawmakers in February.

She wrote that the concept of chronic Lyme disease has been promoted by "a small group of physicians," but the dangers of long-term antibiotic therapy are well-documented and should not be encouraged by legislation like the bill passed Thursday.  State Rep. Jason Bartlett, D-Bethel, another bill sponsor who sits on the Public Health Committee, told colleagues Thursday the legislation would address the dueling "standards for practice" that have arisen over chronic Lyme disease.

"Because of these two disagreements the (Connecticut) Department of Public Health, we feel, has been biased towards the 28 days of antibiotics," Bartlett said.

He said the result is a "chill effect" on physicians who might otherwise be willing to diagnose and treat chronic Lyme disease.  Following a public hearing on the bill in early February, William Gerrish, a spokesman for the health department, said there is no state policy against long-term antibiotic treatment of Lyme disease.  Gerrish said state health officials are concerned the bill as written would strip the department of its ability to review complaints and violations, particularly in cases where the care being provided to a patient deviates from current, evidence-based practice.

No doctors offered testimony in February that they felt persecuted by the state health department for treating chronic Lyme disease.

But at the time, Matthew Katz, vice president of the Connecticut State Medical Society, confirmed there are concerns among physicians over the state's recent actions against Dr. Charles Ray Jones, a New Haven pediatrician renowned for treating chronic Lyme disease.  In December 2007, the state Medical Examining Board, responding to an investigation by the Department of Public Health, fined Jones $10,000 and put him on probation for two years for diagnosing children with Lyme disease and treating them with antibiotics before examining them.

Jones is appealing the decision.  Katz said news coverage focused on the doctor's reputation as a last resort for those complaining of chronic Lyme disease.

"What appeared in the paper and on the news -- Lyme disease mistreatment -- it raised a lot of concerns," Katz said at the time.

Fawcett's bill states that as of July 1, 2009, the Medical Examining Board may not discipline a licensed physician "solely for" prescribing, administering and dispensing long-term antibiotic therapy to a patient clinically diagnosed with Lyme disease as documented in their medical records.

The State Medical Society backs the concept of the bill, but is not taking a position on the existence of chronic Lyme disease.

Gerrish said the Department of Public Health is still hoping to work with the health committee to "preserve our ability to conduct a thorough investigation to protect the public."

"That bill is perfect in our eyes," Fawcett said.

But health committee co-chairwoman state Rep. Betsy Ritter, D-Quaker Hill, told her colleagues before Thursday's vote the legislation may change before going to the full General Assembly.

"There will be . . . at least a bit more work going on with this bill before we're finished," Ritter said.

---

Legal Experts Wade In On AIG Bonus Process
The Hartford Courant
By LYNN DOAN
March 19, 2009

Well before paying out bonuses, AIG decided that a threatening provision in the Connecticut Wage Act left the company no choice but to go ahead with $165 million in "retention pay" to the employees who helped drive the company into the ground.

The troubled company apparently believed that Connecticut law applied even to employees based outside of its Wilton offices, in far-off places like London and Hong Kong, because the retention pay plan was written under state rules.

But on Wednesday — as outrage spread over the bonuses paid to 370 people, in part with federal bailout dollars — labor lawyers and public officials said it isn't so.

AIG had myriad legal strategies at its disposal to avoid making the payments, said employment lawyers, many of whom were shocked to learn that the company had simply decided to dole out the bonuses.

"There are defenses to everything. Nobody writes a letter and says, 'You know what? We did write a contract. Here's the money,'" said Richard E. Hayber, a Hartford labor lawyer who represents workers suing their employers. "Boy, if that were the case, in half the lawsuits I've brought in my life, I don't know why someone didn't just write me a check."

In a memo to U. S. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner, AIG said that it was "legally obligated" to pay out the latest bonuses — which were part of a larger bonus program for 2008 and 2009 — to employees at its Financial Products subsidiary in Wilton.

AIG did not return calls seeking comment on its interpretation of state wage laws. Most agree that retention pay — known as "stay bonuses" — could be defined as wages that, if improperly withheld, could subject a company to double damages in Connecticut under the act. Attorney General Richard Blumenthal disagreed, saying Wednesday that the bonuses would not be considered wages under the state laws, and therefore would not be subject to the laws.

But lawyers, including Bernard Jacques of Hartford, said that the company was in a position to renegotiate. In any case where there is a cause for termination, he said, an employer has the right to renegotiate all conditions of a contract, including any promised bonuses.

"There is no question that all of these folks drove that company into the ground by incompetent decision-making," said Jacques, a labor and employment partner at Pepe & Hazard LLC. "That's a classic example of cause."

Lawyers also cited the doctrine of "commercial impracticability." This doctrine protects a company when following through with a contract is unfeasible due to some unexpected event — in this case, the market meltdown.

"It would seem to me that when the federal government has to come in and prop up the company, and the company would be literally bankrupt and these people would be without jobs if not for the government's infusion, you have an example of commercial impracticability," Jacques said.

Hartford lawyer Daniel A. Schwartz used the term "unconscionability," a way to fight against contracts that are grossly unfair to one party.

Gov. M. Jodi Rell on Wednesday ordered the state's consumer protection agency to subpoena documents and investigate whether the bonuses could be voided "as against public policy" under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act.

"Since the company cited Connecticut law, they will have to live by Connecticut law," Rell said.

At the legislature, Senate Democrats called for an 80 percent state income tax surcharge on Wednesday for any bonus payments received from a company receiving federal bailout money. Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams, said the law would apply to state residents only.

Jacques said that it might not be too late for AIG to correct its mistake and attempt to take back the bonuses already paid. If the company were to deem its legal analysis false and decide that it actually isn't under obligation to pay the bonuses, employees would be forced to give them back.

As AIG asked employees to pay back some of the bonus money Wednesday, it was still not publicly known how much of the cash had been paid out in Connecticut.

---

Effort To Stop AIG Bonuses Based on Obscure Connecticut Law
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING, The Hartford Courant
4:32 PM EDT, March 17, 2009

Top Republican legislators are calling upon the General Assembly to change Connecticut state law next week as a way to stop future bonuses that are similar to those paid by AIG, the insurance giant that has received about $170 billion in federal bailout money.

The AIG bonus flap has caused outrage around the nation, including from President Barack Obama, who asked the treasury secretary to investigate all legal means to stop the bonuses.

The company says it needs to pay the bonuses because of a provision in Connecticut law, under Section 31-72, that is known as the Connecticut Wage Act.

"The state of Connecticut should not be used as the scapegoat or the excuse for AIG to pay these outrageous'' bonuses, said House Republican leader Lawrence Cafero of Norwalk.

Those receiving the bonuses work primarily at AIG's financial products unit that is based in Wilton, an affluent town in Fairfield County. As such, AIG says that the bonuses must comply with Connecticut state law.

Cafero and Senate Republican leader John McKinney of Fairfield are calling for lawmakers to change the Connecticut Wage Act in order to exempt the double-penalty provision for any bonuses that are paid by companies that have received TARP or federal stimulus money.

If AIG failed to pay the bonuses under state law, legislators said, the company could be forced to pay a double penalty - meaning paying $330 million in bonuses.

"We are outraged to learn that AIG is using Connecticut wage laws as leverage to use taxpayer money to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses,'' McKinney said. "The legislature should move immediately to change Connecticut law. We in Connecticut can do what Congress failed to do - which is protect taxpayers from having their hard-earned money used for these exorbitant bonuses.''

Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell agrees with fellow Republicans about changing the law.

"The fact that AIG would even consider paying bonuses of any kind out of taxpayer funds is appalling, especially when it was AIG's greed that led to the business failure that necessitated a federal bailout in the first place,'' Rell said. "To cite Connecticut state law as a defense for this action is contemptible. I strongly support legislation that would prohibit entities which receive federal or state bailout money from using those funds for excessive bonuses or payouts similar to AIG's outrageous attempt at self-enrichment."

---

State's Gold Coast Braces For Jerry Springer 
DAY
By John Christoffersen    
Published on 3/16/2009

New Haven - Connecticut's Gold Coast, a bastion of suburban perfection including both Martha Stewart and the Stepford Wives, is about to become home to Jerry Springer's bawdy TV show, which features wife swappers, strippers and skinheads.
Subject to negotiations, Springer's show will move from Chicago this summer into the new production studio at the Rich Forum Theater in Stamford, about 30 miles from New York City and next to one of the region's largest and oldest Catholic churches. The pastor says he plans to talk to church lawyers to see if they can stop the plan after hearing complaints from parishioners, including one who called the show “low-brow.”

”They didn't think this was the right place for it,” said the Rev. Stephen DiGiovanni of St. John's Catholic Church. “I'm not very thrilled about it.”

Fairfield County is one of the nation's richest regions and inspired the classic film “The Stepford Wives” in which the men in a seemingly perfect town find a way to turn their spouses into beautiful, compliant housebound robots. Stewart's television show focusing on fine living was filmed for many years in nearby Westport.

Springer, the former mayor of Cincinnati, shows the seedier side of life with a show known for profanity, fistfights, cheating spouses and incestuous relationships. Many of the guests are from low-income backgrounds and reinforce negative attitudes about the poor, DiGiovanni said.

”Springer is making millions on other peoples' misery and stereotypes,” DiGiovanni said.

Telephone messages were left Thursday and Friday for Springer.

The deal would also bring two other shows with similar formats. “Maury,” hosted by Maury Povich, would move from New York, and “The Steve Wilkos Show,” hosted by the former security director of “Springer,” would move from Chicago this summer to start producing shows for next season.

Connecticut officials see dollar signs amid the Wall Street meltdown that has taken a toll on Fairfield County, which borders New York and is home to many business executives. They said the new studio that will house Springer's show and two other shows will create 150 to 200 jobs and could be the start of an emerging entertainment industry in Connecticut.

”It's a home run for Fairfield County,” said Joseph McGee of the Business Council of Fairfield County. “This is not public radio, but who cares? Springer may upgrade his audience mix.”

Connecticut officials announced last month they were in final negotiations with NBC Universal to open the studio by offering a 30 percent production tax credit on annual activity and a 20 percent tax credit on infrastructure costs exceeding $1 million. The state would spend $3 million in infrastructure, Gov. M. Jodi Rell said.

”We hope to close the deal soon, but I'm kind of getting a jump on the gun becase we're so excited about bringing some new talent and new production to the state,” she told reporters Feb. 27.

”We are delighted that the film production tax credit enables us to create high-paying jobs in the state, and we're happy to be working with the governor and the mayor to stimulate the Connecticut economy and also to help save the arts center financially,” NBC said.

The deal will help the Stamford Center for the Arts - which runs the Rich Forum and another theater - pull out of Chapter 11 bankruptcy, said Michael Widland, the center's chairman. The financial stability during precarious times also will enhance the arts by allowing the center to continue to serve as a venue for ballet, symphony and other performances, he said.

Stamford Mayor Dannel Malloy said he has not received any complaints about Springer's show coming to his city, which ranks among the safest in the country. He denied the show would hurt the region's image.

”Having the rest of GE doesn't hurt either,” Malloy said, referring to NBC parent company General Electric, headquartered in nearby Fairfield.

Stamford has long been home to World Wrestling Entertainment, whose televised wrestling shows have sparked controversy over the years.

While Fairfield County is renowned for its wealth and cachet, local officials note that the region is more economically diverse than its image. The Jerry Springer show could shatter the Fairfield stereotype, said Frank Trotta, a lawyer who lives in Greenwich.

”If anything, it will bring the perception of Fairfield County more in reality,” Trotta said.

But he compared the show's new setting to a blizzard in Bermuda.

”One is nasty, cold and bitter,” Trotta said. “The other is bright, clean and warm. I'm not sure it's a good fit.”

But after a wave of corruption in Connecticut, some officials don't see much harm with Jerry Springer's arrival.

”Some of the politics in our state is as entertaining as anything Springer puts on,” said Michael Freimuth, Stamford's economic development director.  

---

Compromise sought on postings
New Haven Register
Associated Press
Sunday, March 15, 2009 7:17 AM EDT

HARTFORD — When it was approved last year, a law requiring Connecticut municipalities to quickly post their meeting minutes online was hailed by supporters as significantly boosting public access to information.

In the five months since it went into effect, however, several small towns have suspended their Web sites instead and others are considering it, all saying they lack the technology or money to comply with the new posting rules.  Now, several compromises are being considered at the General Assembly to balance the law’s original intent with the towns’ concerns about being fined for violating the state Freedom of Information Act.

“Some of the towns aren’t used to posting things regularly, so we do recognize this could be a new challenge,” said state Rep. James Spallone, D-Essex. “Maybe with a little time to figure out how to do it, the towns may find that it’s easier than they initially thought it would be.”

The law, which went into effect Oct. 1, requires municipalities to post agendas on their Web sites at least 24 hours before all public meetings and their minutes within a week afterward.  Several town leaders, especially in small communities, complained to their legislators that they rely on part-time or volunteer Webmasters. Others said complying with the law would mean paying more to contractors for the extra work, equating to an unfunded state mandate.

Failure to comply could result in complaints to the state Freedom of Information Commission. At least nine towns have suspended their Web sites since October rather than risk facing an FOI complaint for violating the new rules.  The legislature’s committee on government administration and elections, which Spallone co-chairs, recently endorsed a bill intended to offer some middle ground.

Spallone said it would let towns grant themselves a waiver in the first year without explanation to state officials, and in the second year by stating their rationale to the FOI Commission. “Maybe the FOI Commission can work with the towns and we wouldn’t need a legislative fix,” he said.

He said he hopes that by the third year, small towns will have found ways to comply or technology will have advanced enough to make the process easier for them.  Spallone said he thinks most towns would gladly comply if they could work out their financial and logistical concerns.  The law got little discussion during last year’s legislative session. It was tacked onto a much-publicized law that revokes pensions of state officials who are convicted of illegal activities in office.

“It did come as a surprise to many people in the towns, so what we want to do now is provide more opportunity for the towns to accomplish it, and for the state government to find out their concerns,” Spallone said.

Susan Bransfield, Portland’s first selectwoman and president of the Connecticut Council of Small Towns, said she also believes towns want to provide as much access to documents as possible for citizens.  But it can be difficult to do that when budgets are so tight and the fear of an FOI complaint is hanging over their heads, she said.  The Connecticut Council of Small Towns and Connecticut Conference of Municipalities both want last year’s law completely repealed.

“I don’t disagree with what the lawmakers were trying to do. I think it’s absolutely important that constituents and people interested in what’s going on in town have access to information,” Bransfield said.

“What’s difficult is trying to guarantee that you can be 100 percent in compliance with the law,” she said. “Even in towns like mine where we get a lot of help and assistance, it’s unnecessary that if an FOI complaint comes across the desk, we could be fined or slapped on the wrist or whatever.”

Connecticut lawmakers have proposed more than a dozen bills on the topic in the current General Assembly session.  Some would repeal last year’s law entirely. Others seek compromises to exempt smaller communities or ease the potential punishments for towns who try in good faith to obey the law.

The legislature’s government administration and elections committee last week endorsed the middle-ground proposal backed by Spallone and others. It now heads to the Senate, and would go into effect immediately if the full General Assembly approves it.

---

State braces for cash flow woe; Rell prepares in case revenues come up short
CT POST
By Ken Dixon, STAFF WRITER
Posted: 03/02/2009 03:53:02 PM EST

HARTFORD -- State Treasurer Denise Nappier warned Monday that Connecticut could run into a cash crunch as early as May because of the economic downturn.

Gov. M. Jodi Rell on Monday said she is planning a variety of options.

Rell's office said the extent of the cash-flow problem will depend on income-tax receipts expected around mid-April, but she is preparing to possibly bond some of the nearly $1 billion scheduled for release to city and town school systems May 1.

"Our state keeps its money in a common cash pool, in part so that we can earn as much interest as possible, the same way a family might keep most of its money in a savings account," Rell said in a statement.

She said the downside of that tactic is that when the economy slows, there is not a large amount of cash on hand, so the state may resort to borrowing or issuing bonds.

"In addition to regular bills, in the coming months the state must make the next round of Education Cost Sharing payments (the main grant for state education aid) to cities and towns, and we want to be sure there is enough cash on hand to make those grants without over-stretching our resources," Rell said.

The ECS payments of May 1 will total more than $945 million to cities and towns.

"It is not clear yet whether we will need to do anything," Rell said. "It would not be the first time the state has taken such action and it is only prudent to plan for all eventualities." She said the state could issue bond anticipation notes for the ECS funding or draw on a line of credit arranged with banks.

"If we must act, we will be looking for the best option, one that will give us the liquidity we need without incurring excessive interest charges or other expenses," Rell said. "I will consult with my budget office, the treasurer and others as we determine the next steps."

Rell said the flow of federal stimulus money into the state could also help the cash-flow problem.

Nappier's warning was in a draft letter to the governor dated Monday. Also Monday, State Comptroller Nancy Wyman said revenue continues to fall because of the nationwide economic downturn.

The income tax was projected to bring in $7.6 billion this year, but Wyman said it will fall at least $900 million short. The state also will pay out about $140 million more in tax refunds than was anticipated, while sales tax revenues are expected to decrease by about $352 million from estimates. The corporation tax is down by about $183 million, Wyman said.

---

Bill threatens property rights of evicted tenants
By AMANDA NORRIS, Hour Staff Writer
Posted on 03/02/2009

A proposal to give landlords automatic possession of evicted tenants' property has been bandied about by state lawmakers for several years, but never actually passed. Now it may have momentum on the floor of the General Assembly due to the worsening economy.

The bill would do away with requirements that a town or city take over evicted tenants' property for a period of 15 days. The tenant can then reclaim their property by partially reimbursing the town for the storage and moving costs but may often get a waiver for such fees, according to health department officials.

The Connecticut Conference of Municipalities (CCM) has been advocating for the passage of a bill doing away with such requirements and putting the property directly into landlords' hands. The reason, according to CCM spokesman Kevin Maloney, is that the removal and storage of such property costs towns and cities "hundreds of thousands of dollars" per year.

The bill has shed light on a philosophical divide between those who advocate for tenants' rights and those who say the tax burden on Connecticut cities and towns is too great because of onerous legislation such as the 15-day requirement.

Raphael Podolsky, an attorney and housing advocate with the Legal Assistance Resource Center of Connecticut, said it was unfair for proponents of the law to call existing legislation a "mandate."

According to Podolsky, the law establishing a tenants' right to have their property protected by a neutral entity, their local government, dates back to 1895.

In spite of its long history, Maloney said, the requirement has been "a thorn in the side of towns for many years," using taxpayer dollars to benefit a relative few.

Podolsky maintained that the requirement and other state mandates should not be conflated.
"It has been a long-standing duty of the towns from the perspective of protecting health and safety and ultimately it's been established to prevent the total impoverishment of tenants," Podolsky said.

The proposal's chances of being seriously considered by the General Assembly have become an example of tension between local and state governments as they deal with an unprecedented fiscal crisis.

"There's always a tension between all layers of government whether it's federal to state or state to local, but I think particularly with the budget difficulties there will be opportunities to reexamine some of the mandates that are out there," state Sen. Bob Duff, D-25, said.

Duff said he would be in favor of repealing state legislation that costs towns and cities money in removal and storage fees, but that that burden should not be transferred to landlords either.

"Landlords often go months during the eviction process without collecting rent and may even suffer damage, so I don't see how hoisting another requirement on them would make any sense," he said.

Adam Bovilsky, Director of the Norwalk Fair Rent Commission, said his office continued to receive a high number of referrals for information on housing law, including legal rights surrounding evictions.

Bovilsky said that the out of pocket cost to the city was "generally not recouped" through auctions or fees to tenants. However, he agreed with Podolsky that the proposal might seriously disadvantage low-income citizens.

"These are people who have lost their jobs due to the economy, and I think it's important that we give them every chance to land on firm ground," Bovilsky said.

---

Dems gamble on finding more coins in state’s couch
By Keith M. Phaneuf, Journal Inquirer
Published: Thursday, February 26, 2009 10:51 AM EST

HARTFORD — Majority Democrats in the General Assembly are counting on finding $220 million in surplus dollars among $1.6 billion in miscellaneous state funds to help eliminate this year’s debt.  There’s just one problem with that.

They’ve only found $167 million so far, and Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell’s budget staff says the surpluses lawmakers have targeted really are only worth about $100 million or less. That means Democrats are gambling on finding an extra $50 million to $120 million before June 30 — or else the state budget deficit will grow again.

“The bill that’s before us takes a lot of faith,” House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero, R-Norwalk, said late Wednesday during the House debate. Though all 37 Republicans in the 151-member House supported the measure, Cafero made it clear there is concern that the state could be pushing its fiscal luck.

Rell also was skeptical late Wednesday that Democrats could find that much surplus funding in these off-budget accounts. “My budget office believes that many of the ‘fund sweeps,’ intended to transfer $220 million into the General Fund, cannot happen because the money is either not there or is restricted to certain uses — and the majority Democrats know this very well.”

Rell has grown increasingly frustrated with majority Democrats, arguing that lawmakers continue to look for one-time sources of revenue to prop up expensive programs and services rather than cutting spending.  At issue are nearly $5.1 billion of special accounts, funds, and other programs outside of the General Fund, which makes up the bulk of this year’s $18.4 billion budget.  Many of those accounts and funds are legally untouchable. For example, government can’t dip into state employee pension funds.

But of that $5.1 billion, legislative fiscal analysts say, about $1.6 billion isn’t restricted legally. And after reviewing just under half, or $717 million, they found $167 million in surplus funds that could be redirected to close the deficit without hurting the programs they were dedicated to.

So if $167 million in surplus was found in a review of $717 million, could $220 million be found after all $1.6 billion of accounts are reviewed?

Democratic lawmakers say that’s a safe assumption.

“I guess I’m feeling more about hope tonight,” House Majority Leader Denise W. Merrill, D-Mansfield, said, noting there have been many fiscal assumptions made by Rell and by lawmakers from both parties.

For example, Rell’s $38.4 billion plan for the next two fiscal years counts on achieving $295 million in concessions from employee unions. But no concession package has been achieved.  Similarly, Democrats referred to the deficit-cutting plan they just adopted as slicing $1.22 billion off this fiscal year’s projected shortfall, which could be as high as $1.35 billion.  Still, the bill sent to Rell’s desk doesn’t include $111 million of the measures Democrats counted on their way to reaching that $1.22 billion.

Included within that larger figure are about $88 million in labor costs that could be saved this fiscal year — if Rell not only negotiates a concessions package for 2010 and 2011, but gets the unions to start the give-backs early on April 1.  An additional $22.1 million would come between April and July from a retirement incentive program that lawmakers didn’t approve but say they will adopt after concessions are achieved.

Still, unless a concessions deal is reached within a few days, a program couldn’t be set up fast enough to start April 1, and any savings this fiscal year would be impossible.

---

Tolls expected to return to state highways
Stamford Advocate
By Ken Dixon
Posted: 02/24/2009 08:59:49 AM EST

HARTFORD — It’s just a matter of time before highway tolls return to Connecticut for the first time in nearly a quarter century, the co-chairmen of the legislative Transportation Committee agreed Monday.

At the very least, Connecticut should consider EZ Pass-type tolls on its borders with Rhode Island, Massachusetts and New York to provide revenue for statewide highway and railroad improvements, they said.

But opposition from border towns will have to be taken into consideration as the state plans for the inevitable, said Rep. Antonio Guerrara, D-Rocky Hill, and Sen. Donald J. DeFronzo, D-New Britain, the co-chairmen.

“I’ve been an advocate of border tolls,” Guerrara said during a public hearing in the Legislative Office Building. “In four or five years this state will be better off.”

“There is a need for additional revenue sources,” DeFronzo said. “This is a process that we have to look at rationally and respectfully.”

“We don’t want these toll booths every 25 miles, the way we used to have,” said Sen. Edith G. Prague, D-Columbia, who testified in favor of bills that would reinstitute tolls for the first time since 1985.

That was the year when Gov. William A. O’Neill ended them, following a January 1983 crash at the Stratford toll plaza on Interstate 95, when an out-of-control tractor-trailer plowed into a line of cars, killing seven people.

Rep. David A. Scribner, R-Brookfield, ranking member of the committee, said the current budget crisis makes the possibility more attractive.

“Obviously, the interest is at a different level today than in past years,” Scribner said.

Rep. Janice R. Giegler, R-Danbury, said she and lawmakers from other border towns are worried about tolls forcing some motorists off interstate highways and onto local roads.

“Don’t you think the western borders will see a tremendous impact?” Giegler said. “I know the impact for us will be tremendous.”

Kevin Maloney, president of the Connecticut Messenger & Courier Association, said tolls would increase the cost of doing business in the state and raise prices on goods and services.

“It puts them in an economic disadvantage,” Maloney said. “It negatively impacts our economy.”

Other lawmakers said that so-called congestion pricing — charging rush-hour motorists more for using state roads — is a good way to make money and discourage people from driving if they don’t have to.

“There’s no question people will change their behavior if you have congestion pricing,” Rep. Demetrios S. Giannaros, D-Farmington, said in support of the legislation.

John A. Danaher, commissioner of the state Department of Public Safety, spoke in support of legislation that would require motorists to move from the right lane when they see emergency vehicles stopped on highway shoulders.

“The concept is one we very much hope you support,” Danaher said.

“Our goal is to create a mind set,” DeFronzo said. We want to get drivers to change their attitude when they see emergency vehicles. “I don’t have any doubt we’ll move on this bill as well.”

The committee has until March 16 to debate and vote on the bills.

---

GOP Lawmakers Propose Sweeping Budget Cuts
Hartford Courant
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING,
ckeating@courant.com
9:03 PM EST, February 11, 2009

Republican legislators unveiled a sweeping budget-cutting plan today that would allow liquor sales on Sunday, cut legislators' salaries by 10 percent, require state employees to take eight unpaid furlough days by June 30, and permit 24-hour bar service at casinos.

The proposal would slice an estimated $925 million from the current fiscal year's deficit through a combination of union concessions, spending cuts, and increased revenue from President Barack Obama's federal stimulus plan.

If the legislature fails to act quickly, the state could be forced to use much of $1.38 billion "rainy day fund'' over the next several months, the Republicans said. Gov. M. Jodi Rell and others had called for spending the rainy day fund over three fiscal years in an effort to cushion the blow from spending cuts in any one year.

"We are running out of time,'' said Senate Republican leader John McKinney of Fairfield. "The state of Connecticut is literally running out of money. ... The time for talking is over. The time for to act is now.''

The Republicans admitted that some ideas in their package will be controversial.

One of those is allowing the sale of alcohol on Sundays, which has been banned in a long-held tradition in Connecticut. Carroll Hughes, the chief lobbyist for the state's package store owners, is telling legislators that the liquor sales would simply be spread over seven days – rather than six – and will lead to no increased revenue for the state. In addition, Hughes said the owners of the small, independent package stores would be forced to work seven days a week while incurring higher expenses and no increased sales.

But Sen. John Kissel, an Enfield Republican, said residents of border towns will no longer drive to Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New York on Sundays to buy liquor. Instead, they will buy their booze in Connecticut and increase sales here.

The legislature's nonpartisan fiscal office says that state tax revenue from Sunday sales would increase by $3.6 million per year – or $900,000 for the final quarter of the current fiscal year.

"I understand the small mom-and-pops don't want to work seven days a week,'' said Kissel, who represents four towns along the Massachusetts border. "We don't have that luxury. We need the money.''

Another controversial proposal involves allowing the casinos to serve alcohol 24 hours a day, which is allowed in Atlantic City and has support in the casinos here. Certain restrictions could be placed on late-night sales, such as checking whether the patron would be staying overnight at one of the casino's hotels, Republicans said.

"No one is advocating irresponsible consumption of alcohol,'' said House Republican leader Lawrence Cafero of Norwalk.

Since the state Capitol is closed for Lincoln's Birthday Thursday and on Monday for Presidents Day, the legislature is not expected to vote on any budget cuts until February 25.

The Democrats are working on their own version.

Derek Slap, a spokesman for the Senate Democrats, said the Democratic majority will look closely at the Republican proposals in order to close the growing budget deficit.

"The crisis is so severe that it requires all hands on deck,'' Slap said. "They put some good ideas on the table, and we're going to incorporate some of those into the mitigation plan.''

---

No Bonding Funds? No Big Deal, Say Some Of The State's Cities And Towns 
DAY
By Ted Mann, Claire Bessette    
Published on 2/11/2009

Gov. M. Jodi Rell's proposal to formally cancel nearly $400 million in once-promised spending for municipal projects across the state has triggered the most unexpected reaction yet: shrugs.
While some cities and towns are poised to fight Rell's plan to cancel hundreds of previously authorized bonding projects, others across the region had a more blasé reaction Tuesday. What Rell has proposed to kill is, in many instances, money that the intended recipients no longer need or never expected to receive from the state in the first place.

In East Haddam, a seemingly massive $10 million cut for the Goodspeed Opera House doesn't look that way from the landmark theater's perspective. That bonding was requested when the theater was still planning to build a new facility in Middletown in 2005, a plan scrapped years ago.

In Norwich, Rell ordered the cancellation of six bond authorizations totaling $5.3 million. But four of the six projects involved money either the grant recipient didn't expect to receive or that would have helped to pay for projects that are already completed and thus not jeopardized by the cuts.

Among those cuts are a $500,000 reduction in bonding for the city's harbor-improvement project, in which workers have replaced a dock and are currently rebuilding the collapsed seawall at Howard T. Brown Memorial Park.  But the city has already received $1 million from the state for the project, and is losing funding that both city and state officials said Tuesday was essentially unnecessary for the work to be completed.

”You can't cry over money you never expected to receive,” said Ronald Aliano, chairman of the Harbor Management Commission, which initially pushed for the seawall repair.  Such words are music to the ears of staff in Rell's budget shop, the Office of Policy & Management, where a spokesman, Jeff Beckham, said Tuesday, “They're making our case for us.”

Other cuts will hurt even less, like the $1.2 million authorization that still sits on the books from a 1992 plan to make floodplain improvements along the Yantic River in Norwich and Franklin. The improvements were rendered unnecessary when the state relocated houses from the floodplain instead.  But some organizations are feeling blindsided by the cuts, even some that would register as small by state bonding standards.

Alliance for Living Inc., which assists people living with HIV and AIDS, has waited for years for the state Bond Commission - whose agenda Rell controls - to release $100,000 to remove asbestos tiles on the side of its New London headquarters as the building's structural problems have only grown. That bond authorization, secured with help from Sen. Andrea Stillman, D-Waterford, was on Rell's list of cuts.

”Fortunately for us it's on the side of the building that members don't often go by,” said Sandra Brindamour, the group's executive director. “And yet it's there, and when we get hit by bad weather, the water gets under where the asbestos breaks are and we have been getting water inside the buildings. It's no longer just the health concerns. It's now beginning to cause deterioration to the building itself.”

The City of New London will lose half of a $1.3 million grant that was to be used for general maintenance at Ocean Beach Park. Proposed work included infrastructure repairs such as roof work, plumbing and facade work, according to David Sugrue, the park's manager.

”It's going to slow us down, but we're raising funds and applying for grants and we'll keep working on the (to-do) list,” Sugrue said Tuesday.

The city has already gone out to bid for estimates on replacing the roof of the former bathhouse at the beach, which is home to the Work Out World gymnasium.  The cuts will delay renovations at the Martin House, a Norwich supportive housing facility, and improvements for disabled visitors at the Slater Memorial Museum on the campus of Norwich Free Academy.

But some weren't quite sounding the alarm, including East Lyme First Selectman Paul Formica, who said his town would simply find a way around Rell's decision to cut $2 million that had been authorized to help the town purchase property in the Oswegatchie Hills for open space.

The bonding “was just a piece of the puzzle,” said Formica, calling the cut “disappointing” but noting that dropping property values could help make purchasing open space more affordable. “It doesn't mean anything stops. ... We'll just find a way to solve that problem by requesting to resurrect the funds or do without.”

Day Staff Writers Kathleen Edgecomb And Michael Naughton Contributed To This Report. 

---

Hold on arbitration gets mixed reviews from Norwalk officials
By ROBERT KOCH, Hour Staff Writer
Posted on 02/07/2009

Gov. M. Jodi Rell's call to suspend binding arbitration requirements for two years as the state grapples with the economic recession could have mixed blessings for Norwalk's budget.

"It would have significant impact, because in theory you would be giving no wage increases for the following two years -- they would just carry the contract," said H. James Haselkamp, the city's director of personnel and labor relations. "The flip side is we couldn't make changes we want. We wouldn't be able to increase what employees pay toward health insurance ... (and) there's potential arguments that wages need to go up in a substantial way (after the two-year suspension).

"But on balance, I think it would be a significant benefit to the city," he said.

On Wednesday, Rell unveiled a two-year, $38.4 billion budget that avoids tax increases but cuts hundreds of state jobs and numerous commissions and agencies to help cover the state's growing deficit.

Rell called for, among other things, "the suspension of binding arbitration requirements for two years while we confront our economic troubles.

"At the end of the two-year suspension, I propose that we limit mandatory subjects of binding arbitration to salaries and benefits only -- not scheduling, the size of parking spaces, picnics and parties on state time and the dozens of other subjects currently included," Rell said.

Before learning details of the proposal, some questioned what would occur in lieu of arbitration. Could the city, for instance, impose its last offer on a municipal union? Would employees be allowed to strike?

Jeffrey Beckham, spokesman for the state Office of Policy and Management, said Rell's proposal, if adopted as part of her recommended budget, means existing labor contracts would remain in effect for two years.

"We're not changing any other law, and it's illegal for them to strike," Beckham said.

Under the arbitration process, a third party known as an arbitration panel meets with employers and union leaders in search of resolution, when negotiations over a new collective-bargaining agreement reach an impasse. The arbiters decide in favor of either the employer or employees on an issue-by-issue basis.

"Binding arbitration is a good thing for the state -- the concept," said Mayor Richard A. Moccia. "But the way it is crafted, you get one labor guy, one management guy and one neutral guy (on the arbitration panel), and there's really last-best offers and there's no compromising between them."

State Rep. Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-142, said both Democratic and Republican mayors and first selectmen have told them they want binding arbitration reformed because their local taxpayers cannot afford the wages and benefits that arbitrators are awarding.

Cafero, House minority leader, said the state is facing "extraordinary circumstances," given the economic recession and budget deficit. Suspension of arbitration requirements for two years would give employees and employers "more incentive" to be reasonable in negotiations, he said.

"By suspending binding arbitration, hopefully it will prevail upon the participants, both city and labor, to settle during that period of time. It's a temporary measure to take into account the extraordinary fiscal circumstances we're in," Cafero said. "So, I am supportive of the governor's proposal."

Some union leaders were miffed by Rell's proposal to suspend the binding arbitration process for state employees from July 1 until July 1, 2011. During that period, an independent arbitrator may not make an award to a union.

"If there's no binding arbitration, if there's no right to strike, what collective bargaining is there?" asked John Olsen, head of the Connecticut AFL-CIO. "So just say you want to do away with collective bargaining. Be honest, that's all."

Rell's budget also calls for changes to the municipal binding arbitration process, allowing municipalities and school boards to extend an expiring or expired contract for up to two years.

House Majority Leader Denise Merrill, D-Mansfield, called Rell's proposal "an attack on middle-income people."

"These are teachers and police and firefighters. I'm not sure what it would accomplish," she said. "I can see pain and suffering among the poor- and middle-income people. I would ask, what are the rich people giving up? I don't see a balance there."

---

Rell Ready To Reward Communities That Share
Hartford Courant
By DON STACOM
February 8, 2009

In a year when most municipalities are canceling big-ticket equipment purchases, Gov. M. Jodi Rell is offering to help pay their bills.  But there's a condition: Towns have to share whatever they buy.

The governor's new budget plan includes $10 million to help buy steamrollers, backhoes or similar equipment as long as several neighboring communities agree to share.  Another $40 million is set aside for building dog pounds, public works garages, emergency communications centers or other facilities, but again only if they're used to convert a single town's service into a regional operation.  Rell's administration sees the financial crisis as an opportunity to promote regionalism, a concept that historically hits deep resistance from home rule advocates in Connecticut's 169 towns and cities.

"We're in favor of voluntary financial incentives. Regional partnerships are nothing new — towns on their own have been doing this for 25 years," said Bart Russell, executive director of the Connecticut Council of Small Towns. "But the top-down approach, with the state making the decisions, that's what people oppose."

Rell proposes severely cutting back the number of probate courts next year, saying it's a simple way to save money.  Ralph Eno, first selectman of Lyme, sees it differently.

"My town pays $750 a year for its probate court. If you make it part of a mass consolidation with a big court, I can guarantee you Lyme will be asked to give more than $750," Eno said. "And we'll lose the convenience of a small local court where the judge knows the people. Regionalization for regionalization's sake is not a panacea."

But in presentations to the General Assembly this winter, Simsbury First Selectman Mary Glassman has repeatedly said that traditional opposition is collapsing. Her recession-battered community is examining ways to share emergency dispatch services with other Farmington Valley towns, and she said the possibility of establishing regional labor contracts with municipal unions is more palatable than it was years ago.

"We know something has to change," Glassman said.

---

Gov. Rell's Truly Bold Budget: State Shake-Up • The governor is not letting this crisis go to waste
Editorial
Hartford Courant
February 5, 2009

'Never allow a crisis to go to waste," White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel is fond of saying. The like-minded Gov. M. Jodi Rell is using the state's financial crisis to shake up the status quo in Connecticut government.

On Wednesday, Mrs. Rell unveiled a two-year budget that dissolves many agencies and commissions and consolidates others, while adding innovative programs that will encourage the regional sharing of services and equipment. Though some proposals wander off-course, Mrs. Rell is headed in the right direction.

The state's rapidly declining revenues leave her no choice but to overhaul and cut. And many of the proposed reorganizations are long overdue, though some, such as the elimination of the Office of the Consumer Counsel, make less sense. That watchdog of utilities has saved ratepayers millions of dollars; its costs are paid not by state taxpayers but by ratepayers.

But the governor's budget does less damage than feared to cities and towns and public education. It avoids raising taxes but instead raises fees and relies on $275 million in concessions from state unions — no small assumption — and $2 billion in hoped-for federal stimulus aid.

Though many taxpayers will be grateful, the governor may come to rue her no-tax pledge if the economic storm worsens. Revenues from a boost in the gas tax, for example — supported by the MetroHartford Alliance business group — would help pay for much-needed rail service.

The budget also contains intriguing ideas, such as a Connecticut Conservation Corps to clean state parks and beaches. Mrs. Rell's surprise proposal for a "Middle College System" that would merge vocational-technical high schools with community colleges deserves debate. Some may see it as dumbing down the colleges and turning them into job-training centers.

However, The Courant enthusiastically supports Mrs. Rell's provision of $50 million in grants to municipalities that share services such as recycling and equipment such as snow plows, and her proposal to expand the bottle bill to include water and other noncarbonated drinks.

Inevitably, there are casualties in this budget, including the commissions that advocate for women and minorities, and some agencies that have not made the executive branch's job easy. The watchdog child advocate would now operate inside the attorney general's office rather than independently, for example. That could continue the valuable service while saving on overhead.

But many agency consolidations make sense, such as combining the Connecticut Development Authority and Connecticut Innovations.

We also applaud the governor's suggestion to whittle down the unwieldy and expensive probate court system, though we understand closures and consolidations will be painful to the staffs whose jobs will be eliminated and to the clients served.

Connecticut is swimming in red ink. The governor is right to call a halt to hundreds of millions of dollars in authorized bonding projects. The decade-long University of Connecticut building program, and the newer Connecticut State University one, also can use one-year breathers while the state tries to get its financial house in order.

The biggest winners Wednesday appear to be towns and cities, whose leaders should be smiling this morning. They have to love Mrs. Rell's proposals to suspend costly state mandates such as in-school suspensions and to reform binding arbitration — and to leave education aid intact. But they didn't entirely escape. Payments in lieu of taxes for hospitals and colleges were among other funds cut.

In past addresses, the governor has challenged the legislature to be bold. She's also often likened the state's problems to a family's. Her maternal concern for the taxpayer has accounted in part for her great popularity.

The budget Mrs. Rell unveiled Wednesday truly is bold. She sees in this crisis the chance to remake state government in ways this page has advocated for years. She will need every ounce of her considerable political capital to see this through.

---

State Spending: Rell's Budget Cuts 400 Jobs, 23 Commissions
The Hartford Courant
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING, MARK PAZNIOKAS AND RINKER BUCK
1:07 PM EST, February 4, 2009

Gov. M. Jodi Rell is offering a $18.8 billion state budget for 2009-2010 today that includes a streamlined bureaucracy, incentives to encourage some regionalization of municipal services, state employee concessions and sharp cuts in some services -- but avoids sweeping cuts in Medicaid and preserves spending for local aid to education.

She also is calling for the creation of a "middle college system" that would consolidate technical high schools and community colleges to train the more than 10,000 vo-tech high school students in jobs and provide college credit in such areas as health care, early childhood programs and computer support.

On the one hand, Rell is proposing the elimination of two high-profile watchdog agencies that advocate for residents on health issues and utility rates -- the offices of health-care advocate and consumer counsel -- moves likely to be condemned by citizens' advocates. She also plans to consolidate a number of departments and eliminate a range of specialized agencies, including the Permanent Commission on the Status of Women.

But Rell surprised many capitol observers by maintaining state education aid at present levels and avoiding across the board cuts in Medicaid funding and nursing home rates.

"There is pain and sacrifice in this budget, but it is shared pain and sacrifice," Rell told the General Assembly today. "We are in this struggle together, and we will need to work together, to lead together, in deed as well as in word."

Rell has also promised to balance the budget without significant tax increases, though fees paid for many services would rise sharply.

Other highlights of Rell's budget include:

-- Raising an additional $172 million over the next two years with sharp increases in many state licenses and fees. All licenses, permits and fees that now cost $150 will be doubled and fees that are currently $1,000 or greater will be increased by $250.

-- A dramatic shrinking of the probate court system -- from 117 to 36 courts. The courts will be distributed evenly throughout the state.

-- 400 job cuts and $275 million worth of concessions from state employee unions.

-- The closing of courthouses in Bristol and Meriden.

-- Five-cent bottle deposit expanded to bottled water.

-- A one-year freeze on new construction projects at the University of Connecticut.

Among 23 agencies and commissions that Rell will ask to eliminate or merge in her budget proposal to the General Assembly today are the health care advocate and consumer counsel.

Rell is also proposing ambitious consolidations in both the state's education and economic development bureaucracies. She has proposed that the department of Higher Education be merged with the Department of Education, resulting in about $1 million in savings.

In Economic Development, Rell would incorporate the Commission on Culture and Tourism in the Department of Economic and Community Development and merge job-creating functions of several agencies into one.

"The bloat of bureaucracy is no longer affordable," Rell said. "Over the years, over the decades, state government often lost sight of what its core mission was and who it was serving."

Many of the agencies Rell has slated for elimination--the Latino and Puerto Rican Affairs Commission, or the Permanent Commission on the Status of Women--have potent constituencies expected to protest the changes, forcing the legislature to make difficult choices as the budget moves through committees this spring.

Rell is justifying other actions--merging the Office of the Child Advocate into the state attorney general's office, or the Council on Environmental Quality into the Department of Environmental Protection--as long-overdue efficiencies that will save money.

The governor will also ask lawmakers to cut 400 jobs and obtain hundreds of millions dollars in concessions from state unions. In addition to the job cuts, her budget eliminates nearly 450 other vacant state jobs.

The cuts will also include a 5 percent cut in public higher education, and she would defer construction projects at the University of Connecticut and all public colleges by one year.

The governor also planned to present a new jobs program similar to President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Civilian Conservation Corps from more than 70 years ago, insiders said. The plan would cost an estimated $7.5 million to help reduce the state's unemployment rate, which recently shot up to 7.1 percent.

Workers would be employed on state and local public works projects, including cleaning beaches, parks and contaminated "brownfields." Some of the funds could come from President Barack Obama's stimulus plan, which the U.S. Senate is debating this week.

The plan to keep municipal funding at the same level as the current year will be a stunning -- but happy -- development for local officials. Mayors and first selectmen across the state have been fearing cuts as high as 20 percent as the state struggles to close a gap of $1.35 billion in the current fiscal year and more than $8 billion to fund current services during the next two years.

On the other hand, the proposed elimination of watchdog agencies is likely to be a hard sell in the legislature.

The attempt to eliminate the office of health-care advocate comes as the administration is engaged in a long-running dispute with Kevin Lembo, the chief advocate, over the quality of care provided to Medicaid recipients in Connecticut.

"I'm surprised and more than a little disappointed," Lembo said.

Another high-profile watchdog, the office of the child advocate, would eliminated as an independent agency and folded into the attorney general's office at a projected savings of $1.6 million over the next two years.

Several of the watchdogs are independently funded by levies on the industries they help regulate, but the administration will attempt to fold those independent funds into the state budget, budget chief Robert Genuario said.

The elimination of consumer counsel would remove an independent entity that often challenges utility rates, sometimes suing state rate-setters. Mary Healey, the consumer counsel, intends to make a case to legislators to maintain its independence.

Rell also wants to cut special commissions that advocate for women and minorities.

One initiative in the new budget will be an office of accountability to attack waste and inefficiency, but Genuario said cuts will be made in other areas of the budget to avoid reducing the amount sent to cities and towns.

In the $18.4 billion budget for the current fiscal year, the state sends about $2.8 billion annually to cities and towns, and the biggest portion by far is $1.889 billion for the education cost-sharing grant, known as ECS.

Educators and legislators have been fighting for years over the ECS formula, which some say provides uneven funding levels to meet educational needs across the state.

"There will be no reduction to ECS," Genuario said. "Towns will get what they got last year."

In addition, there will be no cuts in transportation grants for buses that carry children to public and private schools. Rell is also preserving funding for adult education, which is about $19 million this year, and the Local Capital Improvement Program, which is $30 million.

In higher education, for months, the state's public colleges and universities have feared a cut of 10 percent in their annual subsidies, but insiders said the proposed reduction will be 5 percent instead.

UConn's president, Michael J. Hogan, told the university's board of trustees in November that a 5 percent cut in the annual state subsidy would translate to a tuition increase of 13.6 percent.

UConn's $2.3 billion bonding program, which started in 1995 and has transformed the university, is expected to be deferred by one year. The projects that are underway would continue, sources said. The second half of the program, known as 21st Century UConn, would be extended for another year.

Like UConn, the Connecticut State University system has been on a major construction spree with state dollars; those new programs also would be delayed by one year.

In a televised address to the state this week, Rell announced that she will be proposing "painful" cuts that would lead to "times of trial and tears in the weeks and months ahead." The cuts are necessary because the state is facing a projected deficit of $1.35 billion in the current fiscal year, which ends June 30, according to the latest estimates by the legislature's nonpartisan fiscal office.

The projected deficits could be as high as $4 billion in the next fiscal year and $4.71 billion in the following year.

---

Connecticut Legislators Told To Focus On Mass Transit
The Hartford Courant
By DON STACOM
January 30, 2009

After decades of steady devotion to its highway system, the state needs to shift attention and money to mass transit, pedestrian walkways and bike paths, alternative transportation advocates said at two forums in Hartford Thursday.

A crowd of speakers at the Capitol called on state legislators to beef up funding for Connecticut's still-unfinished section of the East Coast Greenway, a bike and pedestrian route that's expected to run along the Atlantic seaboard from Key West into southern Canada.

Hours later, another crowd filled a meeting room at the Greater Hartford Transit District's office at Union Station, where transportation officials and planners discussed strategy for encouraging mass transit development throughout the state.

With the federal stimulus plan moving quickly through Congress, leaders from a variety of alternative transportation fields agreed that they have a narrow window of time to influence how Connecticut uses its share of the money.

The state and municipalities should prioritize road projects that include bike lanes and sidewalks, they said.

Democratic leadership from the General Assembly's transportation committee addressed the forum at the Legislative Office Building and encouraged the audience to push the case with legislators and the governor.

"Now is the time to redirect our limited resources toward intermodal infrastructure for Connecticut," state Rep. Tom Kehoe, D- Glastonbury, said.

"What a time to be in Connecticut. For so many years, we've been focused on just highways, but now we're looking at bike paths and bike lanes," said state Rep. Antonio Guerrera, D- Rocky Hill, a co-chairman of the transportation committee.

At the transit-oriented development session, several speakers said the state needs a well-planned system of walkways, local bus service and passenger rail. A key state transportation official agreed.

"Look at four problems we're facing today: pollution and greenhouse gases; economic development; our dependence on imported energy sources; and our congested, crowded roadways," said Al Martin, a deputy commissioner at the state Department of Transportation. "Effective mass transit plays a significant role in potential solutions to all of these."

---

Osborne, Author Of 'Reinventing Government,' Will Speak To State Legislators
The Hartford Courant
By MARK PAZNIOKAS
January 28, 2009

Is Gov. M. Jodi Rell going to simply cut government in her budget proposal next week or try to reinvent it?

One sign that Rell may be more creative than making across-the-board cuts is an intriguing invitation for legislators to meet the guru of government reinvention, David Osborne.  Another is a project her administration quietly launched in June, hiring a public policy professor to interview 50 agency heads for new and presumably cheaper ways to do business.

Osborne's talk Monday is a prelude to her budget address next Wednesday, when Rell will outline how she intends to close an $8 billion deficit over the next two years.

"I invited Mr. Osborne to come to Connecticut to recommend the tools and resources we will need to survive these difficult financial times and use reinvention to squeeze more value out of every tax dollar," Rell said in her invitation to legislators.

Senate President Pro Tem Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, complimented the Republican governor for bringing in Osborne, whose 1992 book, "Reinventing Government," was an unlikely national best-seller.

Osborne became a high-profile adviser the next year to Vice President Al Gore and his crack at reinventing federal government, the National Performance Review.

"I applaud the governor for bringing in outside people and thinking outside the box," said Williams, who recalls reading Osborne's book after his election in 1993. "It was sort of the bible."

Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield, said he was told that "the governor had heard him speak and was extraordinarily impressed."

McKinney said Osborne's talk appears to be an effort to get legislators in the right frame of mind for a difficult budget debate.

"If you don't want across-the-board cuts, you better come up with ideas to reinvent," McKinney said. "The bottom line is we have to spend less money."

Ken Dautrich, a public-policy professor at the University of Connecticut, said Osborne is the ideal person to frame the discussion.  Dautrich was hired by the governor in June to interview agency heads, seeking new approaches to government. The impetus was a coming fiscal storm that has grown into a disaster.

"The governor has been thinking about this for a long time," Dautrich said.

Dautrich declined to share the recommendations that were forwarded to the governor's Office of Policy and Management. He said he was unaware of how his report will be reflected in the budget.

---

New Day For Smart Growth
LEGISLATIVE PACKAGE • New laws would encourage regional cooperation, saving money and land
Hartford Courant
January 27, 2009

Progress, the late poet Ogden Nash observed, might have been all right once, but it has gone on too long. That might describe the state's postwar rush to suburbia.

Stoked by VA mortgages and cheap cars and gas, development marched outward. Cities lost population as former villages boomed. But what boomed was mostly sprawl — ill-planned, low-density, auto-dependent, single-family residential or strip mall construction on what had been forest or farmland.

Only belatedly did the citizenry realize that progress has a cost, in addition to infrastructure and services expenses, air and water pollution, energy use and social isolation. It diminishes the open lands that support agriculture, water supplies, wildlife habitat and the traditional visual character of the Connecticut countryside.

Corralling sprawl

In the past few years, the General Assembly has passed several bills to discourage sprawl. These have provided some funding as well as plans and studies. Sweeping legislation proposed on Monday would vastly increase the state's efforts to grow more compactly and efficiently.

The legislative package is the result of a year's work by the bipartisan, public/private Smart Growth Working Group assembled by state Rep. Brendan Sharkey, D-Hamden. The proposed laws place a heavy emphasis on regional planning and cooperation. Mr. Sharkey and his colleagues believe that regionalism and other smart-growth measures will shrink the overall cost of government and make the state more competitive.

This is a threshold moment for the state's smart-growth movement. If we really believe that sprawl is damaging the economy as well as the scenery, the bills should pass.

A core problem with the present system is that it almost requires sprawl. Towns have to pay for education and other services, and virtually the only way they can raise revenue is the property tax. So the incentive is to develop all available land, whether the development is appropriate or not.

Sharing revenue

Under the new proposal, towns would voluntarily form economic development regions, which would entitle them to federal funds. The towns would share the revenue from new commercial development rather than waste time competing with one another. They would engage in regional collective bargaining, land-use planning, purchasing and other activities.

As an incentive, the state would give the towns a percentage, perhaps 1 percent, of the sales tax collected in the region (though this might take a year or two to implement).

The proposals also include such things as model smart-growth zoning regulations (most local zoning codes encourage sprawl), Geographic Information System mapping and streamlining the state's brownfield remediation program.

In all, it is the most comprehensive approach to reversing sprawl that's yet been presented in this state. But note: Connecticut has been behind the curve on smart growth; many of these measures have been used successfully elsewhere. For example, Minneapolis and its suburbs have had a revenue-sharing system in place since the 1970s, and it's worked well.

Still, it won't be easy to overcome years of distrust between towns and the state. The way out of that hole is to view state and local governments as one government, Mr. Sharkey said, and not as competing forces.

With local budgets strained and the state heading for a major deficit, it is essential to reduce the cost of government. If we the people can make government more efficient, and save farms, reduce car trips and clean the air in the bargain, we should.

---

New 'green' rules drafted for state buildings 
DAY
By Patricia Daddona   
Published on 1/24/2009
 
The governor's staff has drafted new “green” regulations for the construction and renovation of state-owned buildings and public schools.

The proposed regulations are designed to reduce energy consumption and costs and enhance a growing work force of “green collar” jobs, according to Adam Liegeot, a spokesman in the governor's office.

The green building standards, part of recently approved broad-based energy legislation, would apply to new construction of $5 million or more and renovations of $2 million or more, Gov. M. Jodi Rell said in a prepared statement.

”We are building a cleaner, greener future for all of Connecticut,” Rell stated.

”These strict standards will lead to a new generation of energy efficient 'green' buildings, and ultimately reduce our carbon footprint on the environment. Our children, grandchildren and generations beyond will benefit from the stewardship that we commit to today,” she added.

Some of the requirements in the proposed rules include:

■ Designing buildings to be 21 percent more energy efficient than current state building code;

■ Using low-flow fixtures to consume 20 percent less water;

■ Installing appliances that comply with Energy Star standards;

■ Using indoor adhesives and paints low in volatile organic compound emissions.

The regulations were written in accordance with the “Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design” or “LEED” rating system developed by the U.S. Green Building Council.

The rating system encourages environmental integrity, energy efficiency, healthy work spaces and sustainable building practices.

Now that the proposed regulations are completed, they will be forwarded to the state Office of Policy & Management, which will submit them to Attorney General Richard Blumenthal's office for review, Liegeot said. Final approval of the regulations must come from the Legislature's Regulations and Review Committee.

---

CASE makes it case...
Energy secretary idea pushed 
DAY
By Patricia Daddona    
Published on 1/23/2009

Hartford - A state energy secretary could help Connecticut and its agencies develop clear renewable and clean energy plans and policy, according to a new study released Thursday.

The study, prepared over the past six months by the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering, was presented to legislative committees at the Legislative Office Building. If embraced, the study could be implemented through legislation, said Richard H. Strauss, the CASE executive director.

Link to the study

Members of the committees on Energy & Technology, Environment, Government Administration and Elections voiced a mix of skepticism and support for the proposal, with some decrying the fact that several previous attempts to focus policy-making in an energy department have failed, and others voicing suspicion over the possibility of adding another layer of bureaucracy.

Enabling legislation authorized the study and appointed CASE to conduct it through the state's Clean Energy Fund on behalf of the Renewable Energy Investment Board.

Citing a duplication of effort among state agencies and a need for more focus and clarity, Strauss said that a Connecticut Energy Office headed up by a secretary of energy could be established within, but independent of, the state Office of Policy & Management. The secretary would report directly to the governor, enable “two-way communication” and serve as what Strauss later suggested would be a “point man,” something the state is lacking now.

The energy secretary would also serve as a “guide,” with existing agencies like the state Department of Public Utility Control retaining independent regulatory authority, he said.

Also leading a new energy office would be a state energy coordinating council and a state energy stakeholders advisory group.

The Connecticut Energy Advisory Board and the Governor's Steering Committee on Climate Change would be integrated into the new council, according to Strauss. As such, the changes would not impose major costs on the state's budget or impose an extra layer of bureaucracy in state government, he said.

According to the academy, an energy secretary and office would create a “new energy leadership structure” that would address comprehensive policy across all energy sectors, from electricity and heating and cooling to transportation and climate change.

The academy studied other states' bureaucratic structures and costs and found that California spends about $400 million on energy issues, and about half of that on renewable energy. Oregon spends about $65 million, and about $12 million of that on renewable energy.

State Rep. Vickie Nardello, D-Prospect, the chairperson of the energy committee, thanked the academy for “spurring us on today to get going.” She also asked the academy to break out the ratepayer costs involved in instituting a Connecticut Energy Office.

”If you really want to do this,” she said to fellow lawmakers, “we will find a way.”

---

Amann Declines Controversial Job Offer From House Speaker 
DAY 
By Susan Haigh     
Published on 1/21/2009 
          
Hartford - Former Connecticut state House Speaker James Amann has turned down a job offer to become a senior adviser to the man who replaced him this month as leader of the House of Representatives.  The controversy that developed over the position is not helpful to House Speaker Christopher Donovan, who is just days into his new job and facing a massive budget deficit, Amann said Tuesday.

”The last thing I want to do to this speaker is bring anything negative to him or around him,” Amann said.

Several newspapers and Republican politicians have criticized the appointment as inappropriate given the state's financial crisis.  Donovan, who was House majority leader during Amann's tenure as speaker, announced Friday that he hired Amann at an annual salary of $120,000 to help with legislative and administrative matters.

Amann, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for governor in 2010, said he would like to campaign full-time, but needs a job to provide health insurance benefits for him and his wife. “I am not a rich man,” he said. “I have to work for a living.”

Donovan said he regrets that Amann won't be working for the House Democrats, but said understands his decision.

”He and I had a chance to discuss these matters at length yesterday and again today, and it became clear that his sense of the demands of his political work differed from mine to an extent that it made employment in my office unrealistic,” he said.

Donovan said he understands the negative reaction to the appointment.

”I have heard their voices, and understand the reasons behind those concerns,” he said in a written statement.

Chris Healy, the State Republican Party chairman, said Amann did the right thing by not taking the job. But Healy said he only did it “after being shamed into it by a public that has grown tired of the same old politics.”

Healy said the controversy should send a message to legislature's Democratic majority to “get to work and stop the spending on your buddies and start spending some time on the people who sent you there.”

On Friday, Donovan said Amann's “skills at negotiation and consensus building will be particularly welcome” as the state deals with its budget woes. The two fiscal years beginning July 1 are projected to be at least $6 billion in deficit.

The two men had apparently worked out an agreement that Amann, known for making off-the-cuff remarks, would not publicly criticize Rell while working for Donovan and running for governor. But Amann acknowledged there would have been potential for conflicts if he took the job.  Amann said he's revisiting other job offers in private sector, but had no definite plans.  Amann works as a fundraiser for the state chapter of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society. He said last week he planned to make telephone calls for the society while driving between the Capitol and his Milford home.

Amann said there was “a lot of hypocrisy” to the criticism over his appointment.

He said there have been accusations that “it's some sort of no-show job” while he runs for governor. But said that was “the farthest thing from the truth” and likened to the job to his former chief of staff's position.

He pointed out how other state lawmakers have gotten jobs with the legislature after leaving office, including former state Sen. David Cappiello, who served in the last legislative session. He is now an adviser to the Senate Republicans.

”I don't think anybody else got that kind of scrutiny or flack,” Amann said. “It surprised me a little too.”

Amann said he and Donovan spoke Monday, and that Donovan “put some alternatives on the table.” He did not elaborate except to say that some would involve part-time work.

Editors: Ap Political Writer Susan Haigh Has Been Covering The Connecticut Statehouse And Political Scene Since 1994.

---

New speaker adds Amann as $120,000 senior adviser 
DAY
By Ted Mann    
Published on 1/17/2009

Hartford - James A. Amann, a Democrat from Milford, served as speaker of the state House of Representatives for four years until he retired at the beginning of the current legislative session to focus on a run for his party's gubernatorial nomination.

He wasn't gone long.

Friday, the new house speaker, Christopher Donovan, named his immediate predecessor to serve as a senior adviser at a salary of $120,000, a move destined to be controversial as the state grapples with looming budget deficits measured in the billions of dollars.

Amann's return doesn't make him the first former lawmaker to return to the Capitol as a staffer, only one of the most high-profile, and at a time when members of both parties have taken great pains to show their willingness to cut state spending.

The move stunned the largely idle Legislative Office Building, though Donovan said, by phone from a conference of state speakers in Tennessee, that he “kind of expected” such a reaction, “because Jim is kind of a larger than life person.”

”There are other legislators who have gotten positions,” Donovan said, and went on to compare Amann to former majority leader Robert Frankel, who served as Amann's chief of staff, and the late Richard Tulisano, a former representative who served under previous Speaker Moira K. Lyons.

”Certainly, within my caucus it's a needed position, and we thought it was worthwhile,” Donovan said.

But the hiring immediately drew criticism.

House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, was standing in a stairwell Friday afternoon, talking to a legislative aide about the news. The Republican caucus has already begun to hammer Democrats over what they see as a lack of commitment to reining in state spending, and the Amann announcement seemed likely to provide more ammunition.

”I'm dumbfounded,” Cafero said. “We started off the session with a question: Will there be any change from business as usual? I think we just got our answer.”

He added, with a chuckle: “Jimmy, you just left six days ago. We can't miss you unless you leave.”

A Democratic staffer also expressed amazement at Amann's hiring, saying he and others had not known of it until Friday afternoon.  There is a similar precedent on the other side of the aisle: former Sen. David J. Cappiello, who joined the Senate Republican staff as a policy aide after his unsuccessful campaign this fall against U.S. Rep. Chris Murphy, D-5th District. Cappiello is earning $103,000 in his new job.

In interviews, Amann and Donovan said the incoming leadership had offered Amann the position shortly after Election Day, and hastened to point out that the former speaker would operate with special rules intended to prevent conflicts of interest.

In a letter dated Jan. 5, Donovan instructs Amann not to conduct any fundraising or campaign work from the Capitol complex, prohibits him from enlisting House Democratic staff in campaign efforts, and instructs that neither Amann nor his staff “may make public statements about Governor Rell or other gubernatorial candidates that places me or the House Democratic Caucus in an awkward position.”

Donovan's office also provided a list of official duties, which states that Amann will be responsible for meeting with lobbyists and summarizing their requests for Donovan; reviewing bonding requests from legislators; and occasionally “working out differences of opinion” on “smaller legislative matters.”

Aides to Donovan noted that the new speaker had not filled the position of chief of staff, in which Frankel made $169,355 annually, according to records obtained this spring from the Office of Legislative Management.  Frankel is now semi-retired and serving as a part-time adviser to Majority Leader Denise Merrill, D-Mansfield.

Nonetheless, the new job roughly triples the $38,689 annual base pay Amann earned as speaker, and in an interview he said he had accepted the job offer in large part to keep pace with expenses as he runs for governor.

”If I could run for governor and live in a tent I would,” Amann said. “I got a wife to take care of, I got bills to pay.”

In a brief phone interview Friday afternoon, Amann said he had considered private-sector jobs before deciding to accept a job with Donovan, saying it played to his strengths and might provide more security as some private businesses shed staff.  The position would not, he said, be a make-work post as he concentrates on higher office.

”I'm sure you guys are going to watch me,” Amann said. “If I'm a no-show, if I'm not in my office, then you've got every right in the world to beat the hell out of me.” 

---

Just moving money won't solve problem 
DAY editorial  
Published on 1/16/2009

Democratic lawmakers are going to have to do a whole lot better than this if they want to get serious about the huge deficits facing the state of Connecticut.

The General Assembly controls the purse strings and the Democrats are in firm control of that body, but on Wednesday they largely moved change from one part of the public purse to another.

The House voted to eliminate $35 million in home heating assistance, knowing that aid is now covered by federal funds. It transferred around $60 million from state accounts into the general fund. Legislators cut about $43 million from various assistance programs, but largely spared regular operating budgets.

And the House voted, finally, to collect from the beverage industry the nickel deposits on bottles and cans that consumers fail to return to the store, raising a projected $25 million.  It took 12 hours to come up with these relatively painless budget moves. Republicans, seeking deeper cuts, voted against the modest $124 million deficit reduction package.

By some estimates the budget gap for this year could reach $800 million or more. And the budget deficit projection for the next two fiscal years of $6 billion may prove optimistic.

At some point Democrats must focus on real budget cutting and the need to reorder priorities to concentrate on essential services. Immediately is probably a good time to start.

---

STATE DEFICIT 

Lawmakers approve budget-deficit reduction bill 
DAY
By Ted Mann 
Published on 1/15/2009

Hartford - Facing a deficit that could approach $1 billion, the General Assembly approved a $124 million deficit reduction package late Wednesday after a day of private deliberations about the targets and scope of the cuts.

The House of Representatives approved the bill, 111-35, largely along party lines, after more than four hours of debate. Rep. Edward Moukawsher, D-Groton, was the only Democrat to join all Republicans in voting against the bill. Moukawsher opposed provisions that would have seized revenue from unclaimed bottle deposits for the state.

The Democrat-controlled Senate approved the package on a party-line vote, 24-12, shortly before 1 a.m.

In a written statement, Rell took a shot at the legislature's majority, charging that "some of the cuts they did make represent more wishful thinking than real savings."

"They didn't make as many cuts as we needed and they added money back - particularly for their own spending - while some of their supposed cuts are based on false assumptions," Rell said. "But at least they have acted, and I will sign the package into law."

Neither Rell's original proposal nor the bill approved Thursday morning would erase the amount of the deficit that budget analysts are expected to announce next month. The most recent report of state Comptroller Nancy Wyman pegged the shortfall at $343 million, but state officials, including Rell, have speculated the deficit will be at least twice that amount.

The reduction bill cuts nearly $43 million in spending and raises almost $80 million in revenue, primarily through transfers from a variety of state accounts into the General Fund.

The total value of the package falls short of the roughly $180 million in reduction proposals put forth last month by Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell, but the legislature's Democratic leadership has said they will almost certainly return before the fiscal year ends on June 30 to make more cuts.

Estimated income tax payments are due today, and Secretary Robert L. Genuario of the Office of Policy and Management is expected to report Tuesday that state revenues have continued to plunge below previously estimated levels.

”We're clearly not at the end of the line today in addressing 2008 and 2009,” said Rep. Cameron Staples, D-New Haven, the co-chairman of the Finance Committee, adding that the bill is “a significant step forward in addressing the needs that we have.”

Republican lawmakers charged that the legislature had not gone far enough, as multiple indicators show Connecticut revenues dropping even faster than once feared, leaving a shortfall in the 2010-11 budget that is now estimated to be as much as $10 billion.

”What we have all confirmed here tonight with our words is that the state is facing a fiscal crisis the likes of which we have never seen,” said House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk. But lawmakers “could not cut or reduce the deficit even as much as what the governor wanted to do, and we know that, even in her plan, she was several hundreds of millions of dollars short.”

”I wouldn't blame the public if they thought we ain't trying hard enough,” Cafero said.

”These aren't cuts,” said Rep. Craig A. Miner, R-Litchfield, the ranking House Republican on the Appropriations Committee. “We're moving money around. And that's not going to get us anywhere in terms of the next four or five years of deficits that we face.”

The legislature's deficit package preserved funding that would have been eliminated under Rell's proposal, including $10 million for farmland protection, $10.4 million for the state's public campaign financing program, and $10 million for renewable energy projects.

But Democrats said they concurred with roughly 80 percent of Rell's reductions, and some budget categories were cut, including the state Fuel Oil Conservation Account, which will lose a total of $10 million. Environmental advocates noted that amount was just approved this summer to help oil heating customers take advantage of the same efficiency programs available to electric customers.

”They're just getting the money now and they're yanking it back,” said Chris Phelps, of Environment Connecticut. “It's like Lucy and Charlie Brown.”

The legislators also moved further toward seizing unclaimed deposits on bottles and cans, a perennial revenue proposal that is projected to add $13.8 million in revenue between now and June 30, and had been aggressively fought by the distributors and wholesalers who were once permitted to keep those monies. But the funds will not be transferred until April 30, and lawmakers said they will consider whether to offer compensation for the lost revenue to the companies affected.

Rep. Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford, compared the Democrats' decision to preserve some spending that Rell had suggested be cut to passengers in a sinking boat “grabbing objects and ... jumping into the ocean,” and seized on a line in the bill that would appropriate $274,000 for health cost payments to unionized custodial workers.

”We're setting a terrible precedent by putting more spending into a bill that's actually supposed to be cutting spending,” Candelora said.

Republicans launched a series of unsuccessful amendments, including steeper spending cuts, a delay in the implementation of a new contract award for state prison guards and a move to cut lawmakers' own pay by 5 percent to save money. All were defeated along largely party-line votes.

”Are we all reading the same newspapers?” asked Rep. Penny Bacchiochi, R-Somers, referring to reports of “massive closures and massive layoffs.”

”I don't understand why we're not falling all over one another, trying to make structural changes to this budget,” she said.

But Rep. Christopher Caruso, D-Bridgeport, ripped the amendment, noting that legislators can freely give back some or all of their pay without passing a law to do so.

”This mindless banter of cut, cut, cut has to stop,” Caruso said. “If we're equally serious about cutting, let's also talk about revenue generation and taxes, and no one seems willing to do this. ... We are making cuts tonight. They may not be as deep as some people like, they may not be as extensive as some people like, but they have been thought out and they have been carefully considered.”

The pay-cut amendment was defeated, 111-35, with two Democrats, Rep. Shawn Johnston, D-Putnam, and Rep. Marie Kirkley-Bey, D-Hartford, joining Republicans in support of the measure.

---

State Finds Way To Uncap Cash In Bottle Law
The Hartford Courant
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING
January 14, 2009

Lobbyists for the beer and soda distributors thought they had won a huge victory two months ago when the state legislature rejected Gov. M. Jodi Rell's plan to seize the nickel deposits on unclaimed bottles and cans.

But now, the state environmental department is saying that little-noticed language that was buried deep in a 34-page bill says that the wholesalers can no longer keep the money. Instead, the unclaimed nickels must be set aside in interest-bearing accounts that must be established by the wholesalers. The state says these accounts could eventually total about $25 million per year.

Based on the Department of Environmental Protection's interpretation of the new law — which went into effect Jan. 5 and is retroactive to Dec. 1, 2008 — the distributors can no longer gain access to the money. In the past, wholesalers have kept unclaimed deposit money and used it to help offset their recycling costs.

"It's in limbo," said Patrick Sullivan, a longtime lobbyist for the state's beer wholesalers. "The state doesn't have the money, and we can't use it to pay our expenses. The money is sitting in an account — our account. Our lawyer says that's ridiculous."

Today, when the legislature meets in special session to vote on Rell's latest deficit-cutting package, Sullivan will try to get the law changed back to the way it had been for decades. But Rell is still battling to seize the deposit money to help close a budget deficit that some fear could reach as high as $1 billion in the current fiscal year. In addition, the state is facing a projected deficit that could reach more than $6 billion to maintain current services over the next two years.

The battle over the unclaimed deposits became the most high-profile issue at the Capitol during a special session before Thanksgiving. An estimated 500 million bottles and cans in Connecticut each year are never returned to the store — ending up in the garbage or in recycling bins. Those 500 million nickels translate into $25 million per year.

Capitol insiders say that the beverage lobbyists got outsmarted and outmaneuvered in a high-stakes game of political power as somewhat unclear language got slipped into the bill.

"The worst of all worlds came with the DEP ruling," Sullivan said. "Just fix the amendment so we can deduct our expenses as we've done for the last 30 years." The lobbyist said he disagrees strongly with the interpretation by the DEP, which stands by its ruling.

Dennis Schain, a spokesman for the DEP, said the department is taking no position on the latest maneuvering to change the law. Any decisions on changing public policy are up to the legislature and not the DEP, he said.

"We believe the intent of this [law] was to determine how much was left after the bottles were redeemed and to provide an accounting of what's left in the system," Schain said Tuesday.

Other Moves To Save

Besides the bottles and cans, the legislature today is scheduled to debate Rell's plan that would eliminate $35 million for heating assistance that had been approved by the legislature in August, when lawmakers feared skyrocketing prices for home heating oil. But those prices have since dropped, and Rell says the $35 million is no longer needed because the federal government provided more money than expected for heating aid.

Rell is also seeking to transfer more than $100 million from more than 20 accounts across state government and place them in the general fund to close the current deficit. Although Rell's budget team says some of the accounts would still have large balances, advocates for each issue are arguing that the money should not be transferred.

Environmental advocates are scrambling to save money to help towns retrofit older diesel school buses with anti-pollution devices that would cut down schoolchildren's exposure to dangerous particles in the exhaust. The program has converted buses in 13 communities so far, including Hartford, and another dozen are in line for funding. But the rest of the budget for the program is on the chopping block, said Roger Smith of Clean Water Action.

Rell also has proposed taking a combined $26 million from the Clean Energy and the Energy Efficiency funds, which pay for renewable energy and conservation projects. They are both funded through a surcharge on ratepayers' bills.

"The whole reason for the funds was the promise that the money would go into programs that invest in energy efficiency and ultimately reduce all of our bills," said Christopher Phelps of Environment Connecticut. "It really is outrageous. It really is the epitome of penny-wise and pound-foolish."

David Funkhouser contributed to this report.  Christopher Keating is The Courant's Capitol bureau chief.

---

News gets worse for state budget-makers 
DAY
By Ted Mann 
Published on 1/12/2009

Hartford – Another day, another gloomy hearing on the budget in the Legislative Office Building, as Robert L. Genuario, the governor's budget chief, warned lawmakers that state tax receipts continue to drop as Connecticut slides further into recession.
Genuario had warned in November, during Gov. M. Jodi Rell's earlier efforts to close a current-year budget deficit, that the plunge in the S&P 500 and other stock market indices would eventually result in major declines in state revenues, a fact exacerbated by Connecticut's substantial dependence on income tax revenue generally and the capital gains, salaries and bonuses earned by financial services industry clustered in Fairfield County in particular.

At that time, Genuario said Monday, he was “not sure when we would see that significant decline.”

“I now know when it is coming,” the secretary of the Office of Policy & Management said. “It is coming now. And it is coming hard and it is coming fast.”

Genuario's appearance before the Appropriations Committee Monday — like his appearance Friday at a hearing of the Finance Committee — was in preparation for Wednesday's planned vote on a package offered by Rell, which would eliminate $356.3 million of the deficit through revenue transfers and a variety of spending cuts. But all parties are in agreement that such a package will not eliminate all of the still-growing deficit for fiscal year 2009, which ends June 30.

“The ground is falling out from under our feet,” said Sen. Dan Debicella, R-Shelton, going on to ask Genuario if the deficit plan isn't “just a drop in the bucket.”

Genuario demurred, but said he thought legislators would be forced to vote on more packages of cuts through the spring, as revenues continue to slide.

The drop-off will be even more pronounced than officials expected just weeks ago, Genuario said, adding that the estimates in his monthly deficit projection letter to Comptroller Nancy Wyman, due on Jan. 20, would be “much more significant than what we had projected.”

That precipitous decline in monies is even affecting one of the few areas in which Rell and the administration have been both adamant and specific: The governor's stated insistence on saving the $1.4 billion in the state's budget reserve, or Rainy Day Fund, to spend in the next fiscal year, when they project a deficit of at least $2.6 billion.

“We need to preserve all or as much of the Rainy Day fund as possible for the next biennium,” he said.

But it is impossible to rule out using some of the reserves, the secretary said, given the apparently sharp drops in tax collections that officials now expect when estimated tax payments arrive on Jan. 15.

“Knowing ... about what's coming in January, I'm not sure yet as to whether or not that will be possible,” Genuario said.   

---

Legislators to skate their way to opening day of session 
DAY
By Ted Mann  
Published on 1/7/2009
Hartford — State lawmakers are heading for Hartford this morning for the new legislative session with ice on their roadways and hard choices ahead.
New and returning members will be sworn in shortly after 10 this morning, with some minor delays expected due to the freezing rain and sleet falling across the state overnight and through the morning.

At the outset of a new two-year term, the House of Representatives and the Senate will once again be firmly in control of the Democrats, as the party increased its already substantial margins in both chambers on Election Day in November.

Incoming House Speaker Christopher Donovan of Meriden, who will receive the gavel from retiring Speaker James A. Amann of Milford this morning, will control a caucus that holds 114 of the 151 seats in the lower chamber.

In the Senate, which retains its existing leadership of Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, and Majority Leader Martin Looney, D-New Haven, the Democrats hold a 24-12 partisan advantage.

Both majorities are potentially veto-proof; if Democrats vote as a bloc — a significant “if” — they could override a veto from Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell.

But lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have spoken in the most dour tones they can muster in recent weeks, preparing for this session, which will require not only the elimination of a roughly $350 million shortfall before June 30, but also the crafting of a new two-year state budget in the face of a combined deficit of $6 billion in 2010 and 2011.

Those fiscal woes will be the context of Rell's anticipated brief remarks to the House and Senate around noon.

And, while Donovan and Williams said Tuesday that they will urge their colleagues to act more quickly than usual to prepare the legislature's budget bills, the first move still goes to the governor.

Rell is scheduled to present her budget to lawmakers on Feb. 4. 

---

Latest report on Connecticut budget woes
DAY
By Ted Mann    
Published on 1/2/2009

The state will end the current fiscal year more than $340 million in deficit, Comptroller Nancy Wyman estimated Friday, in the latest gloomy report on Connecticut's budget woes.

Wyman's deficit projection for fiscal 2009, which ends June 30, takes into account steep drops in income tax collection, retail sales and consumer spending, and the loss of roughly 12,500 in the current fiscal year.

“Deteriorating economic conditions are becoming more apparent in revenue collections across most major tax groups,” Wyman said in a statement accompanying her latest deficit estimate, which has grown by $5 million since last month. “Initial retail sales figures for the holiday season are dismal as are other major sectors of the economy.”

Income tax receipts have fallen by 12 percent since the last fiscal year, Wyman's report said, while sales tax receipts fell 16 percent.

Legislators are planning to convene Jan. 14 to vote on cuts to the current-year budget, and will consider the $193 million deficit mitigation plan put forward by Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell. But even adopting Rell's plan in its entirety would only reduce the current year deficit to $150 million, Wyman noted, and Rell's reliance on revenue transfers and one-time infusions of funds would not address the structural gaps in revenue that insure Connecticut's next state budget will be billions of dollars out of balance.

“This is not the type of reform required to rebalance the state's budget for the long-term,” Wyman's report said.

The state has about $1.4 billion in its budget reserve fund. If the current year deficit is not closed by other means, any remaining shortfall would be erased using funds from that account.

But the Rell administration has been adamant that the legislature and executive branch should avoid tapping that so-called Rainy Day Fund this year, if only because it will almost certainly be needed to craft a budget for the fiscal year that begins July 1.

Multiple analysts have projected that the state will face a deficit of at least $2.5 billion in fiscal 2010.

---

Toll roads may return to the state's agenda
Stamford ADVOCATE
Staff and wire reports
Posted: 01/01/2009 01:00:00 AM EST

A key government panel in the state is edging closer to making a definitive recommendation on returning tolls to Connecticut's highways as other states look to pay-to-drive lanes as a way to relieve congestion.  Fairfield resident Jill Kelly, a member of Connecticut's Transportation Strategy Board, said Wednesday the panel expected to hear the results Jan. 15 of a report on highway tolling.

The TSB is an independent board appointed by lawmakers and the governor that is tasked with creating and guiding Connecticut's transportation strategy. The board delivered its first recommendations in 2003. At that time, it suggested that the state study the idea of tolling roads to ease congestion by raising prices at rush hour and lowering them when roads carry less volume. But public and political support for the proposal has been lacking.

Connecticut removed tolls from Interstate 95 in 1985, two years after seven people died in a crash at the Stratford toll booths. In 1987, the state took the tolls off the Merritt and Wilbur Cross parkways.  Kelly said the transportation research group Cambridge Systematics will deliver "a document that lays out as many options as possible so the board can make an informed decision."

But Kelly couldn't say for sure whether the TSB will back the idea of tolling or reject it after this report. Although the board has shown interest in the idea over the years, it has not included tolling lanes as a definitive strategy in its reports, preferring to say it is a subject that merits more attention and study.  Kelly said tolling might not work in some areas of the state but could work in others. And multiple types of toll lanes can be considered, including creating high-occupancy toll, or HOT, lanes.

HOT lanes allow people driving by themselves to pay a fee to use lanes reserved for carpoolers and buses, called high-occupancy vehicle lanes, or HOV lanes. The buses and carpoolers still drive in the HOV lanes for free.

Gov. M. Jodi Rell has adamantly opposed tolls, and critics have said it presents the possibility of turning the public highways into personal roads for the rich.  But tolling, especially through HOV lanes, is gaining in popularity in other parts of the country.  From I-10 in Houston to I-15 in Salt Lake City, drivers can pay extra to zip past traffic stuck in the slower "local" lanes. HOT lanes also are being added in northern Virginia. And where they've popped up, drivers are raving about them.

"That thing is a godsend," said Attorney David Kubiliun, a typical South Floridian who lives in a suburb, works in downtown Miami and spends several hours a week sitting in traffic on I-95.

Earlier this year, his 14-mile slog home took 50 minutes out of his day if there weren't any accidents. "It was murder," he said.

Now, Kubiliun gets home in 20 minutes by paying 25 cents to $6.20 to drive in a new express lane for six miles at or above 45 to 50 mph, guaranteed.

"I can even make it to my kid's baseball practice," the lawyer said. In Miami and other cities, it's not just the drivers with fat wallets who can use HOT lanes: Carpoolers, motorcyclists, buses and hybrid owners drive for free.

"It's one of several huge trends in urban highway transportation," said Tyler Duvall, acting undersecretary of policy for the U.S. Department of Transportation. "You're seeing at least 10 major metro areas with HOT lanes or HOT lane projects. If you're a major city and you've experienced congestion, you either have a HOT lane or you're going to have one in five years."

But do they reduce congestion? HOT lanes haven't been around long enough for researchers to say. Some speculate they could add to congestion by encouraging drivers who can afford to pay the tolls to live in far-flung suburbs.

But many experts say the option of paying for a quicker commute should be available and the proceeds can go toward improving public transportation or roads.

"In the future, congestion pricing is going to be the way we get around in this country," said Gabriel Bernal-Lopez of Miami, a transportation engineering student at the University of Florida and founder of transitmiami.com, a widely read blog in South Florida.

"It's about time that motorists pay their fair share, and HOT lanes are a step in the right direction."

HOT lanes began in congested Southern California in the mid-1990s. By 2006, they were in place in Texas, Minnesota and Colorado, and the planning of South Florida's $122 million I-95 project was under way.

Federal and state officials are big proponents of HOT lanes, largely because they cost less and require neither new asphalt nor the lengthy approval process for building or expanding new highways.

But groups such as the AAA expressed some skepticism.

"AAA believes that all roads should be toll-free. Where toll roads are utilized, reasonable alternative toll-free routes should always be available," said Gregg Laskoski, spokesman for AAA South. HOT lanes are only appropriate if an existing car pool lane is underused and the change won't contribute to congestion, he said.

---

Legislature Puts Off Budget Cuts 
DAY
By Ted Mann 
Published on 12/31/2008

Connecticut legislators groggily greeting the new year will enjoy a temporary reprieve: The hard work of cutting a soaring budget deficit will be put off a couple more weeks.  The Democratic leaders of the General Assembly announced Tuesday that they would postpone action on a $350 million deficit-cutting plan until Jan. 14.  The leaders rebuffed Gov. M. Jodi Rell's attempt to convene the legislature in special session to vote on her deficit reductions on Jan. 2.

Many lawmakers had said they thought a one-day special session would be unnecessary, particularly one that would fall just five days before the regular session convenes, when some legislators are out of town and other newly elected colleagues have yet to be sworn in.

”The effects of the global economic crisis have landed on our doorstep and we must face the challenges head-on,” said Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, and Rep. Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden, the incoming speaker of the house, in a joint statement Tuesday afternoon. “In the next two weeks we expect to work closely with Gov. Rell to reach agreement on a budget mitigation plan that can be approved on January 14th. We must begin the 2009 legislative session the same way we will end it many months from now - working together to make tough, smart, and responsible decisions.”

The statement appeared to leave room for negotiation between the Democrats and the Republican governor, who is out of town visiting family in Colorado, on the substance of any planned cuts. The 2009 budget year is projected to end more than $300 million in deficit, and fiscal 2010 looks even worse, with analysts estimating a shortfall of $2.5 billion or more.

House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, issued a statement applauding the decision to schedule a deficit-reduction vote in the early days of the new session, when lawmakers are usually busy with committee business.

”I understand the logistical and expense issues in having a special session five days prior to a new legislature being sworn in,” Cafero said. “However, I also recognize the fiscal emergency that the State of Connecticut faces, and the need for the Legislature to act as quickly as possible.”

His Senate counterpart, Sen. John McKinney, R-Fairfield, was less impressed.

”If the Democrats are serious about passing the Governor's mitigation plan,” he said in a written statement, “then there isn't a moment to lose; certainly not two more weeks. We should be in special session Friday, or at the very least be prepared to vote on opening day.”

The governor “continues to believe that our deficit issue is something that should be addressed now,” said Rell spokesman Christopher Cooper.  

---

Senate leader expects strong steps next month to close budget shortfall
Journal Inquirer
By Keith M. Phaneuf
Published: Saturday, December 27, 2008 1:16 AM EST

HARTFORD — State legislators won’t be coming into special session next week, but that doesn’t mean they won’t take another step to whittle down the budget deficit next month, according to the Senate’s top leader.

Senate President Pro Tem Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, said Friday he expects the legislature’s Appropriations and Finance committees will work throughout January to prepare a second measure to lower this fiscal year’s projected shortfall.

“I would hope we would be able to act on some type of deficit mitigation bill in January,” Williams said, adding he expects the key fiscal committees will be hard at work over the next month.

“We will probably be asking more of our Appropriations and Finance committees this session than we have ever asked before,” he added.

Lawmakers adopted a bill to chop $71 million off the deficit in November. Despite that step and nearly $200 million in spending cuts that Gov. M. Jodi Rell ordered unilaterally using her emergency budget powers, this fiscal year’s $18.4 billion budget remains in the red.

State Comptroller Nancy Wyman estimated on Nov. 30 that this year’s General Fund, which involves more than $17 billion in spending, is $338 million in deficit. In addition, the Special Transportation Fund, which accounts for most of the rest of the budget, is $73 million in the red.

The comptroller’s next budget forecast is due on Wednesday.

Rell, a Republican, expressed frustration this week when leaders of the Democrat-controlled General Assembly confirmed they would not agree to her plan for a Jan. 2 special session to adopt a second deficit-reduction bill.

The regular 2009 General Assembly session begins on Jan. 7. Williams added that many of Rell’s latest suggestions for lowering the deficit involve tapping unused dollars in various state accounts and special funds.

“These are not time-sensitive items,” the Senate leader said. “The vast majority of her proposals can be acted upon any time.” Williams added that there is no reason to spend thousands of extra dollars on staff time and other expenses required to convene a special session when the regular session starts five days later.

Rell told the Associated Press this week she fears that lawmakers aren’t taking the projected budget deficits seriously enough, and must work more quickly to find ways to cut government expenses.

The governor, who said she opposes increasing state taxes to offset this fiscal year’s deficit, is forecasting that the state budgets for the next two fiscal years will be a record-setting $2.6 billion and $3.3 billion in deficit, respectively, unless current programs, services and other expenses are reduced.

The administration also recently retained special counsel to assist Rell in negotiations with state employee unions in hopes of obtaining wage and benefit concessions.

---

Rell at crossroads with budget;  Governor facing toughest task since taking office
CT POST
By KEN DIXON, Staff writer
Article Last Updated: 12/21/2008 12:25:36 AM EST

HARTFORD -- By the time Gov. M. Jodi Rell finished her latest deficit-reduction plan last week, she was enmeshed in budget numbers and having trouble sleeping.  It got to the point -- during multi-hour sessions with her staff from Office of Policy and Management -- that she had to double check whether various spending cuts or revenue shuffles were within the current $18 billion spending package, or part of the two-year budget that begins July 1.

"It's a difficult task because, one, we're looking at the biennial budget. But at the same time I'm doing a deficit-mitigation plan," Rell said in an interview in her Capitol office, detailing the string of three-and-four-day a week sessions.

"I can't tell you how many times we sit there and I'll look over at somebody and I'll say 'are you asking about '09? Or are you talking '10 and '11?' " Rell said. "So we've tried to separate the two and if we're doing mitigation today we're doing mitigation, not a whole host of things."

While Connecticut's fiscal problems are no where near as bad as neighboring New York, Massachusetts and Rhode Island -- recessions typically hit Connecticut later and linger longer -- the state's growing deficits are creating the biggest challenges to lawmakers since 1991, when the personal income tax was adopted.  The current deficit is a mere drop in the budget bucket, compared to the looming multibillion-dollar deficit Rell will address when she proposes a two-year budget to the General Assembly in early February for a cycle that will take her into 2010, the year when she would run for re-election.

Rell's budget-policy mantra is she's doing the same kind of belt tightening that families across the state are facing in this economy, only on a multibillion-dollar scale. She still wants to do it without new taxes of layoffs among the 50,000-plus state employees, who have lucrative health benefits that are contracted until 2017, under a 1997 agreement.

"While it's important that we can get a bottom line we can live with, it's more important that we make the appropriate cuts and make the adjustments that will best serve the people," Rell said of the short-term challenge in the current deficit and the looming $2.6 billion shortfall in the spending package that starts July 1.

"Families are expecting state government to do the same thing," Rell said. "They don't want me to sit there are go 'wow, we can't cut that. My gosh, that's got to be off the table.' They want us to say that nothing is sacred and everything is going to be on the table."

A couple days later, hours after the Quinnipiac University Poll pegged Rell's statewide approval rating at a sky-high 68 percent, Rell surprised lawmakers by ordering a second lame-duck special session of the Legislature on Jan. 2, just five days before the next General Assembly takes office.  Rell's decision was the result of a continued erosion of state revenue and an estimated $338 million deficit reported by Comptroller Nancy Wyman, a Democrat, on Dec. 1.

That's about twice the 1 percent of the budget that requires Rell to draft a new deficit-reduction plan and present it to the General Assembly within 30 days.  The next session will come on the heels of a Nov. 24 special session, during which the General Assembly filled a $288 million gap in the budget, including about $26.5 million in direct spending cuts.

Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield, said last week that the sooner the current shortfall is addressed, the better.

"I'm ready to vote on her deficit-mitigation package tomorrow," McKinney said. "The reality is the longer we stay out to address the deficit, the worse the problem gets and the bigger the problem gets. The governor is the only one who has demonstrated the leadership to deal with it."

McKinney said he wishes Rell had called for the special session to occur even earlier, but state law requires the Legislature to receive a 10-day notice.

"I think she has shown tremendous leadership," McKinney said. "She is facing an economic crisis and a budget deficit that no other governor in the history our state has faced, including 1991 when the income tax was adopted."

McKinney describes Rell's low-key style as right for the crisis.

"She has a very calm, leveled-headed, common sense approach at a time of critical importance," McKinney said. "She has a steady hand on the helm of state government and she's ready to make the tough decisions that Democrats in the Legislature have not shown an ability to do."

Chris Healy, chairman of the Republican State Central Committee, said the continued strong approval rating says a lot about Rell.

"The governor's numbers are indicative of the confidence people have in her," Healy said in an interview. "People trust her to do the right thing and that will help her negotiating the budget. What she's been saying about the budget is what people want to hear."

Even majority-Democratic leaders, who will no doubt offer major changes to Rell's budget during the winter and spring, have begrudging respect for Rell, 62, who took over after the resignation of John G. Rowland on July 1, 2004.

"There's no doubt it's a huge challenge," said outgoing Speaker of the House James A. Amann, D-Milford.

"It's a very similar challenge to what we had in 1991, but less than 2002," he recalled the last times billion-dollar deficits confronted lawmakers. "But that's what leadership is about. I think the main thing everyone should be talking about now is how to create jobs."

Amann, whose exploration for a gubernatorial run in 2010 makes him the governor's biggest political threat, criticizes Rell on some issues. But he commended her for recently asking municipal leaders around the state for lists of "shovel-ready" projects for possible federal funding when President-elect Barack Obama moves into the White House next month.

"Losing sleep and panicking are not the way to go forward," Amann said. "We have to think what can we do to change the fabric of our economy. We can't wait for bailouts. We can't think that Obama is the messiah, though I'm glad he's president."

Continued investments in health care and tax breaks to foster job growth is paramount, said Amann, although Democratic leaders are currently looking to possibly suspend tax exemptions in their own attempt to create a balanced two-year budget.

"This isn't brain surgery," Amann said. "You can change things with simple ideas."

The period before Rell's Feb. 4 budget presentation may make or break the first term in which she was elected in her own right and will certainly set the tone for a 2010 re-election effort. While she hasn't announced whether she'll seek another four-year term, the governor has formed an exploratory committee.  Rell's had it relatively easy in her four years at the Governor's Residence in Hartford's North End, with consecutive years of robust-to-modest surpluses and budget deals with Democrats to support annual spending growth.

Now, she's trying to hold the line, at best, for the next biennium, in attempt to save billions of dollars.

"When you're putting together a current-services budget, you have to go by what the statute says," Rell said.

"So does that mean I'm going to end up reducing everything by $2 billion?" she asked. "The answer is probably no. It'll be under the current services, it'll be those things that are flat funded at last year's level. But there will be no new funding, no increase for inflation and in some cases actual cutbacks or eliminations."

That means the best towns, cities and school boards may hope for, is this year's level of state aid continuing for the next two years.

"Right now, right now, depending on how things continue to go, I'm trying to flat fund, which means it will be last year's level of education grants to cities and towns," Rell said. "I've told all the mayors and first selectmen since April that I will be lucky if I can keep last year's level and don't anticipate more money."

House Majority Leader Christopher G. Donovan, D-Meriden, who will become the next House speaker when he is officially voted into the post on Jan. 7, said there hasn't been much communication with Rell since the November special session.

"I'm sure she's putting together her new plan for the budget," Donovan said last week. He was glad that Rell recently joined other governors in Philadelphia to meet Obama.

"We're gathering information about infrastructure projects," Donovan said, adding that he hopes to work together with Rell, rather than oppose her directly.

"Good lines of communication have been established at this point," he said. "I think she's working hard to put together the mitigation plan and the February budget. It's hard."

Donovan also appreciates Rell's recent decision to contract an outside attorney, with labor-management experience, to begin approaching state unions for possible concessions and money-saving ideas.

" I'm just trying to make the right decisions with the least amount of pain, and it's not easy," Rell said, adding that she's not sure what the next two-year budget proposal will total. "I'm not focused on the bottom line."

---

STATE BUDGET DEFICIT

Rell Calls Legislature Into Special Session On Deficit
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING | The Hartford Courant
December 18, 2008
Gov. M. Jodi Rell is calling the state legislature into special session on Jan. 2 to vote on her second "deficit-mitigation" plan.

Rell said the session is unavoidable as state tax revenue continues to drop, pushing the deficit for the current fiscal year to an estimated $356 million.

"Some will question why I am calling the legislature into session five days before the next regular session is slated to begin," Rell said. "The answer is as simple as it is stark: We cannot put off reality. We cannot wait to take action. The legislature — the sitting legislature — needs to take action."

"Every day, the economic news gets worse," she said. "One need only scan the news in recent days. Layoffs at the Stanley Works. One-day furloughs at Pratt & Whitney. Two community newspapers in trouble and the Tribune Co. in bankruptcy court. Every day we sit and wait makes the budget situation worse. Lawmakers must address the budget deficit now. We literally cannot afford to wait."

Rell's plan does not include any tax increases or layoffs of state employees. She will also not be tapping the state's $1.38 billion "rainy day fund" for fiscal emergencies because that money will be needed to close a projected $6 billion gap to maintain current services during the next two years.

Rell is calling again for lawmakers to approve her plan to seize the unclaimed deposits from bottles and cans that beer and soda distributors now keep. Thirty percent of cans and bottles are not redeemed, which means that the state could collect an estimated 500 million nickels — or $25 million a year. Rell is calling for an additional $7.2 million in budget cuts. She cut $150 million in her first round of cuts and $34 million in the second round.

Rell also wants to eliminate $35 million for heating aid for low-income residents, which the legislature approved in August. That money, Rell says, is no longer needed because Congress has provided extra funding for this winter. Some legislators doubt that the General Assembly will take any action the day after New Year's Day. The session would include none of the legislators newly elected in November.

---

Rell, GOP leaders meet to discuss future
DAY
By Ted Mann
Published on 12/13/2008

Hartford - Gov. M. Jodi Rell and her top aide met privately Friday with several fellow Republicans, including the party's chairman and legislative leaders, to plan for the coming General Assembly session and quiet tensions that have roiled the party in recent weeks, according to several sources familiar with the meeting.

Among those attending the meeting were M. Lisa Moody, Rell's chief of staff and closest confidante, Chris Healy, the state party chairman, and Lt. Gov. Michael Fedele. Also in attendance, according to sources, were Rep. Lawrence F. Cafero Jr. and Sen. John McKinney, the respective minority leaders of the House of Representatives and Senate.

Participants were tight-lipped - Healy answered a reporter's call to his cell phone with two words: “No comment” - but the meeting came just hours after Rell told reporters outside a meeting of the State Bond Commission that Connecticut Republicans need to “work together to get our party back on good solid footing” after a series of electoral setbacks.

”I think we need to talk about how we grow our party,” Rell said. “I'm not going to sugarcoat it: We took a beating in the election. And I think that we not only lost seats, obviously, but I don't think we can blame it on the ... the national wave, if you will, and the national election.”

The governor's press office did not respond to questions about the meeting Friday afternoon.

Rell was playing peacemaker Friday, but it followed her most pronounced spate of public disagreement with prominent state Republicans since she took office in 2005.

Last week, Healy ripped what he called Moody's attempts to undercut Rob Simmons, a former Republican congressman who is currently the state's Business Advocate. Writing on his personal blog, Healy compared the chief of staff - widely seen as Rell's most powerful subordinate - to a fictional mob turncoat in “The Godfather.”

The party's executive director, Heath Fahle, writing his own assessment of potential political challengers to Rell on the party's official web log, called the governor's 2006 proposal to increase income taxes “cowardly,” and surmised that her political deals with the Democratic majority could leave her vulnerable to a primary challenge.

And while Rell highlighted unity when pressed about the state of her party, she did so after leading a meeting of the Bond Commission that has left many in both parties grumbling, publicly and privately, because of doubts that the state can afford more borrowing as it plunges toward historic deficits.

The comission approved a $635 million agenda, including about $25 million in new borrowing, but not without one member of the commission, Rep. Craig Miner, R-Litchfield, doing something very unusual: voting 'no.'

Miner calmly broke with the habitual unanimity of the commission to oppose those bond allocations that will go to new projects and some nonprofit organizations, including $600,000 for a new swimming pool at a Branford YMCA, and $150,000 that will help restore a historic barn at the Eli Whitney Museum in Hamden.

”I understand completely the pressure that she's under,” Miner said afterward. “I am quite certain that the requests that came into that office over the last four or five months were significantly larger than what we saw today.”

Rell too said she had been bound by prior commitments in approving the bonding released on Friday, especially deals with House Speaker James A. Amann and Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr. to release monies for their favored projects.

Asked how one project - a $200,000 redevelopment of a drive-in in Southington - was approved while other earmarks will quietly expire unfunded, Rell was matter of fact: “Because the speaker asked for it.”

---

New House leadership unveiled 
DAY
By Ted Mann 
Published on 12/11/2008

Hartford – Incoming Speaker Chris Donovan, D-Meriden, announced a new leadership team for the state House of Representatives Thursday, putting his mark on the legislature's lower chamber in advance of this spring's regular session.

The biggest changes: More bodies in the ranks of the House leaders, and a new face at the head of the Appropriations Committee, which is responsible for crafting the spending side of the state budget.

Rep. John C. Geragosian, D-New Britain, assumes the co-chairmanship of the Appropriations Committee, taking over from Rep. Denise Merrill, D-Mansfield, who will serve as majority leader.

Donovan also moved Rep. Christopher Caruso, D-Bridgeport, a lightning rod for controversy, out of the chairmanship of the Government Administration and Elections Committee, but into another important post. Caruso will be the new ranking member of the bipartisan Regulations Review Committee, which must approve regulations and rules promulgated by the executive branch.

The new co-chairman of the GAE committee will be Rep. James F. Spallone, D-Essex.

Several local lawmakers have new responsibilities, including Rep. Betsy Ritter, D-Waterford, who will become co-chairwoman of the Public Health Committee, replacing Rep. Peggy Sayers, D-Windsor Locks.

Rep. Ed Jutila, D-East Lyme, will be the vice chairman of the Public Safety Committee, and Rep. Tom Reynolds, D-Ledyard, will be vice chairman of the Education Committee.

Donovan has increased the ranks in many leadership posts, including doubling the number of Deputy Speakers to six. Rep. Steve Mikutel, D-Griswold, will become a majority whip at large.

Four other local lawmakers, Reps. Jutila, Reynolds, Ted Moukawsher, and Diana Urban, will serve as assistant majority leaders.

Leaders in the Senate, also controlled by Democrats, have not announced changes for next session. Merrill will announce her own deputies next week.  

---

Rell brings budget message to business group 
DAY
Posted on Dec 8, 9:11 AM EST

CROMWEL, Conn. (AP) -- Gov. M. Jodi Rell has told a business group that government today is bigger than the taxpayer's ability to pay for it.

Rell spoke to the Middlesex County Chamber of Commerce Monday to discuss the upcoming legislative session and budget.

Rell says that the cost-cutting actions that the legislature took in a special session last month were baby steps. She says what's needed are major budget cuts and rethinking how government works.

Rell and lawmakers are examining several cost-cutting ideas to close the current fiscal year's deficit and about $6 billion in shortfalls expected in the next two budget years.

Last month, lawmakers approved steps to cover the budget deficit with federal Medicaid funds, a new tax amnesty program and nearly $72 million in spending cuts and delays.

---

From the road: No tolls in Connecticut
Stamford ADVOCATE
By Brian Lockhart
Posted: 12/03/2008 02:45:27 AM EST

Gov. M. Jodi Rell is looking for ways to close the state's budget deficit but does not count highway tolls among the potential solutions.

"I don't want tolls back in Connecticut," Rell said by phone Tuesday while returning from a conference of the National Governors Association in Philadelphia.

The route took her through New Jersey, which, Rell noted, imposed higher highway tolls as of Monday.

Connecticut's toll booths were dismantled 20 years ago after an accident between a truck and three cars killed seven people at the Stratford toll plaza for Interstate 95.

The revenue, used to help fund transportation initiatives, was replaced by gasoline taxes.

The state Transportation Strategy Board is doing a $1 million study on installing electronic E-ZPass style booth-less tolls along the state's main thoroughfares. The study is due in February, in time for the General Assembly to consider it during the 2009 budget session.

For years, strategy board members have said E-ZPass tolls would capture additional revenue for infrastructure projects and decrease congestion by charging higher amounts during rush hour to encourage motorists to use mass transit.

Rell traditionally has opposed reviving the tolls, but she acknowledged Tuesday the state could use the revenue.

Rell and the legislature are faced with crafting a new budget for fiscal years 2009-10 and 2010-11 that addresses an estimated two-year more than $6 billion deficit.

Some of that shortfall is due to the sudden drop in gas prices, which has resulted in a $100 million shortfall in the amount of gross receipts taxes the state collects on the sale of petroleum products.
 
"I understand we're looking at a budget deficit not only in our regular general fund but the transportation fund," Rell said.

But she said she continues to oppose tolls as part of the solution.

"I always hate to draw a line in the sand, but that is not an option for me," Rell said.

Floyd Lapp, executive director of the South Western Region Metropolitan Planning Organization, the organization that recommends transportation policy to the state leaders, supports the concept of tolls and congestion pricing.

Lapp said that based on previous statements he knew Rell was not in favor of tolls, but he said he wishes critics would keep an open mind pending the transportation strategy board's study.

"I would respectfully recommend that we wait, see the results and be guided accordingly," he said. "We remain open. . . . Maybe for whatever reasons, it doesn't work. But I wouldn't at the outset reach a judgment, pro or con."

But Lapp said restoring tolls would not be a quick fix for Connecticut's budget woes.

"What I learned . . . is the initial investment in infrastructure . . . is such you really don't realize a big bang for investment," Lapp said. "I think it would be a false advocacy for enthusiasts like me to say, 'You have a revenue source we don't have now.' . . . Initially, it's a slow investment."

---

Rell hires Weicker's negotiator to head talks with unions
By Keith M. Phaneuf, Marchester Journal Inquirer
Published: Thursday, November 27, 2008 1:04 AM EST

HARTFORD — Gov. M. Jodi Rell on Wednesday retained the same labor negotiator former Gov. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. used in the early 1990s — the last time state government secured major concessions from state employee unions.

By hiring Saranne P. Murray, a partner with the Hartford law firm of Shipman & Goodwin, Rell made it clear she’s determined to avoid the mistakes of her predecessor, former Gov. John G. Rowland.

Rell, who’s grappling with record-setting budget deficits approaching $6 billion in the coming years, has made it clear she plans to negotiate soon with the State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition to seek concessions.

“Attorney Murray’s knowledge and experience will be extremely valuable as we work with SEBAC to identify ways to reduce the cost of government,” Rell said. “I look forward to a constructive dialogue with all of our partners, including state employees who are on the front line of government. They are public servants who perform valuable service to our citizens.”

Murray, a longtime labor negotiator for the state Judicial Department, is recognized as a leading authority on public sector collective bargaining. She has extensive experience representing public and private sector employers and nonprofit organizations in employee relations and employment law.

Murray is counsel to a number of Connecticut municipalities and also has served as assistant to the president of Manchester Community College. She received her bachelor’s degree from Emmanuel College and a law degree from the University of Connecticut.

Weicker, who signed Connecticut’s income tax into law in 1991, also worked with unions to move state employees into managed care health plans, saving tens of millions annually in the early 1990s. Some bargaining units also accepted a one-year wage freeze.

His administration also reduced labor costs in two other ways deemed more controversial:

• It trimmed the state workforce by nearly 10 percent during the first 2½ years of his administration, in part by using an early retirement program.

• Weicker and the unions agreed to allow government to reduce contributions to employee pensions plans during tough fiscal times. But because the level of retirement benefits the state was obligated to pay was not reduced, that opened the door for decades of underfunding of pension programs, which the state still is struggling to reverse.

Unlike Weicker, Rowland relied largely on his budget agency, the Office of Policy and Management, to negotiate concessions with state unions when the budget plunged into deficit in late 2002.

Each side acknowledged it had a poor relationship with the other and no concession deal was reached. Rowland ordered more than 2,500 layoffs in the winter of 2002-03, and more than 2,200 state workers ultimately lost their jobs.

The General Assembly on Monday approved a measure in special session to help reduce the current budget deficit, and Rell signed it into law on Wednesday.

Despite that step, which trimmed $72 million off the deficit through small spending cuts and a tax amnesty program, this fiscal year’s $18.4 billion state budget has a $320 million hole in its General Fund and a $73 million shortfall in its Special Transportation Fund.

More important, a slumping economy and a stock market rocked by huge losses this fall are dramatically driving down state tax forecasts for the next two fiscal years. State analysts say the next two budgets have built-in deficits of $2.6 billion and $3.3 billion, respectively.

“Connecticut is not immune to the effects of the national economic slump, and the projected budget deficits we face over the next two years — nearly $6 billion — demonstrate that very clearly,” Rell said. “Closing that budget shortfall will be an enormously difficult task and we hope the state employee unions will be part of the solution.

The chief State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition negotiator, Hartford lawyer Daniel Livingston, issued a statement last week saying union leaders would negotiate with Rell. But Livingston also said labor was disappointed with recent Rell statements suggesting the budget deficit largely could be erased with spending cuts.

“We hope she wants to work in partnership on the real problem facing the state: The economic crisis that caused the budget crisis,” Livingston said Wednesday. “The solution to the budget crisis is to help turn around the state’s economy. We will happily be part of that.”

Livingston added that he believes President-elect Barack Obama’s administration will dramatically increase federal aid to states to support government services and government-funded capital programs.

“Our key advice is to seize any opportunity to join our state with the new president’s program,” he said. “When we invest in human needs and our infrastructure, we not only improve everyone’s quality of life, but we help provide the spark to revitalize our economy. If, instead, we retreat and make deep cuts now, we not only make the current crisis worse for the people of our state.”

---

Legislature OKs budget-deficit plan 
DAY
By Ted Mann 
Published on 11/25/2008

Hartford - The General Assembly resoundingly approved a deficit-reduction package with a total worth of about $288 million Monday night, making its most serious attempt yet to close the state's budget shortfall, even as massive problems loom in the coming years.
After hours of debate, the House of Representatives approved the most complex portion of the package by a vote of 141-1 shortly after 9 p.m. The Senate unanimously approved that bill, 34-0, about 90 minutes later.

The package was largely in agreement with a plan submitted to the legislature by Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell earlier this fall that combined a projected $157 million infusion of new federal aid with spending delays and small-scale cuts to eliminate the shortfall in the fiscal 2009 budget that ends in June.

That deficit has been projected at anywhere from $300 million to nearly $600 million, but lawmakers also have their eyes on the numbers for next year. The potential deficit in 2010 has been projected to hit $2.6 billion, with an additional $3.3 billion expected in 2011.

Even as they prepared to pass the package, legislators of both parties acknowledged that they would likely have to continue trimming the current budget as state revenues continue to slide, and that they face a potentially major restructuring of spending beginning early next year.

”This does not really address any of those long-term difficulties we're facing,” said Rep. Cameron Staples, D-New Haven, co-chairman of the Finance Committee, referring to the projected deficits looming next year. “… We have to do such an exhaustive look at our revenue and at our spending, and next session is the time to do that.”

Members of the Republican minority, even less impressed with the likely effects of Monday's vote, unsuccessfully launched four amendments in the House to make more substantial cuts than the Democrats had suggested, or to give Rell even greater rein to cut the budget without legislative approval.

”My concern is that what we are going to do tonight is mask the problem,” said Rep. Craig Miner, R-Litchfield, who was the only member of the chamber to vote 'no.' “… I'm not so sure that we really did anything other than put this question off to another day.”

”We're not doing anything,” he added.

On Monday, legislators hadn't even taken up the plan before lobbyists for state beer and soft drink distributors had already scored a victory, helping scuttle the latest attempt to prevent them from pocketing bottle deposits not redeemed by customers who return their bottles and cans.

A proposal to let the state recoup all unclaimed bottle deposits - rather than leave those nickels, estimated at as much as $25 million per year, to the wholesalers themselves - had died yet another quiet death despite widespread concern that Connecticut will have to make jarring reductions across its budget just to close multibillion-dollar deficits.

Despite bipartisan support for letting the state absorb the remainder deposits, called “escheats,” including from Rell and Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, lawmakers dropped that change from the deficit mitigation package.

That decision, occasioned largely by the opposition of House Speaker James A. Amann, D-Milford, to the escheats proposal, triggered sharp criticism, particularly in the Republican minority, that the legislature wasn't doing enough to cut spending immediately.

”How could we in good conscience even discuss cutting educaton aid, health care aid, welfare aid, but say we're going to preserve unclaimed bottle deposits for $13.8 million?” said House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, before the House convened.

Rep. Edward Moukawsher, D-Groton, sided with the wholesalers, however, saying the state had forced them into the trash business by mandating the bottle deposit in the first place. He also said he agreed that any revenue kept by the companies went to offset the cost of equipment used to manage returned bottles.

But Moukawsher was also worried about what he described as the limited scope of the day's efforts. “It's sort of like, 'How can we do this painlessly where nobody notices it?' “ he said of the debate on the deficit plan. “Well, there's going to be pain later. I think we need to look at all this stuff. We have to really do some serious budgetary soul-searching. We have enormous unfunded long-term obligations. We're not even addressing those.”

The legislative package makes a number of changes to Rell's initial proposal, including folding the position of state Business Advocate Rob Simmons into the existing Department of Economic and Community Development. Simmons' job was not eliminated but moved, despite rumors to that effect that circled in the Capitol in the afternoon.

The Democratic bill also transfers $5 million from the account of the Citizens' Election Fund, which administers the brand-new publicly financed election program for legislators and statewide officials, to the general fund.

Action began Monday in the Senate around 6 p.m., with a relief bill aimed at municipalities. The legislation permits city and town governments to enact their own one-time tax amnesties in order to bring in revenue; extends the allowable lifespan, from eight years to ten, of Bond Anticipation Notes, used by towns to fund projects while they wait for receipts from bond issues to arrive; and gives new protection to tenants of buildings whose owners lost them to foreclosure.

The municipal bill also lets the commissioner of the Department of Administrative Services contract on behalf of groups of three towns or more that wish to make joint purchases, and extends the state's foreclosure mediation program.

The Senate passed the bill, 31-3, with Sen. Andrew Maynard, D-Stonington, among the minority opposed to it.

”I don't understand the rush for this,” Maynard said of the municipal law changes, which he noted would substantially alter some housing and local taxation rules despite not having been subject to review by legislative committees. “This is a bill that is fraught with unintended consequences.”

---

Connecticut Towns And Cities Cut Back On Spending
By DON STACOM | The Hartford Courant
October 30, 2008

Windsor considers scaling back a firehouse renovation and delaying a $450,000 road widening project, Bristol puts off building two long-planned schools, Simsbury looks at postponing a $540,000 repaving of its popular bikeway.

Tough times are here, and communities throughout the state are trying to hoard money as they hunker down for worse to come.

Many local governments have reduced hiring, frozen overtime and pushed off big construction jobs as the effects of the late-summer national financial crisis hit their budgets. Chronically troubled big cities with meager fiscal reserves have declared layoffs — 56 in Hartford, 34 in New Haven and 28 in Bridgeport.

Even historically wealthy southwestern Fairfield County towns are cutting back.

"Our goal is not to have any layoffs, but we've stopped our major capital projects this year," said Darien First Selectwoman Evonne Klein. "We're not creating new positions, and next year we're looking at a really bare-bones budget."

"Based on the first three months of the [fiscal] year, we know we're going to have to make up an inevitable shortfall," said John Crary, town administrator of Greenwich. "If you project it out, the shortfall is going to be quite a few million dollars in our budget. Greenwich is just like the rest of Connecticut, the rest of the country. We're all being hit."

Twelve of the 15 communities contacted by The Courant this week said they suspended or reduced hiring after the country's financial markets imploded in September. Most are still filling public safety jobs.

"To call it a freeze isn't realistic; it's more like a frost," Manchester General Manager Scott Shanley said. "But any time there's an opening, we analyze whether we can do without the position. Vacancies will be long-term vacancies."

The immediate pressures on municipalities reflect the ripples of the Wall Street drop-off and the staggering economy. Towns and cities report downturns in conveyance tax collections because sales — and prices — dropped when the housing boom ended. Revenue from building permits has fallen because construction faltered. Investing municipal reserve funds usually generates income, but the stock market spiral has battered that source of money, too.

"We are seriously impacted in terms of conveyance fees, interest income and building permit fees to the tune of about 50 percent of our estimates at this point," said Steven R. Werbner, town manager of Tolland.

Many towns budgeted for a weak year, but few anticipated conditions this bad. Glastonbury and Canton reported that their revenues were mostly in line with what they had anticipated, and Farmington's projection of a nearly 50 percent drop-off in investment revenue paid off.

"Our interest income last year was budgeted at $1.2 million, but we were very conservative this year and reduced the interest income [projection] to $625,000," said Farmington Finance Director Joseph Swetcky. "We're on target to make $610,000 for the year."

Wethersfield, East Hartford, West Hartford, Windsor, Simsbury, Vernon, Southington, Manchester, Bristol and Stonington are among the large and mid-size Connecticut communities that are trying to brake spending immediately. Mostly, they're putting off construction projects until another year, eliminating out-of-state travel and cutting payroll by attrition, although Vernon is going a step further — seeking union concessions.

"We've renegotiated supply contracts, we're looking for savings everywhere," Vernon Mayor Jason McCoy said. "I want to see if we can work on [labor] contracts and renegotiate. I wouldn't want to look at layoffs as an option."

So far, layoffs and service cutbacks have been confined to the big cities. Leaders of mid-size and small communities don't anticipate that will change, but they acknowledge two possibilities that could force their hands: A drop-off in payments when cash-strapped residents get their January tax bills, or an emergency cutback in aid from the state government.

Municipal officials are already looking ahead to the winter, when they'll begin assembling proposals for the budget year that starts in July.

"That's the larger, looming issue," Shanley said. "This is not a problem that looks like it will go away in the next year or two. I've been through what we might call sharp downturns before, but what's different this time is that we never really recovered from [20]01-'02. We've been cutting and tightening since then."

---

Connecticut Hopefuls Flock to Public Financing
NYTIMES
By PETER APPLEBOME
Published: October 22, 2008

CANTON, Conn.

Chances are there aren’t a lot of State Senate debates that end with one candidate’s citing Elliot L. Richardson’s two rules for deciding how to cast your vote. (Does a candidate have a good sense of history? To what extent does the candidate appreciate the consequences of his or her decisions?)

Of course, there can’t be many debates that cite Mr. Richardson at all. But one reason this one did was that one of the candidates, Art House, actually served on a board with Mr. Richardson, the former attorney general, and brings to a modest State Senate race experience that includes public affairs positions with four major corporations, work on the National Security Council and high-level jobs with a former Connecticut senator, Abraham A. Ribicoff, and a current one, Christopher J. Dodd.

Mr. House, 66, a Democrat, is in a tight race with State Representative Kevin D. Witkos, 44, a police sergeant and three-time Republican state representative, for the open seat in the Eighth Senate District in northwest Connecticut. But they’re both players in an enterprising experiment in the public financing of campaigns that has made the process much more interesting than the individual races.

“Would I have run if we didn’t have public financing? I don’t know — maybe yes, maybe no,” Mr. House said. “But I can certainly say public financing was definitely an inducement for me to take the plunge. You begin knowing that politics doesn’t have to be a money game where you spend all your time on the phone dialing for dollars instead of meeting people, talking about issues and campaigning.”

The big story about public financing of campaigns nationally has been Barack Obama’s decision to opt out of the national system. But what’s unfolding in Connecticut may end up being far more influential.

At a time when roughly half the states are seriously considering public financing of campaigns, Connecticut’s initial experience has exceeded the expectations of even its most enthusiastic supporters. Of the 343 candidates running in General Assembly elections, 258 — about 75 percent — are seeking public financing.

“I think that for many reasons, Connecticut has made history this election season,” said Beth A. Rotman, Connecticut’s director of public financing. “We’ve had an unprecedented participation rate for the first elections with voluntary public campaign finance, and we’ve virtually eliminated special-interest money from the elections.”

Connecticut’s experiment with campaign finance reform happened only when it hit bottom. After the resignation of Gov. John G. Rowland in 2004 and a spate of other public corruption cases, with the state’s image moving from “the Land of Steady Habits” to “Corrupticut,” public financing suddenly became something other than a pet topic for good-government types.

A 2005 Zogby poll showed that 76 percent favored the public finance bill in the legislature and 82 percent backed measures to limit the influence of money on politics. That year, Connecticut became the third state, joining Maine and Arizona, with full public financing of statewide elections.

Under Connecticut’s new law, candidates for the House and Senate must first raise threshold levels — $5,000 for the House and $15,000 for the Senate in small contributions of $5 to $100, excluding firms doing business with the state. If they reach that, they then get an additional $85,000 for a Senate race and $25,000 for a House race. They can get more if their opponent decides not to accept public financing. Money comes from the sale of unclaimed and abandoned assets in the state’s possession.

For challengers, the appeal is obvious. Suddenly, they can have resources equal to an incumbent’s without hitting up major donors.

Incumbents have mostly gone along either because it looks bad not to or because, like challengers, they’d rather be campaigning than raising money.

Representative Witkos, whose three terms give him some of the traditional advantages of an incumbent, voted against the public finance bill. It had more support from Democrats than from Republicans, but was signed into law by Gov. M. Jodi Rell, a Republican.

Mr. Witkos figures that if voters did not support him, their money should not go to his campaign. That said, he likes the fact that the current system allows candidates to spend more time meeting with voters and discussing issues rather than raising money. He wants to see how the election cycle plays out statewide before deciding what he thinks of the new system.

“If all the incumbents get re-elected, we’re spending a lot of money and getting the same result,” he said.

Karen Hobert Flynn, vice president for state operations for Common Cause, a nonpartisan citizens’ lobby that supported the new law, said there would be many ways to evaluate it beyond whether incumbents are re-elected. Did it bring new people into the races? Does the behavior of elected officials change when they’re not beholden to those who paid for their campaigns? Are there more contested races?

But the candidates, like Chris Coutu, a 32-year-old financial adviser and one-term alderman from Norwich taking on a 14-year incumbent in the race for state representative there, says the process has already created a more level playing field.

“It lets the candidates focus on the issues,” said Mr. Coutu, a Republican. “In the past, you’d be out begging for money in the final days. Chances are, if you were close, an incumbent could get out multiple mailers in the homestretch and pound home his message while you had run dry. Now you’ve both got your money, and you can focus on the issues and the voters instead of being out begging for money.”

---

Wilber must return public election funds 
DAY
Posted on Oct 22, 12:43 PM EDT

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- Connecticut election officials say a state lawmaker who is resigning and ending his re-election campaign must return a grant he received as part of the state's new public financing program.

Colebrook Rep. George Wilber says he's resigning November 1. The Democrat quit and ended his campaign Tuesday following revelations that he paid $100,000 to a woman who claimed he sexually abused her as a child. He denies the allegations.

Beth Rotman, director of Connecticut's campaign financing program, says Wilber must return the $25,000 campaign finance grant. He must also return most of the $5,000 he raised in small contributions to qualify for the program.

Wilber has spent $500 on his campaign. He'll be allowed to cover those costs and the expense of wrapping up his campaign.

---

"I didn't know department"
GOP Questions Handling Of Allegations Against George Wilber
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING | The Hartford Courant
October 22, 2008

Republicans are asking what top House Democratic leaders knew about the case of state Rep. George Wilber, a Colebrook Democrat who resigned suddenly Tuesday after the revelation that he paid a woman $100,000 as part of a civil settlement following allegations of sexual abuse when she was a minor.

Although the allegations were made by the woman to Democrats in 2002, Wilber served for six years at the state Capitol before newspaper reports this past weekend made the matter public for the first time.

Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell on Tuesday called the allegations "absolutely disgusting," and said she is concerned about how they were handled. Top Democrats knew about the allegations when Wilber ran for the legislature in the fall of 2002 and before he took office in January 2003. Then-House Speaker Moira Lyons oversaw an internal investigation that included interviews with Wilber and his accuser, but no action was ever taken because the information was conflicting and was deemed inconclusive, officials said.

The current speaker, James Amann, had not yet been elected majority leader when he received a briefing on the matter in 2002.

"I'm a little bit dismayed that the speaker knew about this before, several years before, and to the best of my knowledge, he never told anyone," Rell told reporters. "I do not know if there has ever been a criminal investigation or even if one is warranted, but I can tell you that the allegations are absolutely shameful."

But Amann said his role in the matter was limited to a briefing by a staff member, and that he was never involved in any investigation or questioning of Wilber.

"I never once had a conversation with him about this," Amann said of Wilber. "I have no idea [about the details]. I have no clue. I don't know what the allegations are."

Although Wilber paid $100,000 to settle the issue in 2005, Amann said he knew nothing about the settlement until the story broke.

"I wish Wilber would have told somebody," Amann said. "I haven't talked to him."

Amann talked to Rell on the telephone Tuesday afternoon to clarify his position and stress that he had limited knowledge of the issue in 2002 and now.

"She's talking about the wrong speaker," Amann said. "It was fully investigated by Speaker Lyons."

The accuser, who is now 47, has not publicly spoken about the allegations. But she claimed through her attorney that Wilber had sexually abused her more than 30 years ago — from the time she was 11 until she was 18.

No civil lawsuit was ever filed in the case, after Wilber agreed to pay his accuser $100,000. Criminal charges were never filed.

Lyons asked her administrative chief of staff, Lynn C. Blackwell, to investigate the allegations after House Democrats received a letter on the issue, Amann said. Blackwell talked to both the accuser and Wilber, who denied doing anything improper.

"It was a he-said, she-said," Amann said.

Blackwell said Tuesday night that the woman was never specific in her allegations against Wilber. Blackwell said that the accuser was unable to corroborate her contentions about Wilber and that she was unable to provide any witnesses from that time. Wilber admitted knowing the woman and her father, but he denied doing anything to her, Blackwell said. She added that only a small circle of people in the House Democratic office knew about the case.

"I never talked to Jimmy [Amann] about it," said Blackwell, who is an attorney. "He certainly didn't know about it from me."Democratic Rep. Stephen Dargan, who has served 18 years at the Capitol, said that even committee co-chairs and longtime legislators had no idea about the allegations or that Wilber had paid $100,000 to settle the matter.

"There was only a handful of people who supposedly knew about it," Dargan said.

A retired dairy farmer, Wilber represented his hometown of Colebrook and six other towns in northwestern Litchfield County near the Massachusetts border. He previously served for 19 years as Colebrook's first selectman and two years as Gov. Ella Grasso's secretary of agriculture.

Wilber's name will be taken off the ballots. Republican John Rigby is expected to be the only candidate with his name on the ballot in the Nov. 4 election.

State Republican Chairman Christopher Healy questioned why the House Democrats backed Wilber with campaign money in his 2004 and 2006 races. Public records show that Wilber's campaign received money or in-kind contributions from the House Democratic Majority PAC, the Capitol Democrats PAC and the Connecticut Democratic Leadership Coalition, among others.

Healy called the case reminiscent of Democratic support for former Rep. Jefferson B. Davis, who remained in the House for months after being arrested on charges stemming from his relationship with his foster son. Davis eventually pleaded guilty in 2004 to risk of injury to a minor after admitting to committing a sex act with his foster son, after the boy told investigators that Davis assaulted him 50 to 100 times.

"We've been down this path with Jeff Davis," Healy said. "He was accused of this, and he was allowed to participate in the process. No one was calling from the Democratic side for him to step down. I dare say if it was a Republican, the hue and cry from the other side would be pretty loud."

Wilber, 63, officially submitted his resignation Tuesday to Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz, who oversees state elections.

The two-sentence letter said, "Effective November 1, 2008, I am resigning my position as state representative of the 63rd House District. Effective today, I am withdrawing my nomination for election to the 63rd House District."

---

Credit market could affect state bonds
Stamford ADVOCATE
By Brian Lockhart, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 10/07/2008 02:42:15 AM EDT

HARTFORD - The faltering credit markets could make it impossible for the state to sell bonds for road repaving, school construction, clean water initiatives and other capital projects..full story here..

State Treasurer Denise Nappier Monday briefed the legislature's Banks Committee on how the financial services meltdown can affect state pensions, bond sales and other areas of the budget.

"How would you characterize what's happening?" asked state Sen. Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, co-chairman of the committee.

"We may be a little underwater, but we have enough flotation devices to survive and not drown," Nappier replied.

She revealed what Duff called a "bombshell" - how the credit markets are affecting sales of state bonds. The state sells bonds or debt on money borrowed to finance big-ticket projects and help cities with smaller ones.

But, for the first time anyone can remember, the state could not find a buyer in late September to refinance about $480 million worth of AAA-rated bonds for transportation projects, Nappier told lawmakers. Only about $90 million was sold, she said.

"We have never in the history of this state had problems selling our paper," Nappier said.

The problems with the credit markets affect everyone looking to borrow money, Duff said.

"It's why people can't get mortgages and are having a harder time getting student loans, why credit cards may lower the debt people can put on their cards," he said. "So what is happening for the rest of America happens to states as well. Somebody has to be able to buy the debt, and if there's no buyers, there's a standstill."
Under the worst scenario, cities and towns would lose state bonds for their projects.

"And then you're looking at higher property taxes at the local level," said state Rep. Ryan Barry, D-Manchester, co-chairman of the Banks Committee.

Nappier said she will be concerned if the problem persists into spring, but stopped short of suggesting lawmakers would have to cancel projects.

The state "is not cash poor" and has enough liquidity, thanks in part to a $1.4 billion rainy day fund, she said.

Jeffrey Beckham, a spokesman for the state budget office, said it is too early to speculate on what might happen to capital projects if bond sales are stagnant. The state will try again later this month to sell bonds, Beckham said.

"We're not there yet in terms of the credit markets really seizing up," he said.

Nappier also reported that the pension fund for all state employees dropped in net value by $2.5 billion over the past few months, to $23.2 billion.

The state's goal is an 8.5 percent rate of return, but the fund is down 4.72 percent.

"I wish I could tell you our pension fund investments rallied (and) we were completely shielded from the losses associated with Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, Freddie and Fannie Mac and AIG. Such is not the case," Nappier said.

But the state's portfolio "is risk-averse and designed to weather market volatility," she said, displaying a chart showing rebounds from turbulence in the financial markets since 1991.

The Wall Street crisis will not affect what the state and taxpayers contribute to the pension fund in the 2010 and 2011 budgets, she said. State officials are projecting budget deficits of $1 billion in the coming fiscal years.

Nappier said "the jury's out" on the success of the Wall Street bailout Congress passed last week.

"Continued market turbulence resulting in continued underperformance would definitely be cause for concern for the budget cycle beginning in 2012," she said.

Duff and Barry said depending on the success of the bailout, they may convene another hearing with Nappier to take action.

---

Projected state deficit growing; could be worse
BY PAUL HUGHES | REPUBLICAN-AMERICAN
September 23, 2008

HARTFORD -- The governor's budget office says the projected state deficit more than doubled, to $302.4 million, in the last month.  Gov. M. Jodi Rell tied the rising deficit to the troubles in the financial markets, the effects of the national economic downturn and global energy prices.  She warned Monday that the budget outlook could turn even bleaker because the new deficit estimate doesn't fully reflect the turbulence in the financial markets in recent days.

The all-important income tax is raising $75 million less than expected and other taxes and revenues from the two Indian casinos are down $80.2 million.

Rell again ruled out raising taxes or tapping into the state's $1.3 billion rainy day fund to close the growing budget gap. It appears likely that she will soon have to submit a deficit reduction plan to the legislature.  By state law, the governor must submit such a plan if the state comptroller certifies that a projected budget shortfall is greater than 1 percent of the state's general fund. The administration's latest $300 million estimate well exceeds that threshold.  Comptroller Nancy Wyman is expected to trigger the statutory requirement when her next budget update comes out on Oct. 1, said Robert L. Genuario, the governor's budget director.

Rell will then have 30 days to submit a deficit reduction plan to the legislature's two budget committees. The law sets no timelines for legislative action.

Genuario submitted the Office of Policy and Management's monthly budget estimates to Wyman on Monday.

Rell has already been using her limited authority to make spending cuts to try to close the budget gap. She ordered $140 million in reductions before the 2009 fiscal year started on July 1.  Despite the cuts, the shortfall has continued to grow. It jumped from $145.7 million to $300 million in the last month. The governor is readying a second round of cuts.  However, Rell can only reduce an additional $104 million on her own, according to the administration's calculations. That still leaves an estimated shortfall of nearly $200 million to make up.

"We are certainly facing difficult choices ahead," Rell said Monday morning.

An uneasy Rell has been getting daily updates on income tax collections, and she said the news hasn't been good. The income tax is budgeted to raise $7.6 billion. That represents nearly 40 percent of anticipated state revenues.  Some taxpayers pay estimated income taxes every quarter. The administration had assumed that estimated quarterly payments would stay flat, but the first quarter filings are down 5 percent.

"When you project no growth, having less than no growth is really frightening," Rell said.

The quarterly estimated payments are considered reliable indicators of the tax collection rate.

"Right now, we are obviously getting a lot less revenue than we had anticipated," the governor said.

The legislature isn't scheduled to convene again until the regular 2009 session opens in January. Lawmakers on the two budget committees are scheduled to meet Nov. 18 to discuss projections for the next two-year state budget.

---

State deficit now $300M
Stamford ADVOCATE
By Brian Lockhart, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 09/23/2008 02:56:58 AM EDT

The state's financial picture worsened Monday with Gov. M. Jodi Rell's announcement that a projected $145 million deficit has doubled to $300 million.

"We're seeing weakness in most of our revenue streams, top to bottom," said Rell's budget director, Robert Genuario of Norwalk.  On the 20th of each month, Genuario's office is required to submit a budget projection to the state comptroller.

In a statement released yesterday, Rell said, "Our state economy has been doing better than the national economy, but we are simply not immune to the effects of the national economic downturn. We are lowering estimates for personal income taxes, casino revenues and other taxes."

The state Office of Policy and Management estimates a $75 million loss in personal income tax revenue, a $20 million drop in casino revenue, $10 million in losses in sales tax and insurance company taxes, and a $5 million decline in taxes on cigarette purchases.

Genuario will discuss the numbers Thursday in a budget hearing at the Capitol. It was too soon to provide data on what effects the Wall Street crisis will have on state revenue, he said Monday.  His office anticipates that layoffs of Wall Street employees will affect Fairfield County.

"Nothing I present on Thursday will be reflective of the Wall Street activity, except to acknowledge it . . . is unlikely to result in better projections," Genuario said.

About 45 percent of the state's personal income taxes are paid by Fairfield County residents.  Genuario said his office is working with Rell in proposing budget cuts on top of the $140 million she ordered over the summer. The governor has the authority to order 5 percent total agency cuts.

State Rep. Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden, said the $300 million deficit is "not great news" but should not cause panic. The state Office of Fiscal Analysis recently projected a much lower deficit, about $24 million, Donovan said, and Connecticut has a $1.4 billion contingency fund.  Unlike the Republican minority, Democrats have been content to wait until November to receive a full briefing from Genuario on the state's fiscal picture. The annual presentation to the finance and appropriations committees is scheduled for Nov. 18.

"The numbers come in bits and pieces over the next month or so," Donovan said.

He was concerned that Rell is "putting out a kind of fear message," he said. "I think we've got to be careful about that."

On Monday, the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities sent Rell a letter urging her not to touch state aid to cities and towns.

"Transferring the burden of a state deficit onto the backs of local governments and property taxpayers is a false economy," conference leaders wrote, noting that Rell has said she will not support tax increases to address the deficit.

"As the discussion on budget cuts begins, let it be clear that reductions in state aid to municipalities would result in . . . local property tax increases," the letter read. "Any proposals to chop municipal aid would be smoke and mirrors (and) simply shift the fiscal ramifications of the state's deficit onto the front steps of town halls across Connecticut."

Genuario said Rell's power to rescind the state budget exempts aid to cities and towns.

But the conference was looking ahead to when Rell and lawmakers meet during the legislative session that begins in January to craft a new two-year state budget. The first year of the 2010 budget has a hole of at least $600 million.

---

Budget In The Black
Hartford Courant editorial
September 8, 2008
 
Due to "a late summer rally" in income tax collections, says Comptroller Nancy Wyman, the state finished the fiscal year ending June 30 with an official surplus of $83.4 million. That final number comes after a wild ride through fiscal 2008 in which the state's green eyeshade brigade projected a budget surplus of $280 million, and months later a deficit of some $80 million.

Lesson No.1: Revenue flow is hard to predict, and projections should be taken with a grain of salt.

Lesson No.2: It's always wise to show spending restraint.

Gov. M. Jodi Rell helped to turn the deficit to a surplus by instituting a travel ban, a hiring freeze and other belt-tightening across departments. Not every rescission made sense, but the impulse to cut was good.

Mrs. Rell and the legislature were also wise to agree to make no changes in the budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1 — the second year of the biennial budget, approved last year. At present, there's a projected deficit of $145 million for the current fiscal year.

That may change, up or down. But clearly, if the economy continues to sputter, spending must be held in check.

---

Highlights of energy assistance bill 
DAY
Posted on Aug 23, 1:20 AM EDT
 
HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- The following are highlights of energy assistance legislation that lawmakers passed Friday night and Saturday morning.

- Decreases retail oil or propane dealers' minimum deliveries from 125 gallons to 100 gallons.

- Appropriates $8.5 million to Operation Fuel for emergency home heating assistance for households with incomes between 150 and 200 percent of the federal poverty level. For a family of four, that is incomes of $31,800 to $42,000.

- Appropriates $5 million to Operation Fuel for households with incomes between 200 percent of the federal poverty level to 100 percent of the state median income. For a family of four, that is incomes of $42,400 to $93,821.

- Provides Operation Fuel with $500,000 for administrative purposes.

- Appropriates $6.5 million to local and regional school districts for school heating assistance.

- Appropriates $4 million for emergency home heating assistance to people ages 65 and older with incomes at or below 100 percent of the state median income. That is $48,786 for one person and $63,798 for two people.

- Appropriates $3.5 million for home heating assistance grants to human service and public health nonprofit organizations such as adult day care providers, homeless shelters and domestic violence shelters.

- Provides an additional $3 million to expand an existing rebate program for replacement of residential furnaces or boilers.

- Provides an additional $2 million for more rebates to income-eligible residents for repairing and upgrading furnaces and boilers to achieve greater efficiency.

- Appropriates $2 million for additional funding for a state loan program for the purchase and installation of energy conservation materials, replacement boilers and furnaces and alternative energy devices.

- Creates a contingency fund of about $33.5 million with remaining surplus funds to cover future emergency heating needs.

- Allocates $7 million for a new program to subsidize energy audits for customers.

- Appropriates $2 million for a winter weatherization program targeting low-income households in the Connecticut Energy Assistance Program.

---

Rell, Dems endorse winter fuel aid plan
By Mary E. O’Leary, New Haven Register
08/20/2008
 
HARTFORD — A plan for distribution of the state surplus to assist low- and middle-income residents with fuel costs this winter has been agreed to by Gov. M. Jodi Rell and the Democratic leadership.

A vote on the plan, which proposes distribution of some $40 million for energy and heating assistance with an additional $30 million to be kept in a reserve fund for similar needs later this fiscal year, will be taken up Friday in a special session of the General Assembly.

The surplus for fiscal 2007-08 is now estimated at $70 million, said state Sen. Donald Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, president pro temp of the Senate.  The original surplus estimate in July was $22 million, lower than the $85 million legislators thought was available last week. The figure isn’t official until it is certified by Comptroller Nancy Wyman, who is expected to do so before the session.

“There has been an ongoing dialogue with the governor and we do have a basic agreement,” Williams said.

The Republican legislative leaders, the Democrats and Rell all sanction expanding eligibility for emergency fuel assistance for residents with annual incomes up to $94,000 for a family of four. Williams and Rell are proposing $6 million for this group, while the GOP leadership peg it at $15 million.

The GOP wants to cut and then cap the state’s gross receipts tax on gasoline, a continuing source of dispute with Democrats and Rell.

State Rep. Lawrence Cafero, House minority leader, said the GOP generally agrees with the distribution of funds as proposed by Rell and Democrats, but not with the proposed reserve fund.

Instead, they would earmark the $30 million to help municipalities with energy equipment updates, small businesses with electricity costs, and shift $28 million to the special transportation fund.  The Democrats and Rell have a range of proposals with $10 million for Operation Fuel for people with incomes between 151 percent and 200 percent of the federal poverty level. An additional $6 million would be set aside to help senior citizens with fuel costs.

The leadership also suggests funds to help towns and non-profit agencies deal with the heating crisis with gasoline still near $4 a gallon and heating oil around $5 a gallon.  The Energy Information Administration is estimating that residents of the Northeast will spend an average of $2,725 on heating oil this winter, while natural gas and electricity is also more costly this year.

Rell and the Democrats want $7.5 million put aside to help municipalities heat classrooms with grants not exceeding $7,500 per building and $4 million to help nonprofits that provide health and human services.

The proposal also puts aside $3 million to expand funding for the furnace repair or replacement rebate program and $2 million for the energy conservation loan program.  There is also agreement on several protections for people who prepay heating contracts, while they want to reduce the minimum delivery of heating oil to 100 gallons, since many companies require cash payments.

Williams said the state has to essentially double the aid available last year to maintain the same benefits for the most vulnerable citizens, while both parties agreed on the need to extend assistance to the middle class.  The plan also extends tax credits for vehicles that run on alternative fuels, as well as the exemption from the motor fuels tax for propane.

---

Rell, Legislators Plan Session On Heating Oil Costs
Hartford Courant
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING | Capitol Bureau Chief
August 2, 2008

Gov. M. Jodi Rell reached a broad agreement Friday with Democratic legislative leaders to hold a special session to help consumers with skyrocketing heating oil prices expected this winter.

The two sides have agreed to spend the state's $22 million surplus to provide relief to a wide range of individuals and organizations. Rell unveiled a series of proposals Friday on how the money could be spent, but the final details of the legislation will not be settled until the Democratic-controlled legislature meets in caucuses. The 107-member House Democratic caucus is set to meet next week.

"Everyone is in agreement that we need to take all the steps that we can to help folks with energy costs," said Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams. "We are going to pass some legislation to help the people of Connecticut through what we know is going to be a very tough winter. That's the bottom line. What we want to do is to get it done, and I predict that's what's going to happen."

The expected date for the session is Friday, Aug. 22 — the last working day before some lawmakers leave for the Democratic and Republican national presidential conventions in Denver and MinneapolisSt. Paul.

Williams and a bipartisan group of top leaders met with Rell at the governor's mansion in Hartford's West End Friday as Rell introduced an 11-point plan for relief.

"The sooner we address what we all know will be very tough times for so many people this winter, the better," Rell said. "With the price of heating oil heading toward $5 a gallon, we do not want Connecticut families and senior citizens having to choose between food and fuel this winter."

Many of the precise details were not set Friday because the bill has not been written and the legislature's nonpartisan fiscal office has not yet released its own surplus estimate — which will help determine exactly how much the state can spend. Rell and lawmakers also want to spend federal money from the Low-Income Heating Energy Assistance Program, known as LIHEAP.

Among the various ideas, Rell wants to:

•Provide funding to the nonprofit Operation Fuel to help both lower- and middle-income families. Operation Fuel is an umbrella organization of local fuel banks across the state that helps needy families who are not poor enough to qualify for government assistance. If funding is available, assistance could go to families earning as much as $78,154 annually, which the U.S. Census Bureau cites as the Connecticut median family income for 2006.

•Prevent heating oil dealers from imposing a surcharge on deliveries of less than 100 gallons. Currently, dealers are prevented from imposing an extra charge on deliveries over 150 gallons. As such, a homeowner who calls a dealer and orders 75 gallons could end up paying a surcharge.

•Force the dealers to report to the Department of Consumer Protection on their pre-paid contracts. This is designed to prevent situations similar to this year's collapse of a Waterbury-based company in which consumers complained that they made pre-paid deposits under a locked-in price and then never received the oil.

•Send money to cities and towns to help heat school classrooms.

•Help nonprofit organizations, which provide health and human services, with their heating bills.

•Allow Operation Fuel to receive 50 percent of the money that the state would normally receive from abandoned utility deposits and refunds.

While top leaders said there was a bipartisan agreement on many aspects of fuel aid, Republicans said they will still seek to cut and cap the state's gross receipts tax on gasoline. Since the gross receipts tax is based on the wholesale price, the tax has increased by 18 cents per gallon over the past three years, lawmakers said.

"We can and should provide relief in terms of gasoline taxes," said Senate Republican leader John McKinney of Fairfield. "We're going to continue to try."

Republicans have been blocked in their efforts this year because Democrats say that the state needs the increased money from gasoline taxes to avoid even worse deficits in the current fiscal year. Standing next to McKinney during a press conference in the driveway outside the governor's mansion, House Speaker James Amann blasted the Republican call for cutting the tax.

"It's a dumb idea," Amann said as he stood virtually shoulder-to-shoulder with McKinney. "We have declining revenues at a time when next year we're going to have deficits. ... Casino revenue is down. Corporate revenue is down. Certainly, income tax revenue is down."

McKinney then responded, "There are no dumb ideas, only dumb people with ideas. Right, Jim?"

---

Debate heats up over fuel aid session
CT POST
By KEN DIXON
Article Last Updated: 07/29/2008 01:45:42 AM EDT

HARTFORD — Gov. M. Jodi Rell wants lawmakers to meet in a special session before the end of August to provide more heating assistance for the state's low-income, elderly and even some middle-income families.  She told reporters in the Capitol that if the General Assembly waits until September, the $22 million in last year's budget surplus would automatically revert to the emergency reserves.

If that were to happen, it could create complications, distractions and temptations if the Legislature were to meet after Sept. 1, opening the reserves — called the Rainy Day Fund — to a scramble for other funding and election-year politics.

Rell said she'll meet with legislative leaders this week to finalize a special-session agenda and agree what to do with the surplus.

"I want to make it very clear that I do not want to and will not open up the Rainy Day Fund, because it becomes a Christmas tree for way too many projects that may be worthy, but certainly should not be used by the Rainy Day Fund," Rell said. Rell said she'll finalize the date with majority Democrats on Friday.

"Once you open that Rainy Day Fund, I am afraid that there are too many people who'd like to use funds for other purposes and I'd like, frankly, to stick to the one area that I believe we all have agreement on," Rell said.

She wants the heating assistance to extend beyond low-income and elderly state residents, to include some middle-income families.

"The sooner we can do that the sooner we can get the funds established in whatever venue will be appropriate to make that happen," Rell said.

Minority Republicans in the Legislature have promised to make an election-year issue of the state's so-called gross-receipts tax on the wholesale costs of petroleum products because of the windfall profits the 7-percent tax has produced during the unexpected run-up of gas prices.

Rell doesn't support expanding the focus beyond home-energy costs. "If we can do something else, so be it but right now I want the surplus funds dedicated to home-energy costs," Rell said.

She said $22 million is better than the state could have hoped for when it appeared last spring that the fiscal year would end June 30 in deficit rather than the modest surplus.

"It may very well not be enough," Rell said, adding that the state low-income program may be as much as $30 million short for participants in the state's low-income heat-assistance program. However, she expects more money from Washington.

"We're hoping that the federal government will step up to the plate," Rell said. "We may very well have to add to that."

Last year 86,000 families participated in the state's $70-million Low Income Heating Assistance Program, which was funded primarily by the federal government. Families in Bridgeport alone amounted to more than 10 percent of those served statewide.

This year, state officials anticipated a shortfall of at least $5.5 million, which would be offset in part by the $22 million in new state funding, although the price of fuel oil has also jumped by about a dollar a gallon since last year.

Speaker of the House James A. Amann, D-Milford, said Monday that it might be too soon to plan for a special session.

"I agree with the governor that we should do everything possible for our most-vulnerable citizens when it comes to home-heating assistance," Amann said in a statement. "The fact is it may take more than our latest surplus to help those who will struggle to pay their bills this winter," Amann said. " I look forward to meeting with the governor and legislative leaders this week to further discuss the issue, after which I plan to schedule a caucus of House Democratic members. Until all of these conversations take place, talk of a special session is premature." Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, said Monday that energy assistance has captured the focus of many lawmakers.

"We all want to increase funding for critical energy assistance programs for the elderly and needy," he said in a statement from the Capitol.

"Next week the nonpartisan budget office will release its report on whether there is a surplus, and if so how much it is and what department it is in," Williams said. "We must look for the most-efficient way to move these critical funds and that could mean a special session or there may be other methods that would save taxpayers the cost of another special session."

Last week majority Democrats said they anticipated a September session, and Amann hinted that lawmakers might add money for the criminal-justice reforms that were passed earlier this year and were the target of subsequent budget cuts by the governor when the new fiscal year started July 1.

Rell, stiffening at a reporter's question on the issue, said Democratic claims that the justice reforms of earlier this year were being threatened by her cuts are wrong.

"I'm frankly sick and tired of some of the legislators complaining that we have cut the criminal-justice bill," Rell said. "That bill was fully funded. We carried forward all funds that paid for the bill that we passed in January. There's nothing lost there."

She pointed out that the Department of Correction received no rescissions and that the Judicial Branch decided which areas could afford budget reductions.

"So to stand here and say we're short $10 million, or we're short $20 million is frankly wrong and it's misleading and I'd wish they'd stop it," Rell said as she walked away.

---

State budget chief: Deficit could grow
Norwalk HOUR
By SUSAN HAIGH, Associated Press
July 10, 2008

Gov. M. Jodi Rell's budget chief delivered a sobering message to legislators Wednesday, warning that a projected $150 million state budget deficit could seriously worsen in the coming months.

Robert Genuario, secretary of the Office of Policy and Management, told the legislature's Appropriations Committee that personal income tax revenues are flat. That's a problem because the budget for this new fiscal year relies on an assumed 6 percent increase in collections.

Adding to the trouble are significant drops in state revenue from the corporation tax and real estate transaction tax.

"Some could legitimately say that is a conservative estimate," Genuario said of the projected $150 million shortfall. "The deficit could become significantly worse."

Other looming budget issues also complicate the situation.

Some financially struggling nursing homes are expected to ask for more state revenue because they did not receive an increase in Medicaid funding. The state's HUSKY health insurance for children is expected to cost more, the University of Connecticut Health Center is $11.5 million in the red and special education accounts are in deficit.

The 2008-09 budget was crafted back in 2007, when it appeared the state would be reaping surpluses. Given the worsening revenue picture, majority Democratic lawmakers and Rell, a Republican, decided last session against making changes to the $18.4 billion tax and spending plan. Instead, it has been up to Rell to use her executive power to make limited reductions to keep the budget balanced.

Last month, she announced about $125 million in cuts.

Genuario said Rell can still rescind more budgeted spending. If the state comptroller projects the deficit has grown to greater than 1 percent of the state's general fund, Rell is obligated to prepare a deficit mitigation plan to the General Assembly.

"Whether or not it is necessary to revisit the rescission process before the end of the fiscal year depends on what happens to revenues," Genuario said.

He said there are no plans for state employee layoffs, despite cuts in personal services accounts from most state agencies.

Some of Rell's cuts are drawing criticism. For example, some lawmakers are questioning why the governor would reduce funding to alternative incarceration and supervision programs for offenders leaving prison. Such programs were a key component of a reform package passed after last year's deadly home invasion in Cheshire.

"I'm begging you to go back and rethink this whole reduction," Rep. Toni Walker, D-New Haven, told Genuario.

Walker said she fears the state's prison population will continue to grow if there aren't enough parole and probation officers, as well as alternative incarceration programs.

Besides deficit problems with the 2008-09 fiscal year budget, Connecticut is facing even larger financial challenges in 2010 when there's a $400 million revenue shortfall because of how the budget was crafted. Genuario said his office has estimated the gap could be $568 million, but that was before the state's revenues began deteriorating.

---

An Odd Farewell For Bill Dyson
Hartford Courant
By Mark Pazniokas on June 23, 2008 3:45 PM

Rep. William R. Dyson, D-New Haven, a longtime champion of the poor, is leaving the House of Representatives on an unexpected note -- by voting to uphold the governor's veto of a minimum-wage increase.

Dyson was one of 106 House members to pass the bill in April, but he switched today and voted with the Republican governor. The House Democrats still managed to override the veto, 102-39, one more than the necessary 101 votes.

When asked to explain the switch, Dyson replied, "Different economic times."

Dyson said unemployment has worsened since April.

Jerking a thumb toward the Republican minority, Dyson said, "I believed the argument they made about this impacting a whole lot of people with layoffs."

Dyson, who often has broken with the Democratic majority since losing a bitter race for speaker to James Amann four years ago, said that Rell's office approached him about switching.

"They asked me what I was doing," he said.

Dyson said he already had decided to uphold the veto before he was approached.

Dyson, who is not seeking re-election this fall after 32 years in the House, acknowledged that some people will find it odd that one of his last votes was against the minimum wage, but he said, "I didn't think about that at all, that it was one of the last votes."

Rep. George M. Wilber, D-Winsted, who voted against the bill in April, switched today to override. At the time, he appeared to be the deciding vote.

Then Rep. Penny Bacchiochi, R-Somers, voted to override, bringing the tally to 102.

---

Another shot for minimum wage hike
Stamford ADVOCATE
By Brian Lockhart, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 06/21/2008 01:00:00 AM EDT

The Democratic-majority General Assembly will likely have the votes Monday to overturn Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell's veto of legislation that would increase the minimum wage from $7.65 to $8 per hour.

"We're within striking distance," Larry Perosino, spokesman for House Speaker James Amann, D-Milford, said yesterday.

The bill passed the 151-member House of Representatives during the regular session in a mostly party line vote of 106-45, with two Democrats opposed and three Republicans voting for the increase.  Rell and other opponents say the measure could hurt businesses in a tough economy and cost the state jobs.  Proponents dismiss this argument, saying the increase is needed to help residents cope with the tough economy and rising prices.

Amann has said he supports overturning the veto but was uncertain whether enough lawmakers could return to the capitol for the veto session Monday.  A two-thirds vote - or 101 members - are needed to overturn Rell's veto in the House.

State Reps. Gerald Fox, William Tong, Christel Truglia, and Carlo Leone, all D-Stamford, along with state Reps. Bruce Morris and Christopher Perone, both D-Norwalk, said they will be among those headed to Hartford on Monday.

"Look, it makes an impact for people that are living below the poverty line, working two jobs," Perone said. "Given the economic pressures and the costs of energy and gas, it does make a small impact."

Leone said boosting the minimum wage is "the least we can do."

State Rep. Joseph Mioli, D-Westport, was one of the few Democrats to vote against the minimum wage increase.  Mioli's family owns a pizza restaurant, and he was concerned about the bill's effect on small businesses.  Mioli could not be reached for comment.  Twenty-four votes are needed in the Senate.

Senate President Donald Williams, D-Brooklyn, said he could deliver the votes of his 23-member caucus.  Earlier this week, the two Republican state senators who also voted for the minimum wage increase said they had not changed their minds.

"I continue to believe my initial position was correct," said state Sen. Sam Caligiuri, R-Waterbury. "But I will be taking people's calls and hearing from people and continuing to study this right up until the vote."

State Sen. Anthony Guglielmo, R-Stafford Springs, who was born and raised in Stamford, talked briefly with Rell about her veto after a press conference last week.

"She said, 'I wouldn't pressure you on this, but I do think the facts have changed (and) I'd like to send you some material,' " Guglielmo recalled.

He said people were being punished by high gasoline, fuel oil and food prices, and hiking the minimum wage is the least the state can do to help.

"It amounts to $14 a week," Guglielmo said. "It's not a lot of money."

Perosino said the intention Monday is to also overturn Rell's veto of a tip credit bill that was linked to the minimum wage hike.

The tip credit allows hotels, restaurants and related businesses to offer salaries that are less than minimum wage to service employees who make up for the difference in tips.  Perosino said the minimum wage bill is the only Rell veto lawmakers plan to override Monday.

---

Action in the "Veto" Session Monday, June 23 is purely to overturn the Governor's veto of the raise in the minimum wage.
DOT problems will probably live on for now
CT POST
ROB VARNON
Article Last Updated: 06/20/2008 11:46:37 PM EDT

HARTFORD — Lawmakers meeting this Monday to try and override a veto, probably won't tackle proposed reforms to working conditions at the state Department of Transportation.

The Connecticut State Employees Association/Service Employees International Union Local 2001 sent letters to legislative leaders asking them to call a special session to approve a supplemental collective bargaining agreement it reached with Gov. M. Jodi Rell.

The CSEA's said in a letter to the leadership, the supplemental would address some of the concerns raised about the performance of the DOT, including retaining good employees who were leaving for higher paying, private sector jobs. One provision would allow DOT employees to work 40-hours a week. DOT workers are limited to 35 hours a week. The five additional hours would be at regular pay, not overtime. The agreement also places educational requirements on engineers and supervisors that do not now exist.

The union's deal could be up for discussion if Rell asked the leadership to do so, Perosino said. The governor didn't comment Friday.

Despite contacting Rell's office, the governor did not comment on the union agreement Friday. After a number scandals in the early part of this decade, followed by a string of embarrassments, including a gross underestimation of the costs for the more than $1 billion rail maintenance yard in New Haven, reforming the DOT became a hot topic leading into the regular legislative session this year. But bills to change the DOT went nowhere.

Larry Perosino, a spokesman for House Speaker Jim Amann, D-Milford, said the agreement is not on the radar for lawmakers.

Representatives and senators are coming to Hartford on Monday to try to override Rell's veto of a bill to raise the minimum wage, he said.

---

Rell signs subprime aid bill
HARTFORD — Homeowners stuck in the subprime mortgage crisis may be eligible for a revolving-loan program, funding for which will be expanded under legislation signed into law Wednesday by Gov. M. Jodi Rell.

During a bill-signing ceremony at the Manchester branch of the Rockville Bank, Rell said the law will set a new national standard to help homeowners caught in the subprime squeeze.

"Connecticut residents are feeling the pressure from all sides — from staggering gas prices, rising prices for all forms of energy, food prices and the overall cost of living — and many middle-class families are having trouble making their mortgage," Rell said in a statement. "We are here to help, and with this legislation, we will."

The bill includes $40 million to continue a Connecticut Housing Finance Authority program started by Rell last year to offer those trapped in adjustable-rate mortgages to sign on at 6-percent rates; and a new $30 million revolving loan program.

Sen. Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, co-chairman of the Banks Committee, said in a phone interview on Wednesday that the measures will not cost taxpayers anything, but will be self-sustaining because as loans are paid off the money will become available for new loans.

"We've expanded the definition of how people can qualify," Duff said, noting that the bill also allows CHFA to develop and implement a new program on turning foreclosed homes into affordable or supportive-housing sites.

The bill will also allow people within certain income guidelines to participate in an expanded job training and retraining program.

"We should try to help people get a job because if they don't need state services we can help them keep their homes on their own," Duff said.

"I'm proud of the fact we were able to pass a bipartisan bill, written in 11 weeks, that was very comprehensive, doesn't use taxpayer money but will help keep our economy strong," Duff said.

---

Rell Signs Ethics Reform Bill 
DAY 
By Ted Mann    
Published on 6/18/2008 

Hartford - Gov. M. Jodi Rell signed an ethics reform bill today that would allow judges to reduce or revoke the pensions of public employees or officials convicted of corruption.

Calling the bill "the crowning glory of four years’ worth of hard work," Rell said the pension revocation measure represents the final piece of a series of ethics reforms begun after she took over for her predecessor, John G. Rowland, who resigned amid a corruption scandal and later spent 10 months in federal prison.

"We’ve tinkered around the edges for years with ethics reform," Rell said in a press conference on the north steps of the Capitol. "This truly is major ethics reform."

The governor was flanked by mayors from Manchester, Newington and Middletown, as well as legislative leaders, including Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, and Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield.

Also on hand were the lawmakers who finally hammered out a compromise on the bill for last week’s special session, after years of unsuccessful efforts to win passage of the pension revocation language: Sen. Gayle Slossberg, D-Milford, and Rep. Diana Urban, D-North Stonington, along with Rep. Christopher Caruso, D-Bridgeport.

The bill also includes the governor’s spouse as a public official in the state’s ethics code, tightens gift restrictions for public officials, prohibits legislative or executive chiefs of staff from soliciting campaign contributions, and requires anyone witnessing the offer or acceptance of a bribe to report it.

The pension revocation provisions leave discretion in the hands of a sentencing judge, and would apply to both state and municipal public employees, as well as elected officials.

---

SPECIAL SESSION JUNE 11, 2008:  all over now!
Dems thwart GOP proposals in late session; Ethics bill passes; special session ends after 3 a.m.
By Brian Lockhart, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 06/12/2008 07:57:03 AM EDT

HARTFORD - Lawmakers wrapped up a special legislative session after 3 a.m. Thursday.
Though legislators arrived at the capitol around 10 a.m., the actual debate on extending higher conveyance tax rates, cutting a gas tax and passing ethics reforms did not begin until around 12 hours later.

The Senate left at 1 a.m., but the House of Representatives did not head for home until after 3 a.m.  Rep. James Shapiro, D-Stamford, said members wanted to finish their business instead of adjourning to return later today.

"Nobody wants to come back," Shapiro said.

Democrats successfully limited the agenda to a handful of bills, thwarting Republican proposals at every turn.

"C'mon!" shouted a frustrated House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk, just after 1 a.m. when yet another GOP amendment was shot down in the House.

The biggest news was passage of an ethics bill that, until Wednesday, many thought would become the victim of a dispute between the Democratic co-chairs and vice chairs of the Government Administrations and Elections Committee.  When the regular session ended May 7, House Democrats, at the urging of GAE chairman Christopher Caruso, D-Bridgeport, and vice-chair Diana Urban, D-Stonington, balked at a Senate ethics package allowing a Superior Court judge to strip corrupt elected officials and public employees of their pensions.

Championed in the Senate by GAE co-chair Gail Slossberg, D-Milford, the measure was also backed by Republicans in both chambers and Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell.  House Democrats argued the bill interfered with collective bargaining agreements and said judges should be limited to ordering unionized employees' pensions pay for their restitution.  The compromise backed unanimously in the Senate and by 124 members of the House specifies the Attorney General can first ask a judge to fully revoke a unionized workers' pension.

If the judge determines the request violates a collective bargaining agreement, the judge is then given the option of reducing the pension to pay fines, restitution or jail costs.

"We've done our job here. We've set the public policy," Slossberg told reporters prior to the House and Senate votes. "We also recognize we have contracts and the court is going to look at those and we need to respond accordingly."

The ethics package also: Makes failure to report a bribe and failure to report witnessing a bribe a crime; defines the governor's spouse a public official; limits gifts to public officials to major life events, such as the birth of a child, and to $1,000 or less; prohibits state contractors from offering a job to a state employee who participated significantly in awarding a contract to that firm; and requires lawmakers complete ethics training.

The Senate, followed by the House, also passed a bill yesterday they hope will provide drivers some relief at the gas pump.  The legislation cancels the planned 0.5 percent increase on July 1 of the gross receipts tax on wholesale fuel transactions, limiting it to 7 percent until 2013. At that time it is scheduled to increase to 8.1 percent.  The gross receipts tax is levied on wholesale fuel transactions. Gas stations pay the tax and pass it on to their customers at the pump. That amount varies with the wholesale price of fuel.

The 0.5 percent increase was, based on current prices, expected to add between 3 and 5 cents per gallon of gas.

The tax has been gradually increased to help pay for the state's transportation needs. But lawmakers from both sides of the aisle agree that unexpectedly high gas prices are bringing in far more revenue than anticipated and the state will not lose money by halting the July 1 increase. Republicans wanted to go further. They proposed capping the amount of tax that is actually collected so it does not continue to rise with wholesale costs.

They were also pushing a summer "gas tax holiday" that reduced a 25-cent gas tax the state levies directly at the pump.

Sen. William Nickerson, R-Greenwich, began the Senate debate by arguing stopping the July 1 percentage increase in the gross receipts tax would put an estimated $10.20 back in consumers' pockets over a year.

"Can we all agree that's completely imperceptible?" he said. "The day after this bill is adopted, no one will be better off."

But in the end he voted for the Democrat's limited proposal to halt the July 1 increase.

"You could argue it doesn't do any harm," Nickerson said afterward.

The bill also prevents oil companies from interfering with gas stations that want to give discounts to drivers who pay for gas with cash, rather than credit.  Some gas stations want to extend such offers but are contractually prohibited.  Attorney General Richard Blumenthal earlier this week said he would not be surprised if oil companies challenged the law but expected the state to prevail.

Finally, lawmakers extended increased rates in the tax levied on real estate sales until 2010.

Before 2003, cities and towns collected $1.10 on every $1,000 of a home or a business sale.  The General Assembly then raised that to $2.50 and allowed 18 communities, including Norwalk and Stamford, to raise the tax to as much as $5 per $1,000.  Norwalk residents pay the maximum and Stamford charges $3.50 per $1,000.

The tax was scheduled to sunset June 30, and cities and towns that have come to rely on the money to balance their budgets begged lawmakers to extend it.  Realtors like Sen. Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, have pressed for the higher rates to sunset.

"My beef is that there's no accountability to the funds whatsoever," Duff said after voting against the extension.

He said he might support the increased rates if cities and towns were forced to use the additional dollars for infrastructure needs or affordable housing. "This is nothing more than an unregulated slush fund for most communities," he said.

In the House Shapiro also voted against extending the higher rates.  Republicans argued the tax was a hit to residents suffering from the poor housing market.  They unsuccessfully offered a host of amendments last night to lower the tax for seniors, members of the military and residents caught up in the sub prime mortgage crisis.  The conveyance tax was the original reason Democrats scheduled yesterday's special session.

The extension was contemplated earlier this year as part of a package of adjustments to the two-year state budget passed by Rell and the General Assembly in 2007.  But everything changed in the final few days of the regular session when the state's six-digit surplus turned into a deficit.  Democrats and Rell agreed the best response was to not change a thing and allow the Governor to use her limited authority to make necessary cuts over the coming months.

Republicans offered instead an early retirement plan for state employees they said would not only balance the budget but also provide additional aid to cities and towns and non-profit organizations.  But budget staff and the state comptroller questioned the GOP's numbers and the minority party failed to raise their proposal for a vote before midnight on May 7.

Cafero and Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield had hoped yesterday to force a debate on their budget by amending it to the conveyance tax or gas tax bills.  Democrats outmaneuvered them. The majority party drafted and successfully passed a narrowly defined set of guidelines for the special session that allowed them to kill any GOP amendments.

Throughout the night Cafero and McKinney continually challenged the Democrats, arguing the majority party was unfairly stifling debate.  But their amendments were consistently ruled by the Democrats as being out of order.  Cafero at one point appealed to the majority party, arguing it is their responsibility to protect the minority party's rights.

"I believe we're establishing an incredibly dangerous precedent," Cafero said. "You might not agree with us, but for God sakes let us be heard."

At one point Rep. Arthur O'Neill, R-Southbury, grew so desperate as to read aloud a passage from Senator and Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama's book, "The Audacity of Hope."

O'Neill recounted the author's frustrations in the Illinois Senate dealing with a Republican majority that constantly found creative ways to thwart Democrat proposals.  O'Neill said until he thought Connecticut's General Assembly was immune to such "hyper technical rulings" and the majority allowed for robust debate.

Rep. William Tong, D-Stamford, a vocal Obama supporter, said on the contrary, Obama would support the Democrat's tactics.

"The Republican budget is irresponsible and the governor of their own party has rejected it out of hand," Tong said.

In the Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney, D-New Haven, said there are "fundamental problems" with the GOP's reliance on an early retirement to balance its budget proposal.  And Senate President Donald Williams, D-Brooklyn, added the GOP's budget would also eliminate the estate tax - a move long favored by Republicans from lower Fairfield County.

"(This would be) a break for the wealthy," Williams said. "This is the wrong time, the wrong place, to take up that."

Republicans have also said their budget would restore a $20 million education program that helped fund early reading programs throughout the state, including in Stamford and Norwalk. Stamford Mayor Dannel Malloy, a Democrat, and Norwalk Republican Mayor Richard Moccia recently visited the capitol to urge the legislature to include that money in the special session.  Sen. Thomas Gaffey, D-Meriden, a co-chairman of the legislature's education committee, said last he "abhors" not being able to come through with the dollars.

But, Gaffey said, the state does not have the money. He suggested school districts look to restructure their budgets to be able to continue the early reading programs.  Stamford is losing $1.5 million and Norwalk $1 million.

"It's all about choices. It's all about priorities," Gaffey said.

---

Outgoing Speaker Amann's last opportunity (?) to zing the GOP?  Read article here.
Lawmakers to take up heating oil and gas prices 
DAY 
Posted on Jun 11, 9:05 AM EDT

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- State lawmakers are returning to the Capitol to take up bills dealing with the soaring costs of gasoline and home heating oil.

On Wednesday's agenda is a proposal to postpone a July 1 state tax increase that would raise gas prices at the pumps by up to 5 cents a gallon. Legislators will also debate whether to allow retailers to offer discounts to gas customers who pay with cash instead of credit cards.

Another bill up for discussion calls for spending $2.5 million on fuel efficient burners and furnaces for more than 3,000 low-income and elderly families in Connecticut. Proponents say the measure would help families with their home heating costs and save the state's fuel assistance program about $64 million next winter.

Legislative leaders also plan to take up a bill designed to protect consumers who enter into prepaid heating oil contracts.

---

The last word on "short session"...
Circus and its ringmaster call it a day, for now
CT POST
KEN DIXON
Article Last Updated: 05/09/2008 08:05:50 PM EDT

In the three-ring circus of your General Assembly, the last night of the annual session on Wednesday had something for kids of all ages, from trapeze artists to little cars full of clowns.
Most of it, however, was useless entertainment.

Rep. Chris Caruso, up on the high wire from where so many lawmakers would like to push him, briefly teased the House into thinking he might retire.

The veteran Bridgeporter delved into his annual exercise in self-destruction as he let the ticking clock first stifle, then strangle to death the ethics reform bill that would have revoked the pensions of crooked state and municipal officials.

Caruso was a keg of gunpowder away from being shot out of a cannon after he presided over the demise of legislation that, 13 weeks earlier, every lawmaker worth their name in the newspaper said was a slam-dunk.

But at least it made public employee labor union members happy when the clock struck midnight and, for another year at least, they protected crooked employees from potentially losing their state or municipal pensions.

A few hours earlier, the 23-member Democratic majority of the state Senate took over one of the biggest rooms in the Capitol to do what they do best: eat catered meals and blather about what good lawmakers they are and to thank each other for their "leadership" — the Capitol's most over-used encomium.

Forget the fact that time was running out to actually accomplish legislation.

The Senate spent most of  the last week of the session in the endless procession of farewell "points of personal privilege" for those retiring members of "The Circle" as the senators call themselves.
During an hourlong tribute to Sen. Bill Nickerson, R-Greenwich, an articulate, smart and witty member of "The Circle" since 1991 — whom the Legislature will sorely miss — every one of his colleagues tried to be articulate and witty about him.

No one actually was, however, until Nickerson himself rose to bid farewell to them, working around the ring, firing off personable riffs on each of his 35 fellows.

At least they were slugging it out in the House as Democrats led by Speaker of the House Jim Amann, the ringmaster up at the podium, tried time and again to debate bills, many of which wilted under prolonged questioning from minority Republicans.

Every few minutes, House Majority Leader Chris Donovan, the lion tamer, popped up out of his seat and instead of shouting "Back Simba!" he asked Amann to "pass temporarily" bills that were to be abandoned like popcorn after the matinee.

Lawmakers were gathered around Donovan's desk like circus clowns trying to get back into the little car, as they desperately attempted to salvage pet legislation.

But if you wait until the last two days of the session to pass a bill, you're asking for heartbreak.

The term of legislative craft in yanking bills from debate when they become tedious is called "P.T."

There were more P.T.s in the House Wednesday night than Ringling Bros. and (P.T.) Barnum & Bailey Circus.

House Minority Leader Larry Cafero's dark eyes were wide open with watchful loathing behind his classic Roman nose as he surveyed the scene, his chin jutting out, over toward Donovan's desk about 30 yards away. Cafero, R-Norwalk, was on a low boil for days after Democrats cut a budget deal with Republican Gov. Jodi Rell that left minority House and Senate Republicans out in the cold. It was reminiscent of the now-repudiated administration of John "Why Should I Resign If I've Done Nothing Wrong?" Rowland, who annually cut his own budget peace with Democrats. Cafero and his assistant leaders were on the phone constantly, with Donovan, his aides and Amann, to make sure that on the last day, the few bills the GOP wanted would reach the center ring.

In the morning, the House celebrated the retirements of a few veterans, including Rep. Julia Wasserman of Newtown, one of the smartest lawmakers in the building, who at an optimistic age of 84 is shopping around for a doctoral program.

She accepted kudos from a few of the leaders, then stood up and cut through the self-congratulatory haze.

"And now we should go back to business and do our work and especially pass the Program Review bill," said the long-time committee chairwoman. "It's noncontroversial."

That was around the time Caruso, whom Cafero loathes like no other denizen of the Capitol, stood for a point of personal privilege.

"I'd like to announce, Mr. Speaker, I'm staying," Caruso said as the chamber, which had briefly halted, hopefully, resumed its sideshow undercurrent.

Over on the west side of the Capitol, down the hall from the House chamber, Gov. Rell was quietly signing into law a criminal-justice bill that would double and triple penalties for violent criminals' second and third offenses.

Rell and her team in the elephant pen made two of the biggest political blunders of the year in the last month.

First, she immediately dissed a GOP lawmakers' proposal last month to offer early retirements to thousands of state employees. She never even gave Cafero and Senate Minority Leader John McKinney a half-day's news cycle to reap the media coverage.

The governor's second, larger miscue was to briefly allude to the possible veto of the criminal-justice legislation over its measly $10 million cost for more prosecutors, public defenders, monitoring of parolees and better court operations.

That kind of money isn't even peanuts in the $18.4 billion budget that takes effect July 1.

As the House circus wound down toward midnight, they approved two bills that would address the state's long-running school desegregation case, and unanimously approved a consent calendar that included a scary bill to exempt the names and addresses of more state employees from public disclosure.

At about 11:59, as the final, oblique piece of legislation was being called, someone with a sense of humor briefly flashed the title of a super-controversial bill on paid sick leave, sending a roar through the House.

Then the House voting machine, appropriately, malfunctioned, missing more than two dozen lawmakers, who stood with their hands in the air as Amann, minutes away from shedding a few tears on the podium, rattled off names in his final performance after four years as House ringmaster.

---

Parties spar over legislative session results
Manchester Journal Enquirer
By Keith M. Phaneuf
Published: Friday, May 9, 2008 10:54 AM EDT

HARTFORD — Majority Democrats tried Thursday to put their best face on a 2008 legislative session plagued by a slumping economy and budget deficit.

But minority Republicans countered that Democrats ran from state government’s fiscal challenges, ducked a host of other issues, and compounded the problems awaiting lawmakers in 2009.

Also Thursday, House and Senate Democratic leaders confirmed that they plan to call members into special session, probably within the next 30 days, to extend a municipal real-estate conveyance tax increase that is set to expire July 1.

But whether that special session also will include another attempt to enact pension sanctions for corrupt state officials remained unclear Thursday.

“What we had to do this session is what families all across Connecticut had to do — make tough choices in difficult times,” said Senate President Pro Tem Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn.

Despite a 2008 budget that’s $68 million in the red and a projected 2009 deficit of about $119 million, Democrats added prosecutors, probation and parole officers, and public defenders and enacted $140 million in mortgage-relief financing for homeowners.

They also increased the minimum wage from $7.65 to $8 per hour starting Jan. 1.

“We have, no doubt, budgeted wisely,” said House Speaker James A. Amann, D-Milford. “Best of all, we didn’t have to raise taxes.”

Gas tax increases

Actually, though, a wholesale fuel levy that already adds about 20 cents per gallon to the price of gasoline will jump from 7 to 7.5 percent on July 1. It was the fourth consecutive annual increase in the tax. Lawmakers didn’t have to approve the increase this year because it was part of a package of five fuel-tax hikes they approved in May 2005.

Leaders of the House and Senate Republican minorities said tax hikes aren’t the only issue that Democrats are distorting.

State government doesn’t have to enter the new fiscal year with a built-in budget deficit, Republicans said. But they say that will happen this year because Democrats are afraid to consider tough fiscal choices in a legislative election year.

“Our Democratic colleagues talk about living within our means, but they do nothing about it,” said Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield. “Talking is not good enough. … All we saw was gymnastics of the first order” to avoid facing tough choices.

Republicans said they could balance the $18.4 billion budget for 2009, and restore modest increases for nursing homes and nonprofit social service providers, an early reading grant for cities and towns, and some criminal justice initiatives, by reducing the state workforce next year through an early retirement program.

Rather than allow a debate on the Republican budget, Democrats used procedural maneuvers to avoid such a debate. The majority party also refused to allow votes on numerous other measures, stifling proposals to provide further relief to towns, to eliminate a deficit at the University of Connecticut Health Center, and to expand staffing at nursing homes.

House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero, R-Norwalk, added that Democrats even dragged out ceremonial farewells to retiring officials and held extra-long, closed-door meetings to run out the session clock.

“We said good-bye to everybody and their uncle. They had caucuses that lasted longer than Lent,” Cafero said, adding that families are struggling with high prices, unemployment and rising local taxes. “You know what we did about it folks? Nothing, and that’s shameful.”

Conveyance tax on agenda

Amann and Williams pledged Thursday to call the legislature into special session within the next month to adopt at least a one-year extension of a municipal real estate conveyance tax increase set to expire July 1. Without that increase, cities and towns would lose an estimated $30 million to $40 million in revenue next fiscal year.

The legislature also tried and failed to adopt an ethics bill that would allow state government to cancel the pensions of officials guilty of corruption.

Democrats in the House and Senate clashed over whether to limit the penalties to pension reductions or to cancel pensions entirely — and whether to limit the penalties that could be imposed on unionized employees guilty of corruption.

Amann and Williams said negotiations would continue over the next few weeks in hopes of reaching a compromise that could be enacted in special session.

Republicans charged that the effort failed because the Democratic co-chairmen of the Government Administration and Elections Committee, Rep. Christopher L. Caruso of Bridgeport and Sen. Gayle S. Slossberg of Milford, don’t get along and couldn’t strike a compromise.

“We are ruled and governed by people who can’t get along,” Cafero said.

---

Budget woes are left to Rell to sort out 
DAY
By Susan Haigh, Associated Press    
Published on 5/10/2008 

Hartford - Now that state lawmakers have gone home, it's up to Gov. M. Jodi Rell to deal with Connecticut's newfound deficit problems.

Democrat leaders of the General Assembly and Rell, a Republican, agreed to stick with the $18.4 billion budget approved last year for the new fiscal year that begins July 1, and not make any changes given the state's slowing revenues.

That means Rell will have to keep the tax and spending plan in balance, using her limited powers to cut spending and calling on commissioners to be frugal. It marks the first in her gubernatorial career that she's faced a deficit and the prospect of making reductions that could upset many people.

”She's the leader of the state and I believe as leader of the state, she will make the tough decisions necessary to keep the budget in balance,” budget director Robert Genuario told The Associated Press.

Earlier this month, state Comptroller Nancy Wyman predicted the state would end this fiscal year about $70 million in deficit, due in part to slowing income tax revenues. It was a sharp departure from the $263 million surplus projected earlier this year.

Genuario said the good news is the current fiscal year deficit will likely be covered without tapping the state's budget reserve fund. Because the General Assembly did not pass a new budget bill, leftover money in some state accounts will not be automatically carried into the new fiscal year.

That means, he said, the money will cover the deficit and there will possibly be a small surplus in the end.

But the new fiscal year is at least $40 million to $100 million in the red, Genuario said. And that's the budget Rell will be concentrating on in the coming weeks. Meanwhile, Rell is working to find $10 million to cover a major criminal justice reform bill that calls for hiring additional prosecutors, probation officers and other staff.

House Speaker James Amann, D-Milford, said lawmakers are banking on Rell's ability to find that money within the budget to fund the legislation, which stems from two deadly home invasions in Cheshire and New Britain.

”We'd encourage her to keep that commitment in place,” he said.

But Amann said he understands that leaving the budget untouched means that Rell will likely have to make some cuts.

”In a tough economy, I can't argue with her,” he said.

Rell's budget-cutting powers are limited. She can rescind up to 5 percent of any appropriation and 3 percent of any fund, such as the General Fund. Yet the governor is barred from reducing municipal aid and entitlements.

She has already ordered cutbacks in discretionary spending at state agencies and issued a ban on out-of-state travel for personnel. And despite strong opposition from her fellow Republicans in the legislature, Rell supports the idea of keeping the original budget in place even though she'll now be the one making any necessary cuts.

”Our first order of business is to maintain the services in our state, to cut where necessary,” Rell said, adding that“We are prepared to make rescissions as quickly as possible.”

Rell appears optimistic she can keep the budget balanced without having to lay off state employees or immediately implement money-raising ideas such as an early retirement incentive program for state workers or a tax amnesty program that would encourage delinquent taxpayers to pay up their bills.

Legislative Republicans have lobbied for an early incentive program, while Senate Democrats suggested the tax amnesty. Genuario said Friday that both ideas are“tools” that Rell might have to use should the deficit problems worsen and revenues plummet.

But at this point, she plans to focus first on scaling back spending.

Genuario said if the governor decides to rescind spending because of weak revenues, she can always reverse that decision months down the road if the economy improves.

”I think it's important to get an early start,” he said,“and get a plan in place.”

---

Special Session Expected On Conveyance Tax
Hartford Courant
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING | Capitol Bureau Chief
May 9, 2008

Cities and towns have nothing to fear.

That was the word from the state Capitol on Thursday as Democratic lawmakers and Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell said they expect the legislature to convene a special session so that municipalities can continue receiving $40 million from an extension of the tax on real estate sales.

The General Assembly's 2008 session adjourned Wednesday with no action on the conveyance tax — meaning it would decrease if the legislature takes no action before the fiscal year ends on June 30. Despite vows that the tax would be extended during the regular session, it never happened as the tax got tied up in a broader battle over the state budget.

The tax battle has turned into a major clash between the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities and the state's Realtors, who have complained that the measure is a form of double taxation for homeowners who have been paying their annual real estate taxes for years and then pay more upon the sale.

In her budget proposal in February, Rell remained silent on the issue — meaning that she favored the "sunset" provision that would lead to a drop in the tax on July 1. But Rell says now that she will go along with an extension because she knows that the municipalities are relying on the $40 million.

"That's real money," Rell said Thursday.

House Speaker James Amann said no date has been set for a special session, but he vowed that the House will act. "There's no doubt that we'll come back" to vote, Amann said. "The conveyance tax is an extremely important tax to municipalities."

The tax was increased in the midst of a state budget deficit in 2003 to 0.25 percent of a property's sale price, up from 0.11 percent. The increase was originally scheduled to expire in 2004, but the legislature has instead extended the expiration date three times. Without any action before June 30, the tax would drop back to the 2002 level.

The Realtors were pleased that time expired Wednesday without any action.

"The legislature's decision to postpone action to extend real estate conveyance taxes is at least some good news for home sellers struggling in this difficult market," said Ken DelVecchio, president of the Connecticut Association of Realtors. "The increases were never meant to be a permanent revenue stream for municipalities, and their sunset means $40 million in tax relief for home sellers. We urge lawmakers to reject the idea of revisiting this issue in special session. Municipalities, like taxpayers across the state, need to tighten their belts."

Amann and Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams also said they believe the ethics bill can be revived during the special session — but only if House and Senate leaders can agree in advance on language under which the pension of a public official or employee can be revoked upon conviction of a corruption charge. The two chambers passed conflicting versions of the bill in recent weeks, and midnight arrived on Wednesday without the House acting on the most recent Senate-approved version of the bill — so it died.

Amann said that on Wednesday, House leaders had tried "on three or four occasions to try to get compromise with the Senate" with no luck, but he hopes differences can be resolved before the special session. He said both versions "were very good bills. There is a difference of opinion … on the union [part of it] and hopefully we can come back in special session and work on it."

---

Democrats plan special session 
DAY
By Ted Mann    
Published on 5/9/2008 
          
Hartford - Democratic lawmakers said they are committed to calling the state legislature back in for a special session this spring, citing their desire to extend a critical source of revenue for cities and towns.

It remains unclear when that session might be called, and if the legislative majority will try to use it to revive some of the other bills that could not be completed by midnight Wednesday, when the regular session adjourned.

Legislators in a special session could consider extending the current conveyance tax rate on real estate transfers, which benefits municipalities.

Still outstanding is the session's troubled ethics bill, which foundered in a dispute between House and Senate Democrats over the reach of a provision allowing courts to strip corrupt public employees and officials of their taxpayer-funded pensions.

Prospects seemed dim for another proposal to extend paid sick time for many Connecticut workers, which is staunchly opposed by business lobbyists and many Republicans and failed to get a vote in the House before adjournment.

Democratic leaders, including House Speaker James A. Amann, D-Milford, and Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, acknowledged frustration at the failure to pass the ethics bill, and others. But they were bullish as usual on the legislature's other accomplishments this year, enthusiasm not dampened by their decision to forgo a new 2009 budget and leave the existing spending plan in place.

The House Democrats“offered a balanced, responsible approach to government this session in a very difficult climate,” Amann said Thursday, a wrap-up day of dueling partisan press conferences and conflicting story lines about the effectiveness of the General Assembly this year.

But Republicans like Sen. John McKinney of Fairfield, the Senate's minority leader, said the three months of work had yielded little more than“gymnastics of the first order” and“a failure of leadership” by the Democrats.

Republicans are still incensed that Democrats - and Rell - dismissed out of hand their calls for a new budget that would have boosted some spending levels and paid for it with a buyout affecting thousands of state workers.

The majority party had ducked a debate on their budget plan, calling it a waste of time, said House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, even while wasting time themselves on bidding farewell to colleagues and meeting to discuss pending bills.

”We said goodbye to everyone and their uncle,” he said.“They had caucuses that lasted longer than Lent.”

The session was“disappointing,” he said later, because the legislature had failed to adequately prepare its constituents for an economic downturn that many lawmakers worry will grow worse.

”They look to us to say, 'Can you help lead us out of this?'“ Cafero said.“ 'Prepare us for these bad times.' And we let ’em down.”

Only after prodding from reporters did the minority leaders concede that their criticism extended in part to their fellow Republican Rell.

”What do you want me to do, growl?” Cafero said, after reporters repeatedly asked him and McKinney about how much blame for the reviled budget deal Rell should shoulder.

He obliged several times, growling into the microphone, but McKinney was more concise.

Rell's striking the deal to stand pat with the Democrats had been“a mistake,” he said.

---

Special Session Needed to Resolve Pending Issues 
DAY
By Ted Mann    
Published on 5/8/2008 

Hartford — Not having to pass a budget didn’t save state legislators from having to convene a special session.

The Democratic leaders in the Senate and House of Representatives said on the regular session’s final day Wednesday that they would call lawmakers back in to vote on an extension of the municipal conveyance tax on real estate, a prized source of revenue for cities and towns in a year when the state will be sending a relatively modest increase in municipal aid.

The announcement came early on an ultimately anticlimactic final day, in which several key proposals that Democrats had hoped to pass — including paid sick leave for many workers, and a long-awaited bill to strip corrupt state officials and employees of their pensions — failed to come to a vote.

It was not yet clear whether the ethics and sick time bills, or others, would be added to the call of the special session on the conveyance tax, though some lawmakers were already lobbying for their inclusion.

Williams blamed the decision to postpone action on the conveyance tax, a perennial issue since it was elevated in 2003, on the legislature’s Republican minority, whose budget amendments the Democrats had been ducking for the final three days of the session.

“I’d like to get back to the good old-fashioned concept of doing things in the legislative session as much as possible,” Williams said.

“I think the Republicans have made it clear that they would kill this tax relief for municipalities,” he added moments later. “They’ve made their pledges to the Realtors and would filibuster it up to midnight.”

Realtors and other opponents of extending the tax don’t see the proposal as tax relief at all. They have fought  for the repeal of the tax since it was imposed as a temporary measure, to help close a budget deficit in 2003.

“The increases were never meant to be a permanent revenue stream for municipalities, and their sunset means $40 million in tax relief for home sellers,” said Ken DelVecchio, the president of the Connecticut Association of Realtors, in a written statement. “We urge lawmakers to reject the idea of revisiting this issue in special session. Municipalities, like taxpayers across the state, need to tighten their belts.”

Williams said Wednesday morning that the majority party was forced to put off any attempt to extend the conveyance tax — which is scheduled to “sunset” when the current fiscal year ends June 30 — because of the same factor that has reduced the legislature to a plodding, torturous pace in the past two days.
Democrats had been attempting to avoid giving the Republican minority any chances to protest their budget deal with Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell by running a massive amendment that would implement their own alternative spending and tax plan.

“Most likely it’s not going to come up during the regular session today,” Williams said of a proposal to extend the tax, “because Republicans have more or less pledged to filibuster it and talk it to death, which is too bad from the point of view of providing relief for taxpayers across the state.”

The slow pace couldn’t be blamed on Republicans alone.

The Senate did not begin action until shortly before 3 p.m., after a morning devoted to tributes to departing members of the chamber and to the staff. The House was only slightly more prompt in beginning its work for the day.

After the Senate had debated and passed a bill aimed at helping those hurt by the implosion of the housing market, the chamber broke for dinner for more than an hour.

The current, elevated level of the conveyance tax has staunch support from many municipal leaders, since it has provided a sorely needed stream of revenue even in years when aid from the state is scarce. A lobbying group for cities and towns, the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities, has estimated that total value of the tax at roughly $40 million statewide.

But the levy is fiercely opposed by Realtors and others who charge it amounts to a “hidden” tax on those selling real estate, especially homeowners who may already be forced to sell at or near a loss because of the decline in the housing market.

Lawmakers increased the municipalities’ share of the conveyance tax five years ago while facing a budget deficit, from 0.11 percent to 0.25 percent on the sale of real estate worth $2,000 or more.

Eighteen designated distressed municipalities, including Norwich and New London, were permitted to charge up to 0.25 percentage points more, or a total of 0.5 percent in municipal tax on the real estate sale price.

That increase was initially slated to sunset one year later, but its elimination has been continually postponed since then, as legislators have proved reluctant to deprive municipalities of a prized source of revenue.

Even the prospect of a delay in the renewal of the tax was pleasant news for its opponents in the real estate sales sector, but they would prefer the legislature take no action at all. If the General Assembly does not intervene, the tax would automatically revert to its 2003 levels on July 1.

The conference of municipalities, meanwhile, “expressed its gratitude” to leaders at the news that the $40 million revenue stream might be preserved for cities and towns.

---

Legislature May Return For A Special Session
By MARK PAZNIOKAS | Courant Staff Writer
12:56 PM EDT, May 7, 2008

The session is not quite over, and the legislature already is making plans to return for a special session.

Senate President Pro Tem Donald E. Willliams Jr., D-Brooklyn, said today that legislators will return in special session to reauthorize the real-estate conveyance tax before the new fiscal year begins July 1.

Without legislative action, municipalities will lose millions of dollars in revenue from the expiration of the conveyance tax.

Williams said he would like to act on the measure before the regular session ends at midnight tonight, but he said Republicans have threatened to filibuster if the bill is debated.  The Senate's priority today will be final legislative action on a mortgage-relief bill for homeowners burdened by subprime mortages, he said.

---

Rell, Legislators To Forgo Budget Changes  - Original $18.4B spending plan stands; governor says state must knuckle under 
DAY
By Ted Mann     
Published on 5/3/2008 
 
Hartford — After days of trying to craft a new 2009 budget, even as revenues plummet and the state dips toward a deficit, Democratic and Republican negotiators settled on a plan Friday: Let it be.

Legislative leaders and Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell have agreed to leave in place the $18.4 billion 2009 spending plan adopted last spring, before a tanking state economy threw legislators' policy ambitions and spending priorities into doubt.

The parties agreed to drop their attempts to craft a new version of the budget bill, effectively dashing the hopes of a variety of diverse interests who had sought new aid from the state, and leaving to the Rell administration the responsibility to keep the plan in balance through spending cuts and use of budget reserves.

“My fear is that there are more difficult days ahead,” Rell said Friday night in a press conference outside her office in the Capitol. “The state needs to do what families are already doing, which is to continue to cut back and do without.”

The budget deal brought markedly different reactions from the legislature's two Democratic leaders.

House Speaker James A. Amann, D-Milford, was matter-of-fact as he announced the deal to reporters in the well of the House chamber, saying the lawmakers had decided they could do more good by simply doing “a few more bills, and go home.”

“We all know that these are tough times,” Amann said, citing the deficit expected when the fiscal year ends June 30, projected at $68 million. “Connecticut is well-prepared. This legislature, along with the governor, have a historic budget that's in place. That's the one we're going to be living with.”

A few minutes later, Senate President Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, came to meet reporters in the Capitol's fourth-floor press room, sounding almost morose.

“I'm very disappointed,” Williams said, using that adjective four times in the course of several minutes. “We've gone to the mat and fought very hard for important priorities. ... Unfortunately, we have not received the cooperation we needed to get this done.

“We are sticking with the second year of the biennial budget because there is no agreement to do anything else.This is a default position that I am not happy with. But that's where we are.”

The decision to adjourn without adjusting the budget would elicit howls from many quarters, the lawmakers acknowledged, as special interests that had been counting on funding increases in the coming fiscal year will almost certainly be forced to do without.

“Connecticut's community providers face the harsh reality of eliminating services, cutting back on staff and telling hundreds and thousands of the state's most vulnerable residents that they can no longer provide the essential services they need,” said Terry Edelstein, the president and CEO of the Connecticut Community Providers Association, which represents institutions that serve those with mental, physical and other disabilities.

The agreement also brought vigorous objections from the legislature's Republican minorities in the House and Senate, who last week diverged with both Rell and the Democrats to offer their own budget plan, calling for cutting state employee ranks with a massive early-retirement program as a way to cut spending.

“We have a plan to do it,” said House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk. “To just say we did a great budget nine months ago and we should rest on that, when we see that we're on quicksand here economically with our revenues, is irresponsible.”

The minority leader also charged that Democrats had cut their deal with Rell in order to continue passing on to the governor laws that would require state spending to be implemented.

“That's what they call passing the buck,” Cafero said.

Rell was clearly anticipating the same, urging Democrats during her press conference not to pass any bills requiring state funding. “Don't send them to me,” she said.

Cafero said Republicans planned to draft an amendment containing all the provisions of their budget plan, and pledged to run it on any related bill called in the House or Senate through the end of the session on Wednesday night.

Much wrangling remains to determine what priority programs will receive funding next year.

Rell said in a conversation with reporters that she was confident her administration could find the necessary budget cuts to pay for a $10 million investment in the state criminal justice system, which was passed after nearly a year of debate this spring only to be cast into doubt when state revenue estimates began plunging in April.

Earlier Friday, Rell announced her intention to begin those budget cuts to close a deficit in the current fiscal year, which has been estimated as high as $68 million.

Under state law, Rell has the ability to make cuts — known as “recissions” — of up to 5 percent in each state agency without permission of the legislature. (The recission authority does not extend to municipal aid or entitlement programs, like Medicaid.)

Projections of the state's fortunes have shifted radically over the course of just a few weeks. Only several months ago, analysts from the governor's budget office and elsewhere were predicting Connecticut would end the fiscal year on June 30 with a surplus well over $100 million.

But a steep drop in income tax receipts, which began to come in after the tax filing deadline April 15, drove those estimates downward.

Collections in payroll taxes had been in decline since February, Comptroller Nancy Wyman reported this week, adding that she expected the decline to continue as employment continued to slacken.

The session adjourns at midnight Wednesday.

---

State Expects $67 Million Deficit, 'Do-Nothing' Budget
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING | Hartford Courant Capitol Bureau Chief
May 2, 2008

The financial news just gets worse every day.

Amid that constant drumbeat, the state comptroller issued the most dire projection yet Thursday as the state's budget deficit for the current fiscal year was estimated at $67 million.

That is worse than either the $19 million deficit predicted only one day earlier by Gov. M. Jodi Rell and the $50 million deficit projected by the legislature's nonpartisan fiscal office.

Despite suggestions by legislators, Rell's budget director, Robert Genuario, said he is not recommending that the state tap into the $1.4 billion "rainy day fund" to cover the deficit. Instead, Republicans say, the fiscal situation will only get far worse in 2009 and 2010 — and the rainy day fund should be saved for those tough years.

With those projections as a backdrop, Rell met with top legislators twice Thursday in an attempt to craft a new budget for the fiscal year that starts July 1.

Rell and lawmakers have talked about avoiding any major revisions and instead leaving in place the second year of the two-year budget that was approved last year. If that occurs, the state budget will still increase by about 4 percent, below Rell's February request for a 4.8 percent increase.

Top Democrats emerged from a meeting with Rell Thursday night expressing optimism that they can complete a budget deal in the coming days as they race toward a scheduled adjournment of May 7. Another meeting with Rell is scheduled for today. "There's more to do, but I'm very encouraged," said Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams of Brooklyn, the highest-ranking senator. "There's certainly a way that we can reach an agreement."

House Speaker James Amann of Milford said the deficit numbers have forced legislators to realize that they cannot afford all the funding programs that various groups are seeking.

"I think reality is really starting to sink in, and we know that whatever we do is going to be extremely limited," Amann said.

Amann rejected a plan by the House and Senate Republicans to try to save $163 million by offering an early retirement plan to more than 11,000 state employees. The problem, he said, is that many of the jobs would be re-filled, and the state would have to pour more money into the state pension fund to pay for the early retirees. Rell and Genuario agree that state officials have learned from past early retirement plans that the long-term savings are negligible.

"It's a short-term fix, but in reality it's a wash," Amann told reporters after meeting with Rell and lawmakers.

But House Republican leader Lawrence Cafero of Norwalk released copies of roll-call votes of 40 Democrats who voted in favor of early retirement plans in the past, including some who are now trashing the idea.

"The early retirement plan was apparently a good way to save state taxpayers' money in 1989, 1992, 1997 and 2003, and the Democrats voted for it then," Cafero said. "Why do they dismiss it now?"

As lawmakers scramble to rearrange the budget and find money for programs, three of the main groups seeking more funding are nursing homes, nonprofit organizations that provide state services, and cities and towns. The nursing homes and nonprofits were expecting to receive at least a 1 percent increase for the next fiscal year, but are now facing no increase at all if the legislature makes no changes in the budget. Cities and towns would collectively receive more than $100 million less in funding than they expected, and the mayors of Hartford, New Haven, and Bridgeport came to the Capitol this week to seek more funding and avoid cutbacks in their cities. The municipalities were hoping to receive about $20 million next year in the Early Reading Success Program, but no final decisions had been made Thursday.

"Make no mistake," said James Finley, the chief executive officer of the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities. "The 'do-nothing' state budget will do something. It will result in stiff property tax hikes, services cuts and employee layoffs in hometowns across Connecticut."

With the state and national economies continuing to weaken, Comptroller Nancy Wyman cited the state's declining tax revenues as the reason for her new projection of a $67.7 million deficit — which is expected to change once again before the state closes its books for the fiscal year that ends June 30.

"Collections of the payroll tax have been in decline since February," Wyman said in a statement. "Based on current employment reports, I expect this trend to continue for the rest of the fiscal year, resulting in this significant drop in tax revenue."

The state's recent loss in jobs has contributed directly to the budget problems. With fewer people working, fewer are paying taxes. Those who are working fewer hours or only working part time would also pay less in taxes. Wyman reported that the state has had no net gains in jobs for the current fiscal year, and job losses for the past three months have reached 7,200. As a result, the state's unemployment rate has jumped to its highest level in almost five years, at 5.3 percent.

In one bright spot Thursday, the Dow Jones industrial average finished above the 13,000 level for the first time since Jan. 3. The volatility and sluggishness on Wall Street is one of the reasons for the state's deficit, as many residents who rely on capital gains, dividends, and interest have seen drops in their income in the last quarter of 2007 and the first quarter of 2008.

Senate Republican leader John McKinney of Southport said lawmakers and Rell need to make a deal on the budget relatively quickly because past years have shown it often takes 48 hours to compile the details of the final agreement and get it printed for 187 lawmakers.

"We're at the 11th hour," McKinney said. "It can't wait [for an agreement] until Tuesday or Wednesday of next week."

---

As deficit balloons...
In Jeopardy
Hartford Courant
May 2, 2008

• Crime fighting: $10 million to hire prosecutors, state police detectives, probation and parole officers.
• Nursing homes: Hiring of badly needed staff.
• Cities and towns: State aid of up to $100 million.
• Nonprofit agencies: Expected 1 percent increase in funding.

---

Weston football field and soccer fields are turf...
Legislators table health study of artificial turf athletic fields
Stamford ADVOCATE
By Brian Lockhart
Article Launched: 05/01/2008 01:00:00 AM EDT

HARTFORD - A state study of the environmental and health effects of artificial turf athletic fields is on hold unless funds can be found to pay for it.

The Senate tabled a bill authorizing a study of the pulverized rubber tires used to cushion the fields because of its $250,000 price tag.  Lawmakers at the Capitol are reassessing every bill with a dollar amount attached now that a once robust budget surplus has dwindled to a $19 million deficit.

The turf debate was touched off in part by a report issued last year by Environment and Human Health Inc. of North Haven.

The nonprofit organization found that when heated in a lab, the rubber crumbs used on the fields released at least four compounds, including one known carcinogen that can irritate eyes and skin.  Other studies have shown tire rubber contains heavy metals that can leach into ground water.

Over the past year, residents in Stamford, Westport and Greenwich have opposed artificial turf field proposals.

In November, Fairfield's Conservation Commission did not allow the private Fairfield Country Day School to reconstruct its fields using synthetic turf.

State Sen. Edward Meyer, D-Guilford, co-chairman of the legislature's Environment Committee, said yesterday that when it became apparent the state was facing fiscal problems, he asked the Department of Environmental Protection to find money in its existing budget for the study.

But Meyer said the request was met with resistance. Despite the $250,000 price tag, he raised the bill in the Senate to force the issue.  The legislation was tabled after Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield, said he would approach the departments and urge their cooperation.

"John McKinney is the Senate Republican leader and DEP is within a Republican administration," Meyer said. "I'm hopeful the administration will do the right thing. . . I'm not going to be happy about leaving Hartford next week unless we have a study."

The legislative session ends Wednesday.

New York, where Meyer served as a legislator in the 1970s, recently initiated its own study of synthetic turf fields made with ground up tires.

McKinney yesterday said he was not worried about synthetic turf after reading other studies that have concluded they do not pose health concerns.  His children play on an artificial field at their local Boys & Girls Club, he said.

But state Sens. William Nickerson, R-Greenwich, and Judith Freedman, R-Westport, said they hope the state will move forward with its own analysis.

"Let the state . . . come up with something they can then recommend to our school systems and recreation departments," Freedman said.

---

Senate Passes Crime Bill At About 2:20 a.m. Thursday; Rejects "Three Strikes" Amendment By 19 to 16 With 3 Dems Supporting 3 Strikes
Hartford Courant
By Christopher Keating
April 24, 2008 2:40 AM

Under pressure to respond after two deadly home invasions in the past nine months, the state Senate voted early Thursday morning to strengthen the state's criminal law and allocate $10 million for enhanced crime-fighting.

The bill passed by 32 to 3 at about 2:20 a.m. after the Senate Democrats withdrew a previous amendment that had prompted a sharply bitter debate with Republicans. The final version gained bipartisan support after lawmakers said the bill would authorize a judge to double the penalty following a second violent crime and triple the penalty after a third offense - up to a maximum of life in prison for a violent felon.

Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell and legislators have all called for tougher laws after the triple slayings in Cheshire last summer and the abduction, rape, and killing of a frail, cancer-stricken, elderly woman who could not defend herself last  month in New Britain.

Republicans and Democrats clashed sharply for the second time of the late-night debate when Republicans offered a "three strikes'' amendment that would force judges to automatically sentence a criminal to life in prison after conviction of a third violent felony. In a relatively close vote, the "three strikes'' amendment failed by 19 to 16 after three moderate Democratic Senators - Joan Hartley of Waterbury, Thomas Gaffey of Meriden and Paul Doyle of Wethersfield - all broke with their caucus and joined with the Republicans to support "three strikes.''

The three Democrats who voted against the overall bill were Senators Toni Harp of New Haven, Edwin A. Gomes of Bridgeport, and Eric Coleman of Bloomfield.

Senate Republican leader John McKinney of Southport said that the "three strikes'' proposal was necessary because some judges were not handing down stiff-enough sentences. A legislative report showed that an average of 103 people have been released from prison every year for the past five years after they finished serving their time for three violent felonies. The average sentence for the third violent felony was 7.9 years in prison, McKinney said, citing the legislative report.

"They have not been punished as severely as we believe they should have,'' he said.

But Democrats ripped the "three strikes'' proposal, saying it was nothing more than a bumper-sticker slogan in an election year.

"This is not a baseball game. This is life,'' said Senator Donald DeFronzo, a New Britain Democrat. "It achieves more as a political sound bite and a sports metaphor than it does as a piece of solid legislation. ... This amendment is virtually valueless.''

Earlier in the evening, the Republicans had verbally pummeled the original bill on the Senate floor, saying that it would actually weaken the state's laws for violent crimes. Following that clash, Democrats -- who hold the majority in the chamber -- suddenly postponed the debate and called for a recess shortly before 11:30 p.m. The chamber reconvened later, and the "three strikes'' debate pushed the vote past 2 a.m. Thursday.

Sen. Andrew McDonald, a Stamford Democrat, began Wednesday's debate by saying violent criminals would be treated much more harshly than under the current law. A "second strike'' under existing law could lead to no prison time at all, but the sentence would be doubled under the bill, he said.

"This is an extraordinary change in our public policy,'' McDonald said, adding that criminals "will be punished in extraordinary ways.''

But Sen. John Kissel, an Enfield Republican, said the original bill was so badly written that it would not accomplish the legislature's tough-on-crime goals and, in fact, would backfire.

"I guess I'm missing something,'' Kissel said. "It actually is weaker addressing persistent dangerous felony offenders. ... This amendment pushes us backward. How can this be tougher on criminals? It's not.''

Out of 21 violent crimes mentioned in the original bill, the maximum prison sentence would actually be reduced for eight of them, Kissel said. That includes second-degree manslaughter with a firearm, among others.

"I think we can do better than this,'' Kissel said. "I don't view it as a get-tough amendment.''

Sen. Sam Caligiuri, a Waterbury Republican, agreed with Kissel and rejected the statements by Democrats that the state already has a "three strikes'' law.

"You will be lying to the people of Connecticut if you tell them'' that the bill includes tough, mandatory minimum sentences, he said. "It's nothing close to what the people of Connecticut'' want.

---

Parts Of State Stranded Without Broadband
By MARK PETERS | Courant Staff Writer
April 18, 2008

SHARON — - In most of Connecticut, dial-up Internet access is a thing of the past, along with rotary phones, pagers and portable cassette players.

But even though the state is a national leader in the availability of broadband Internet, there are still hundreds of residents who can't get it. For them, the static screech of a telephone modem is their only pathway to the Net.

When Bob Corrao traded the bustle of New York's Westchester County for bucolic Sharon, he just assumed there would be broadband access. He still sounds a bit surprised as he describes his painfully slow dial-up connection. It's become a running joke: Does he actually live in Connecticut — or some more remote outpost?

"Moving from Rye Brook to here, I knew I was going to give up quite a bit," Corrao said. "I never even gave a thought to high-speed Internet."

Corrao is among the hundreds of people in rural pockets of the northeast and northwest corners of Connecticut who don't have access to broadband, either by cable or DSL service delivered over phone lines. Even million-dollar homes in western Connecticut towns, like Sharon, that are known as rural retreats for wealthy New Yorkers, suffer a 1990s link to the Web.

The scattered properties without broadband are remnants from a rapid buildup of high-speed Internet service over the past decade. Broadband Internet is available in an estimated 95 percent of the state, according to estimates by the New England Cable and Telecommunications Association.

But if you're among the broadband stranded, it's an irritating issue.

John Friedman was a producer of the film "Hotel Terminus," which won the Academy Award for best documentary in 1989. It would be impossible for him to work on digital files over the dial-up connection at his Sharon home.

"If he gets involved with a film project, he is going to be tearing his hair out," his wife, Kathleen Friedman, said. "It is not a luxury anymore."

Getting broadband service to the remaining 5 percent has become a vexing problem. Satellite Internet connections can work, although some rural homeowners complain about the cost and quality. AT&T offers high-speed DSL service, but houses need to be near a central office and remote terminal.

That leaves cable as the most likely solution. The problem is that neither the cable companies nor the state nor stranded homeowners want to pick up the cost of installing the wires.

Cable companies string lines and add equipment based on the number of new customers they'll gain. State regulations require cable companies to provide service only where feasible, said a spokeswoman for the Department of Public Utility Control.

For instance, cable company Charter Communications doesn't provide broadband service to about 350 houses in the state's northeast corner. The company adds lines every year, but looks for a five-year payback when it analyzes the cost of adding new customers.

"If it is twice that, we think twice about that," said Thomas Cohan, director of government relations for Charter in New England.

Residents have the option of paying the cost themselves. The prices quoted for the Lakeville area, a section of Salisbury served by Comcast Corp., ranged from $2,500 to $6,400 per home. The expense per household varies depending on how many people on a rural road want to sign up, said state Rep. Roberta Willis, D-Lakeville.

Willis has spent years gathering together residents of rural streets, then bringing them to Comcast or AT&T to try to work out an agreement to add broadband service. Willis is now pushing for the General Assembly to step in.

Legislators have recently talked about levying a tax on communication companies, or establishing a state grant program and other options to complete the statewide broadband system. Massachusetts is considering spending $25 million to bring broadband to more than 30 communities in western parts of the state that have no high-speed access.

Another idea that's been discussed is adding a onetime charge of a few dollars on the bills of high-speed Internet customers to pay the cost of connecting the last few households, said state Sen. Andrew Roraback, R-Goshen.

But he said there has been resistance to that idea by people who think — incorrectly, in Roraback's view — that the charge is a subsidy for wealthy New Yorkers. Roraback said it's more an issue of fairness and promotion of economic development in a part of the state where residents have a wide variety of incomes.

Roraback, Willis and other legislators are working on negotiating final legislation and winning support for it before the General Assembly session ends next month.

---

Stamford ADVOCATE editorial April 18, 2008:  the punch line below:

...One big reason for municipal fiscal difficulties is the dependence on property taxes for most local government services, particularly local public schools. It's the "800-pound gorilla" that state and local leaders ultimately must wrestle, even though they would like to avoid doing so. If you'll permit us another metaphor a bit more fanciful: That gorilla's aboard the Titanic too - and his weight may be making it sink faster.

---

Sheff Parties Ask Legislators To Approve Settlement
By ARIELLE LEVIN BECKER | Courant Staff Writer
April 16, 2008

Representatives from both sides of the state's 19-year-old Sheff v. O'Neill school desegregation lawsuit on Tuesday urged lawmakers to embrace the latest proposed settlement, saying it stands the best chance yet of achieving what earlier efforts have not: desegregating Hartford schools.

"We signed this agreement because we believe it could be done," said Dennis Parker, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union and one of the plaintiffs' attorneys, testifying before the legislature's education committee. "We recognize it involves hard work but we are willing to put in that hard work."

The proposed settlement, reached earlier this month, outlines measures that include building magnet schools in Hartford-area suburbs and expanding the number of slots for Hartford students in suburban public schools, racially integrated preschools and technical and agricultural high schools. It would also streamline the application process to magnet schools, improve transportation and support for Hartford students attending schools in other districts, and give the plaintiffs a role overseeing the desegregation efforts.

If it's successful, by the time the settlement expires in 2013, at least 80 percent of Hartford students who seek places in a racially integrated school will have them.

The proposed accord would replace a 2003 settlement, which expired last summer far short of its goals. The new proposal doesn't spell out how to achieve the new goals, but requires officials to create a comprehensive plan by Nov. 30, and specifies many items that must be included.

"There is no moment to be lost if we're to implement this by December," state Education Commissioner Mark K. McQuillan said, urging approval of the plan.

Lawmakers offered a mixed reception.

Committee co-chairman Rep. Andrew M. Fleischmann, D- West Hartford, noted that Tuesday's hearing was far less contentious than ones held last summer on an earlier settlement proposal, which legislators ultimately refused to ratify. Fleischmann said he is optimistic about the new proposal.

State Sen. Thomas P. Gaffey, D- Meriden, the committee co-chairman, said the proposal had a more reasonable chance of success than previous efforts, but said he was "chagrined" that officials have not yet offered projections on the cost of the settlement.

Others expressed skepticism.

State Sen. John W. Fonfara, D-Hartford, said the settlement continued mistakes of a decade ago, shortly after the state Supreme Court ordered Hartford's schools to be desegregated.  Back then, he said, the experts charged with developing the desegregation effort split into two camps: one that wanted to focus on reducing racial isolation, and one that sought to improve student performance. The camp focused on racial isolation seemed to have won, Fonfara said. He questioned whether it was worth continuing to spend money with the same focus.

"This was about the quality of the schools and what kids in Hartford, particularly minority kids, receive, and I don't see those kids benefiting," he said.

Parker disagreed "fundamentally," he said.

The proposed settlement, like earlier efforts, is designed to improve education while also reducing racial isolation, he said. "We have never and do not now accept the proposition that it is an either-or," he said.

The exchange brought to a head a theme raised by several legislators, who suggested that the efforts to desegregate Hartford schools had not focused sufficiently on raising student achievement or determining whether the efforts were improving education or simply, in the words of state Rep. Deborah W. Heinrich, D-Madison, "moving kids around."

Parker and McQuillan disputed the notion, and argued the settlement was designed to both reduce racial isolation and raise student achievement.

---

Child advocacy group calls for higher taxes on rich
Norwalk HOUR
April 15, 2008

A new report, released the day before tax returns are due, calls for lower taxes on low-income families at the expense of the state's most affluent citizens.

Connecticut Voices for Children says more low wage earners should be eligible for tax exemptions and they should get additional money back in the form of an earned income tax credit. In exchange, Connecticut's wealthiest families would shoulder an additional burden, the study recommends.

"Our position is that we should think about a more progressive rate structure for the personal income tax," said Shelley Geballe, president of the organization, which she said is non-partisan. "What percentage it would be and at what level it would kick in would have to be a point of discussion."

The group's recommendations are based on statistics from the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy, which found that Connecticut's poorest workers pay a greater percentage of their earnings than the wealthy on sales, property and income taxes.

Those who earn less than $25,000 per year spend 10.9 percent of their income on taxes, while residents who make roughly $1 million or more give back 4.7 percent, after adjusting for federal tax exemptions.

Sales and excise taxes cause most of the disparity between tax payments of the rich and the poor, as the lowest income bracket spends 6.4 percent income on that category. Middle class workers give up most of their roughly 10 percent tax contribution on property taxes. Connecticut's top earners contribute mostly through income taxes.

The study suggests adding a new tax bracket of 6 percent of personal income for single-filer earnings above $100,000 per year and for joint-filer earnings above $200,000. This would boost the richest 1 percent of residents' tax contributions by 0.64 percent and the next 4 percent of earners by 0.06 percent.

"The 6 percent is actually fairly arbitrary," said Douglas Hall, Connecticut Voices for Children's assistant director of research. "That's just one suggestion of where we might go."

Local lawmakers on the Republican side of the aisle were cool to the proposal.

"There's something really socialistic about that plan, I have to tell you," said state Sen. Judith Freedman, R-26, "and I haven't seen the report yet, but I find it really bothersome that they're always looking for taxes to resolve the problem."

Freedman said the state shouldn't hand out money and add programs without examining whether they are effective.

State Rep. Toni Boucher, R-143, worried that more taxes could drive top earners out of the state. "I think what you're doing by taxing those with more means is your eliminating the sources of income and your hurting those that get the funds," she said.

Even some Democrats aren't keen on raising taxes this year. There's no appetite for it in a tight fiscal year, said state Sen. Bob Duff, D-25.

State Rep. Bruce Morris, D-140, lauded both the study's recommendations to tax the wealthy and increase tax relief for low income workers. A supporter of the earned income tax credit and programs for impoverished people, he said residents who are working to make ends meet need the money for basic expenses.

"In light of this report we're looking at today, those who are extremely wealthy, well, they feel some strain, yes, but not to the degree of the working poor."

---

Panel Backs Extension Of Real Estate Tax 
DAY
By Ted Mann     
Published on 3/28/2008
 
Hartford — The legislature's finance committee approved another two-year extension of the real estate conveyance tax for municipalities on Thursday, rejecting demands from brokers to abolish the stop-gap measure first passed in the state's budget crisis in 2003.

The vote in the Democrat-controlled committee was closer than the partisan margin, 29 in favor to 21 against, a reflection of the lobbying many have received from the real estate industry to finally repeal the tax hike, which was supposed to be temporary but has provided an irresistible $40 million in funding per year to cities and towns since its inception.

Several of the committee's 38 Democrats missed the final vote on the measure, while a few voted against the bill, joining Republicans.

Current law requires most people who sell property for $2,000 or more to pay a tax on the conveyance of the property to both the state and municipal governments.

While the state tax rate is 0.25 percent to 0.5 percent, depending on price, the municipal share was set at 0.11 percent until 2003, when the legislature raised it to 0.25 percent in an attempt to provide cities and towns with revenue during a period of sharp deficit-related cutbacks in state aid. (For 18 cities and towns designated as distressed, the lawmakers added an option to raise the municipal share to 0.5 percent.)

The increase was supposed to be temporary — the rate for municipalities was originally set to return to its previous level on July 1, 2004 — but lawmakers have postponed the fall-back since then, at the behest of some municipal officials who have seen the higher rate as a windfall that helps pay for municipal services.

Now scheduled to expire in July, the bill approved by the committee Thursday would put off the expiration date to July 2010.

Those whose clients are paying the tax are not happy, said Ken DelVecchio, the president of the Connecticut Association of Realtors.

The committee vote is “very bad news for home sellers across Connecticut, who would have seen a much-needed $40 million tax cut on June 30th,” he said in a prepared statement. “In these difficult economic times, with home sales slowing, how can legislators dismiss the needs of families across the state, who are struggling to make ends meet?”

Other lawmakers, particularly the Republican minority leadership, have urged colleagues to “keep the promise” implicit in the 2003 law and sunset the tax hike.

The committee first rejected an amendment by Sen. Andrew Roraback, R-Goshen, which would have lowered the state's share of the conveyance tax by 0.14 percentage points — enough to return the rate to what it was before it was raised while still allowing municipalities to collect the higher share.

But as loath to forgo revenue as towns have been, so too is the state legislature, which is preparing its budget and tax proposals amid economic indicators that point toward recession.

“What we're looking at are diminishing returns, and I think we cannot vote for any reduction in state tax revenue at this juncture,” said Sen. Eileen Daily, D-Westbrook, the committee's co-chairwoman, “however valuable the underlying premise might be.”

The topic is one legislators are tired of fighting over, Roraback said, after extending the tax deadline three times, all the while trying to weigh the complaints from mayors and first selectmen about their desperation for municipal revenue against the Realtors' complaints that the tax is unfair.

“When is this conversation ever going to come to an end?” he asked.

Daily responded immediately: “When we either abolish the tax or make it permanent,” she said.

---

Rell is pessimistic about state economic stimulus plan 
DAY   
Posted on Mar 5, 10:05 AM EST

HARTFORD, Conn. (AP) -- Gov. M. Jodi Rell says the state's surplus is shrinking every day and it's dangerous to consider spending it on a state economic stimulus package that some Democrats are proposing.

Rell tells business leaders that no amount of stimulus is worth the prospect of having to raise taxes in future years to make up the lost revenue.

Senate Democrats want to dole out rebates to about a million low- and middle-class residents as long as the state surplus is at least $100 million. They also want to boost spending for rental and heating assistance programs, as well as help homeowners caught up in the subprime mortgage crisis.

This week, State Comptroller Nancy Wyman predicted the state surplus has dropped more than $54 million, to $227 million, because of a sharp decline in corporate profits. Also, she says the state is expected to pay out about $20 million more in tax refunds than originally budgeted.

---

Duff named head of transportation committee
By JARED NEWMAN
Hour Staff Writer

NORWALK — The cause for a Super 7 highway found more prominent footing in a local lawmaker who will become vice chairman of the General Assembly's transportation committee.

State Sen. Robert Duff, D-25, majority whip, announced the news Thursday he will head the committee but downplayed that particular cause — though his affection for it is well known — and said he would focus on statewide transportation issues...for the full story

---

Fast Drivers, Taxes Top List Of Concerns In Rell Budget; Businesses May See Relief, Cameras May See Speeders
By CHRISTOPHER KEATING And GARY LIBOW | Courant Staff Writers
February 3, 2008

When Gov. M. Jodi Rell unveils her new budget Wednesday, she will call for cutting business taxes and hiring 100 new state troopers over the next five years for increased traffic enforcement.

Declaring war on dangerous drivers, Rell will ask for funding for a pilot program of speed detection cameras along a treacherous stretch of I-95 — enabling the state to capture images of speeders and then mail them tickets.

"Those who choose to break the rules of the road need to learn the hard way," Rell said in a statement released to The Courant. "That requires more manpower and a larger state police presence on our roadways."

Rell wants to hire 20 new troopers during the fiscal year that starts July 1.

"I want our troopers to be visible on the side of the highways in high-accident areas across Connecticut," Rell said. "The goal is to get ingrained into motorists' heads that they should not even consider breaking the law because there may be a state police car right around the corner to pull them over."

Rell's speech to the legislature Wednesday will begin an important session in a year when legislators are up for re-election. She has pledged to offer a frugal budget — refusing to break through the state's spending cap and avoiding tax increases.

Aside from hiring more troopers, Rell envisions a traffic enforcement effort that will rely on a system of cameras. A controversial traffic-camera radar system would initially be set up in the Lyme-Old Lyme stretch of the Connecticut Turnpike, close to where three motorists died in November when a tanker-trailer barreled through metal dividers in East Lyme at Exit 75 and crashed head-on into traffic at high speed. Three other drivers were seriously injured in the crash that veteran troopers said was one of the most horrific they had ever seen.

If it reduces the number of speeders and traffic-related deaths, the technology will be rolled out in other areas of the state, Rell said. Similar systems have been operating in other spots around the country, such as Washington, D.C., since they were first introduced in Texas more than 20 years ago. Many places have abandoned the systems, though, because of public opposition from drivers uncomfortable with being photographed on the highways.

"It's high time we put that technology to good use," Rell said. "To put it simply, slow down out there."

Taxes

With the economy in a slowdown, legislators, who must approve Rell's budget, are already offering short-term plans of their own to improve the state's business climate to help stave off a recession.

Tax cuts and tax credits will be at the top of the agenda for both parties in an election year in which many legislators want to be seen as tax-cutters. Although the exact stimulus package still needs to be molded, legislators are talking about tax cuts for homeowners, small businesses, low-income families and those in the middle class with high medical and home-heating bills.

On the economy, Rell has not yet announced a short-term stimulus plan — unlike some legislators. But Wednesday she will propose to permanently eliminate the business entity tax currently paid by more than 118,000 Connecticut businesses, Rell spokesman Christopher Cooper said.

The $250 tax was created in 2002 to plug a budget gap during the tenure of Gov. John G. Rowland, but legislators now say the tax is an unnecessary nuisance for limited partnerships, limited liability companies and small corporations that often employ fewer than than 50 workers. Although critics say $250 might not mean much to any single company, others say the cumulative cut of $32 million a year would be important.

Senate Democrats, Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz and Republicans in both the Senate and House have also pushed for the business tax cut, which insiders say is nearly a certainty to be signed this year by Rell.

"She already has that [cut] in her budget, which is at the printer," Cooper said.

Sen. William H. Nickerson, R-Greenwich, who is one of the legislature's leading authorities on taxes, said the tax cut will provide a strong indication that the General Assembly is serious about improving the business climate during an economic slowdown.

"This entity tax is an ugly weed that grew in 2002 [and now hurts] the very entities that take risks, invest and seek to build a better mousetrap," Nickerson said. "We will root it up, toss it away and send a message to those on the entrepreneurial cutting edge."

Although there is bipartisan support on the business entity tax, legislators have a variety of economic proposals for both short-term stimulus and long-term growth. House Republicans want to provide up to $500 a household for joint filers for home heating assistance and another $500 to pay for out-of-pocket medical costs such as co-pays and deductibles.

"I believe we can and must provide immediate and meaningful help for those struggling to make ends meet, whether it is staying warm in the winter or offsetting rising health care costs," said House Republican leader Lawrence Cafero of Norwalk. "If we act sooner rather than later, we can mitigate the effects of an economic slide in Connecticut. ... Connecticut needs to take steps before the middle class and working families are hit really hard."

Senate Democrats say a vote could be held as early as Feb. 20 on a package that could include increased property tax credits and other relief such as the business tax cut. But House Speaker James Amann, D-Milford, would not commit to a date on any votes and said the size of any relief package would depend on factors such as the status of the stock market and whether the state's projected surplus of $280 million will grow.

"It all depends on what happens in the economy and the surplus," Amann said. "It all depends what the governor says Wednesday and what happens in the next 13 weeks."

One of the biggest battles in the upcoming session will be fought over whether legislators should create a state earned income tax credit. A coalition of groups gathered at the state Capitol complex last week to push for the credit, which has been dropped by the legislature during the past two years in a compromise to reach a budget deal. The Republicans, in turn, dropped their support for eliminating the estate tax for those who die with more than $2 million.

"I believe this is the year that we will adopt the state EITC," said Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney, D-New Haven, who has pushed for the credit for years. The credit provides a cash infusion to low-income workers, with the highest amounts of money going to families with children who have a household income of about $15,000 a year.

Senate Republican leader John McKinney of Southport appeared at a news conference last week with Looney in support of the credit and asked a spirited crowd why everyone was acting as if his support was a surprise. McKinney noted that he had voted for the credit last year.

"But you weren't then who you are now!" said Looney, referring to McKinney's ascension to GOP leader when Sen. Louis DeLuca of Woodbury stepped down after pleading guilty to conspiring to threaten his granddaughter's husband.

Longtime advocates at the Connecticut Association of Human Services and other organizations believe this year is their best chance to enact the credit for working families, but Rell is not convinced. Last week, she said, "I do not support that because I do not support giving a tax credit to people who don't pay taxes in the first place."

Among the many issues that will be debated before the session adjourns May 7 are:

Property Tax Cap

In a second attempt to control property taxes, Rell will propose imposing a cap on cities and towns this year, but she will be flexible on the level of the cap. Cooper said Rell is not wedded to a particular rate, such as a 3 or 4 percent increase. But the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities, which represents most of the state's cities and towns, has ripped the plan with such harsh terms as "wrong for Connecticut" and "a cure worse than the disease."

CCM is running an advertisement on nearly 20 radio stations statewide that will last until the session opens on Wednesday. The ad says "a state-mandated property tax cap isn't the single answer. A cap, by itself, will starve education and other services. State leaders need to increase aid for schools and town governments; protect the municipal real estate conveyance tax; reject unfunded mandates; and increase incentives for regional cooperation."

Nursing Homes

Based on investigations in The Courant about the Haven Healthcare nursing home chain, Senate Democrats are calling for a reform package to increase staffing, improve financial accountability and allow more public scrutiny of the state's 240 nursing homes. They call for requiring the state Department of Public Health to prepare consumer-oriented report cards on nursing homes that would include detailed data on state inspection results and staffing in an industry that receives about $1.4 billion a year in state Medicaid money.

"We have to make sure the outcome is there so we don't have to read about things in the paper, like what happened with Haven Healthcare, ever again," said Rep. Peggy Sayers, D-Windsor Locks, the co-chairwoman of the public health committee.

Environment

A coalition of environmental groups, which has formed The Face of Connecticut Campaign, is asking for $100 million a year for 10 years for open space, urban parks and the preservation of historic land and farmland.

"Connecticut has one opportunity to preserve the farmland and forests which have forever been our signature," said Sen. Andrew Roraback, R-Goshen, who represents 15 towns in Litchfield County. "One of the things that has frustrated me the most is elected officials are behind the people. People don't mind paying to preserve what we have."

Prisons

After the triple slayings in Cheshire last summer, legislators passed a series of crime reforms during a special session. Debate will continue in the regular session, including on whether to build any new prisons and whether the state should enact a tougher "three strikes" law that would take away discretionary powers in the judicial branch. Republicans say many judges have been too lenient in the sentencing of repeat violent felons. If a criminal is convicted of three violent felonies, Rell and other Republicans say, that person should be sentenced to life in prison.

---

A program begun during good times by a different Speaker now falls on hard times?   Maybe we should do a CT version of "The Emperor's New Clothes?"

Filmmakers await final cut in tax credits
Greenwich TIME
By Brian Lockhart,Staff Writer
Posted: 06/27/2009 09:52:03 PM EDT

HARTFORD -- Lawmakers' on-again, off-again efforts to scale back the state's film, television and digital media production tax credits were back on again last week when legislative Democrats passed a budget that included stricter criteria for the 3-year-old initiative.

Though Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell said Saturday that she is going to veto the budget, the changes to the tax credits, estimated to eventually save the state around $15 million annually, could still be a part of any final budget agreement reached this summer.  Kevin Segalla, a founder of the Stamford-based Connecticut Film Center, which provides production services and financing for movies, said that for the most part, he is not troubled by the changes.

"I think a lot of the things in their budget make sense," Segalla said, adding that the industry recognizes the state must address a two-year, multibillion dollar deficit, and lawmakers clearly understand the value of drawing films and production infrastructure to Connecticut.

In February, Rell proposed capping the credits at $30 million annually.  Segalla and others in the industry hired lobbyists and mobilized their colleagues to fight the proposal. Democrats, fearing a cap might send the wrong message to Hollywood, left it out of the budget they put on the table in April.  But since then, the state's revenue outlook has gotten bleaker, and a controversial analysis released earlier this month by the state's film office revived the debate over whether Connecticut is getting the most out of the credits.

The draft analysis indicated the state issued more than $113.2 million worth of credits, but productions invested around $41.5 million in return into the economy.  Though Segalla has pointed to flaws in the report -- it claimed "Confessions of a Shopaholic" never filmed in Connecticut though the movie used Segalla's Norwalk soundstage, as well as Stamford locations -- lawmakers want to find ways to ensure a larger return.

"We're ratcheting up the qualifying elements of applying for the credits," said state Rep. Patricia Widlitz, D-Guilford, one of a handful of lawmakers who have been reviewing the credit program and meeting with industry representatives.

Beginning immediately, the minimum expenses eligible for production tax credits would increase from $50,000 to $1 million, and the amount of a star's salary eligible for the program would rise from $15 million to $20 million.  Infrastructure projects eligible for the tax credit would increase from the current minimums of $15,001 for a 10 percent credit, $150,000 for a 15 percent credit and $1 million for a 20 percent credit to a new, $5 million minimum for a flat 20 percent credit.

And the Democrats' budget moved up the date from Jan. 1, 2012 to Jan. 1, 2010, to phase out a production's ability to apply for credits for 50 percent of production expenses outside of Connecticut.  State Sen. Thomas Gaffey, D-Meriden, who also worked on the revisions, said some of the qualifying amounts had been "ridiculously low." He said it is absurd to allow out-of-state costs.

"It does absolutely nothing for the state of Connecticut and really brings credit to the notion you're just giving money away," Gaffey said.

Segalla said he is concerned that increasing the minimum eligible production costs to $1 million will discourage smaller projects.

"We feel the small productions in the state are key; they're kind of the 'farm team' for growing the industry," he said, adding that they should be given incentive to grow.

Another piece of the proposal, which legislators said is in flux, is a new requirement that a company filing for the credits conduct at least 50 percent of principal photography days and incur 50 percent of its postproduction costs within the state.

"We haven't built the postproduction infrastructure in the state to the degree that a motion picture could come in and do 50 percent here," Segalla said. "We don't want to create a bar that's too high."

Gaffey said the argument is convincing and that it is likely that requirement will be phased in.  Another significant change in the Democrats' proposal shifts the state film office from the Commission on Culture and Tourism to the Department of Economic and Community Development.

"Tourism has done a great job. We're not faulting them," Widlitz said. "But the film industry is an economic development effort."

Gaffey said he was uncertain whether every job in the film office would be preserved within DECD, but he said it is likely some personnel will make the move because of their expertise in the industry and with the credit program.  While the Commission on Culture and Tourism is required to report every two years on the credit program, DECD would be required to do so annually.

State Rep. Themis Klarides, R-Derby, who worked with Widlitz and Gaffey on the proposal, said she understands why Rell sought to cap the tax credits. But she said the priority should be to continue to grow the film industry and encourage productions to spend in Connecticut.

"We need to ensure the tax credits are used to create business in the state," Klarides said.

State Rep. Carlo Leone, D-Stamford, who has been a vocal proponent of the tax credits, said lawmakers all along envisioned scaling back some of the program as the industry gained a greater presence within Connecticut.  The budget crisis made it happen sooner, he said.

"Given the economic situation, it just ramped up," Leone said. "I think it's prudent given where we are right now."

---

Coalition: Film tax-credits report incomplete 
DAY
By Lee Howard 
Published on 6/20/2009
 
A coalition that promotes the entertainment industry in Connecticut questioned Friday a report issued earlier this week that said the state's film tax credits are a money-losing proposition.

The Hartford-based Connecticut Production Coalition called the report by a children's-advocacy group incomplete and inaccurate, based on information that was intended to provide some context for discussion of the tax credits rather than be used for a rigorous analysis.

Among the problems with the report by the New Haven-based Connecticut Voices for Children, said the coalition, were that it excluded more than $125 million in Connecticut wages paid to production crews working in the state and that it failed to identify Connecticut expenditures for several productions, leading to underreporting of in-state spending by millions of dollars.

”Our production had a full-time staff of 12 people who went to work in Westport every day,” said Gary Cohen, owner and president of Triple Threat TV, in a statement. “The draft compilation says our production received a tax credit without spending a single dollar in the state. Nothing could be further from the truth.”

Shelley Geballe, author of the Voices for Children report, said she received the data for the report from the Finance Committee of the state legislature, which was provided the information by the Connecticut Film Commission. While some questioned how she got the data, which includes sensitive tax information, she said it is readily available by filing a Freedom of Information request.

”We rely on state data,” Geballe said in a phone interview. “We have had a tremendously difficult time gathering data.”

Geballe faulted the Connecticut Film Commission for not providing adequate data and said she did not have access to the information compiled later in the week by the Connecticut Production Coalition. She added that the coalition's data don't necessarily contradict the basic premise of her report, which was that the state overall was losing money on the tax-credit program.

She was heartened, however, that the coalition agrees with two of her suggestions for how to improve the film tax-credit program.

The coalition approves of making tax credits available only for money spent in-state - though it doesn't propose such a move taking effect until Jan. 1 of next year, about six months later than Voices for Children has endorsed. The coalition also called for a comprehensive independent study of film credits to be compiled within the next year, a position Geballe heartily endorsed.

Geballe also called for the state Department of Economic and Community Development to take over data collection on the tax credits, saying the agency has economists on staff to analyze the program.

Two of Geballe's other recommendations - that the state bar tax-credit sales to corporations not involved in the film industry and that it cap the annual amount of money available for credits - is opposed by the industry.

Kevin Segalla, president of the Connecticut Film Center in Stamford and Norwalk and a founder of the coalition, said capping funds would stanch the flow of money to the state's fledgling film industry at exactly the wrong time: when only funds spent in-state would get credits. He added that disallowing the sale of tax credits to other companies - which pay generally about 90 cents on the dollar - likewise would discourage the growth of the industry. “Sonalysts is seeing the benefits in a big way, with 'Deal or No Deal,'” Segalla said in a phone interview, referring to the Waterford studio that landed the filming of a popular television show through the summer.

”There's a reason why 43 states have a film incentive program,” he said. “We're close to New York and Boston. It's an ideal place.”  

---

Group Claims Tax Credits For Film Industry Not Paying Off;  Critics say Connecticut being 'hoodwinked' by entertainment industry  
DAY
By Lee Howard     
Published on 6/16/2009 

A state program intended to drive more film-production work to Connecticut has been used instead largely to subsidize costs incurred in other states and by other industries, according to an economic analysis issued Monday by a group critical of the film tax credits.

The New Haven-based Connecticut Voices for Children said in its report, titled “Fiddling While Rome Burns,” that nearly 90 percent of the $376 million in tax credits approved in the first few years of the program has been used for expenditures involving out-of-state production work. Of the Connecticut expenditures, the biggest category is not for film production but for lodging, according to the report, reflecting the fact that movies and TV commercials are being shot in the state while often being completed in New York - essentially subsidizing a neighboring state's thriving entertainment industry.

The report also alleges that the 30 percent tax credits are often not going to film-related companies, but to some of the biggest corporations in Connecticut, including Comcast, Pilot Corp. and Hershey, as well as several multinational financial institutions that have received TARP funding.

According to the report, most of the film production companies do not need the tax credit because they are already set up to minimize their tax liability. These film producers recoup a portion of the credits by selling them to companies - including major insurance firms - that can then turn around and use the credits to reduce their own liability.

”Connecticut has been hoodwinked by the entertainment industry into paying for 30 percent of their production costs,” said Shelley Geballe, author of the report.

Geballe, in a phone interview, said that she is not necessarily calling for an end to film tax credits but is asking the state to be more cautious in their use.

”At a time when the health and well-being of our families and communities is threatened by severe state budget cuts ... investing our scarce resources into schools, health care and home-grown businesses in emerging fields like renewable energy makes far more sense than subsidizing the next horror movie or thriller,” she said in a commentary accompanying her report.

Among Geballe's recommendations are:

■ The state should amend the film tax credits so they are no longer transferrable. If a company has no use for the credits - because they pay little or no taxes to begin with - no other company should be allowed to buy them up, she said.

■ Companies should not benefit from tax credits for work performed outside of Connecticut. The current tax-credit law will phase out the ability of companies to use the credits for out-of-state work, but that sunset provision won't take effect until Jan. 1, 2012. Geballe said she would like to see tax credits for out-of-state work to end July 1 of this year.

■ The state should establish a cap on how much it gives out in film tax credits, limiting taxpayers' liability. Gov. M. Jodi Rell proposed such a cap in the current budget.

”Connecticut's current film tax credit system makes no fiscal or economic sense,” said Jamey Bell, executive director of Connecticut Voices for Children, in a statement. “These common-sense reforms will help to limit any further damage to our state budget.”

A spokeswoman for the Connecticut Business and Industry Association said officials had not yet had a chance to read the report. A call to George Norfleet, director of the Film Division within the Connecticut Commission on Culture & Tourism, was not returned.

The state Department of Economic and Community Development studied the film tax credits in 2008, finding they had a “small and positive impact” on the state's economy.

”For every dollar spent on the tax credit, the state receives 8 cents back in additional revenue,” said the report, prepared by Stanley McMillen, who could not be reached to comment about the new analysis. “This will have a small favorable fiscal impact only if the state government pays for the film tax credit by reducing spending.”

The report that came out Monday, however, noted state spending has not been in balance, and claimed the tax credit adds to state taxpayers' burden - a total projected to reach $116 million by the end of the current budget period, the third year the credits have been in place.

Among the credits issued during this time were more than $6 million to Bronx Productions Inc., which produced the “Bronx is Burning” television series that was filmed largely in eastern Connecticut, including scenes at Dodd Stadium in Norwich. These credits were assigned to Wachovia Bank, according to the report.

The report, based in part on new information released in May by the Commission on Culture & Tourism, indicates that state government has given away nearly three times as much in tax credits as it has generated in state spending from the program.

”These tax credits don't 'pay for themselves' as their proponents suggest,” the report states. “In fact, Connecticut is losing tens of millions of dollars each year on these credits.”

---

Budget deficit may end film tax credits
Stamford ADVOCATE
By Brian Lockhart
Posted: 12/08/2008 02:39:37 AM EST

Director Wes Craven, who brought horror icons Freddy Krueger and the "Scream" killer to the big screen, reportedly was in Connecticut over the weekend filming shots for an upcoming feature.

Craven was drawn to the state by a film tax credit program, which now may wind up like the victims in his slasher movies. The program, though, would be the victim of state officials looking to close a $6 billion budget deficit.

"The hole is too big for everything not to be on the table," said Jeffrey Beckham, spokesman for the state budget office. "The governor has said this is an opportunity to re-examine virtually everything, and there may be some extras out there we just can't afford right now."

The goal of the 30 percent film credits, passed in 2006, was to lure movies and television shows to the state. The hope was that the credits, bolstered by additional tax breaks for film infrastructure and digital animation, would build a lasting industry to Connecticut.

A report from the state film office and the Department of Economic and Community Development released in March concluded the credits have had "a small and positive impact on the Connecticut economy," and proponents saw hope for continued growth.

But priorities changed as legislators began to see tough times ahead.

James Amann, D-Milford, speaker of the state House of Representatives, who spearheaded the push for a film tax credit program, used it to attract digital animator Blue Sky Studios Inc. from White Plains, N.Y., to Greenwich. In the spring, Amann said Blue Sky, producer of blockbusters such as "Ice Age" and "Dr. Seuss' Horton Hears a Who," needed more money. Amann wanted the cap on the annual pool of available tax credits hiked from $15 million to $25 million, but all bills with a price tag were killed.
Since then, Wall Street collapsed and the state budget deficit now is estimated at $6 billion for fiscal years 2009-10 and 2010-11.

State Rep. Cameron Staples, D-New Haven, said the legislature's Finance Committee, which he helps lead, will take a hard look at all tax credits.

"At a time like this, when you're making deep cuts in the budget, the first thing to do is see whether the credits and exemptions are achieving the goals they were set out for, and even if they are achieving the goals, whether we can continue to afford them," Staples said.

The most recent report of the Office of Fiscal Analysis, released in January, showed that of the $556.2 million the state spent on corporate business tax exemptions, deductions and credits, $90 million went toward the film production credits - the highest amount of the 41 corporate business tax breaks offered.

The amount did not count the $15 million spent to draw Blue Sky to Greenwich.

"That makes it a pretty big credit," Staples said. "So it's certainly going to be on our radar screen."

George Norfleet, head of the state's film office, said the next study of the film tax credits is due in 2010.

But Staples said he intends to ask for one this session.

That comes as good news to Shelly Geballe of Connecticut Voices for Children. The nonprofit child advocacy group was one of the first to urge star-struck lawmakers to reconsider the film tax credits this year.

"People understand that to get out of problems as large as what we have, it requires some spending cuts and some ways of increasing revenues," Geballe said. "And one way of doing that is to repeal preferential tax breaks when they don't make sense."

With Amann retiring from the legislature this month, proponents of the tax credits are losing a valuable ally.

Amann said it would be wrong to roll back the film tax credit program becaused Connecticut is suffering from the Wall Street crisis in part because of an over-reliance on financial jobs. Growing new industries should be a priority, he said.

"The only thing the General Assembly and governor should be concentrating on in 2009 are jobs, jobs and jobs," Amann said.

Norfleet of the film office said that more than the financial crisis, "the most immediate factor impacting the (film) industry . . . is the steadily degrading negotiations with the Screen Actors Guild, which has resulted in a de facto strike ever since the expiration of their contract with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers."

It is reasonable to examine the film tax credit program but "it is also important to note . . . millions of dollars have been spent here in relation to film production that otherwise would not have been," Norfleet said.

Some members of the legislature remain strong advocates for the program, including state Sen. Gary LeBeau, D-East Hartford, a chairman of the Commerce Committee.

"Be careful," LeBeau said. "When you've got programs to create jobs in a recession, you don't want to willy-nilly destroy those."

---

Lights, Cameras, Credits 
DAY editorial
Published on 3/29/2008 

House Speaker James A. Amann may indeed be a bit star struck, but his inclination to continue aggressively promoting Connecticut as a destination for the entertainment industry is a good one.

The speaker's promotion of tax credits for the film industry has allowed him to rub shoulders with some Hollywood elite, but his motivations appear purely political. Rep. Amann recognizes that being able to generate jobs, boost business, while adding in some star power, is a winning combination.

A Department of Economic and Community Development report released earlier this month estimated a 7 percent return has resulted from the tax credits first passed into law in 2006. The number of movies filmed in the state is increasing and the digital-production companies Blue Sky Studios and NBCSports.com have expanded into the state.

Now Rep. Amann is pushing hard to expand the incentive program. His proposed bill would lift the current $15 million cap on credits for digital animation products to $25 million, something lawmakers agreed to pursue when Blue Sky Studios came to Connecticut from New York last year. Other proposals would expand tax credits to cover expenses associated with live stage productions. And additional legislation would, if passed, promote training programs for future workers in the entertainment industry.

During hearings some skeptics have questioned whether the state is getting a true payback on the investment directed at the entertainment industry and urged a moratorium on incentives pending further study.

It is true that the recent DECD study was hardly comprehensive, but studies done in other states that have promoted the growth of the film industry through aggressive incentive programs suggest a significant return on investment. A study in Louisiana showed every dollar invested generated $1.85 in economic growth.

Given the progress seen thus far, and the success in other states, the legislature should support the expansion of incentives along the lines suggested by the Amann-backed proposals. Yet at some point a more thorough study is necessary to define how the incentives are helping the state economy.

---

 
Gone With the Cash: Films Go for the Best Tax Breaks
NYTIMES
Article Tools Sponsored By
By LISA W. FODERARO
Published: March 29, 2008

WHITE PLAINS — Martin Scorsese’s crime drama “The Departed” may be a paean to the city of Boston, but a number of scenes featuring Leonardo DiCaprio were shot at the county courthouse and library here. It was a surprisingly apt title, since 2007, the year “The Departed” won the Academy Award for Best Picture, was also the year that many film and television shoots departed — for Connecticut...

Not only is Connecticut attracting location shoots, but it has also encouraged the development of soundstages. Disney’s “Confessions of a Shopaholic” is now in production on a soundstage that opened last spring; construction will soon begin on six more soundstages in Norwalk.

While Connecticut is not publicly gloating, it is certainly celebrating. Economic development officials are hoping, in particular, to build on the momentum of Blue Sky’s decision to relocate. “We’re real excited,” said Joan McDonald, commissioner of Connecticut’s Department of Economic and Community Development. “People call it digital animation, but they’re high-tech jobs, and they’re high-tech jobs that young people like. There’s a real energy...”

 “If you need the Empire State Building, you can’t very well say, ‘I’ll go to Connecticut,’ ” he noted. “But if you need the countryside or suburbia or a quaint little village, there are a number of places you can go in the Northeast.”

Brian A. Keane, chief operating officer of Blue