CT's economy in cartoon format;  the New England Region;  RPA's "tri-state" regional map.
So if you are going to think regionally, you definitely need a good map!


Taxpayers Could Benefit From State Makeover 
DAY Editorial
By Paul Choiniere    
Published on 11/25/2007 

A couple popular television shows provide the opportunity for a “complete makeover.”

In one show, individuals society would consider ugly ducklings are transformed through the miracle of modern plastic surgery.

Another features the complete redesign of homes. An army of construction workers, plumbers, electricians and other tradesmen descend on a home, outfit it with all the modern amenities and add unique touches to meet the family's special needs and interests.

Connecticut government could likewise use a complete makeover.

Having now lived in Connecticut for 32 years I can see that its reputation as the land of steady habits is well deserved. One steady habit is the sanctity of home rule.

Each town and city is responsible for educating the children in its borders, providing for the public safety of its townspeople and offering various other services. Municipalities in Connecticut have basically two sources for the revenues needed to provide for those needs — income from property taxes and the largesse of the state.

The greatest strength of this system is that local control tends to be frugal control. The smaller the government bureaucracy the less likely wasteful spending will be tolerated. Every dime has to be justified by finance boards, councils or selectmen and, in most towns, sometimes to voters in a referendum.

But this local-only approach to governing has plenty of drawbacks as well. It is often inefficient. The region has multiple emergency dispatch centers, for example, when one or two could serve all of southeastern Connecticut. Nearly every town, big or small, has its own school superintendent and administration though, at least in some cases, one superintendent could oversee the administration of several schools in multiple towns.

If not for home rule there would certainly be other services that could be shared by towns. Savings could also be achieved in the purchase of supplies by combining the buying power of several towns.

The dependence of the property tax system to meet local needs also creates inequities. Homeowners in towns with large commercial tax bases enjoy lower taxes and better services. Often this is the function of location near highways and having land available for development.

Conversely, small bedroom communities with little commercial tax bases can offer their citizens few services. Cities, which have limited land available for development, are hard pressed to provide services without overburdening taxpayers.

Towns compete with each other for the commercial developments needed to raise property tax money, leading to poor land use choices.

The complete makeover would involve some form of county government. The region, rather than just individual towns, could benefit from the large commercial taxpayers. Projects could be built where they make sense, not where they are desired to raise tax revenues. Economies of scale could be realized.

But this is not television and that is not going to happen, at least not at any point in the near future.

Yet towns can search for opportunities where regional cooperation makes sense. The state budget proposal, which this past week was still being negotiated between the governor and legislature, would provide financial incentives for towns to undertake regional projects.

Towns and cities may soon have no choice. Homeowners are reaching a breaking point when it comes to property taxes. Old habits have to change. And while Connecticut's communities may not be ready for a complete makeover, it is time for a partial makeover to begin.



Area leaders hash out hot issues at roundtable
Norwalk HOUR
September 13, 2007

Businesses are moving in, shops and restaurants are opening. Downtowns are flourishing in Darien, Fairfield, Westport and poised to do so in Norwalk.  If those trends are to continue, however, the four lower Fairfield County communities must work together on regional issues such as transportation, education funding and affordable housing.

So concluded Mayor Richard A. Moccia, Darien First Selectwoman Evonne M. Klein, Fairfield First Selectman Ken Flatto, Westport First Selectman Gordon K. Joseloff during a Regional Roundtable put on by The Greater Norwalk Chamber of Commerce at DoubleTree Hotel on Connecticut Avenue Wednesday.  Moccia, borrowing the city's new slogan, said Norwalk is a city "On the Move" through its urban renewal projects. When done, the projects will create neighborhoods where people will live, work and shop, he said.

"The one big caveat on all of this is the transportation. That is the key for all of us. We need something done about moving people in Fairfield County," Moccia said. "Whatever town you're in in Fairfield County, unless this problem is addressed and addressed immediately and on a regional approach ... we can have all the businesses in the world, but if people can't get home and people can't get to their jobs, that's going to cause problems."

Moccia said Gov. M. Jodi Rell and lawmakers made a commitment to mass transit, new rail cars, and bus service, but added "it's going to take a coordinated effort from the state and all the cities."

The roundtable drew about 100 business and civic leaders, as well as Norwalk mayoral candidates Walter O. Briggs and Scott P. Merrell. AT&T sponsored the roundtable. Wendy Corey, host of WSTC/WNLK Morning News, moderated the event, which began with the four chief elected officials explaining issues in their communities.

Klein credited Darien Revitalization Inc. and the Main Street Center Program, as well as smaller quality-of-life initiatives, such as allowing more outdoor dining, extending off-street parking hours and adding more pedestrian crossing signs, for the revitalization of downtown Darien.

She identified transportation, affordable housing, aging infrastructure as the greatest issues facing the town.

"Fortunately and unfortunately we have the Post Road, which brings a lot of traffic into our town. When people park and shop, it's good fortune," Klein said. "When they're just using Route 1 as an I-95 detour, our entire town becomes totally congested."

To solve the problem, Darien has applied for a $200,000 state and federal grant to study the Route 1 corridor. The study will get under way in early 2008, she said.  In the area of housing, one developer plans to include two affordable-priced units downtown. The town has the opportunity to create more such housing by acquiring the Darien Library property, Klein said.

Joseloff said Fairfield County communities do work together through meetings of chief-elected officials, as well as through the South Western Regional Planning Agency and Metropolitan Planning Organization.  At the same time, each faces its own problems in education, affordable housing and transportation.  Westport is now dealing with Connecticut Light & Power Co. digging up Route 1 to upgrade the Middletown-Norwalk transmission cable.

Joseloff urged "smart transportation" strategies to unsnarl traffic jams elsewhere. Traffic accidents along Interstate 95 and the Merritt Parkway could be cleared faster, he suggested, if first-responders were given the same access to live roadway camera images, as are broadcast media.

Flatto offered three solutions: "Fix the trains. Fix the trains. (Fix the trains)."

He said the opening of a new train station on the east side of Fairfield will alleviate traffic and add parking for commuters. Flatto urged following Transportation Strategy Board goals and "reform" of the Department of Transportation.

On education, Moccia noted that Norwalk is the state's sixth largest city but receives far less in Education Cost Sharing dollars from Hartford than do Bridgeport, New Haven, Waterbury and other communities.  He said Norwalk did receive more money this year thanks to Norwalk's legislative delegation. The cost-sharing formula, however, remains unfair to Norwalk, he continued.

"We're being perceived as being very successful cities. We're in the heart of the Gold Coast," Moccia said. Still "we are a city. We face urban problems. The state of Connecticut does not recognize this."


Push for regionalization a tricky balancing act
 Norwich Bulletin
By MAX BAKKE
August 25, 2007

For many small towns in Windham County, passing budgets this year proved arduous.

Several towns held at least two referendums -- Thompson held four and Canterbury passed its $13.7 million budget Wednesday, its third try.  According to John Filchak, executive director of the Northeast Connecticut Council of Governments, the pressures have much to do with balancing growth while retaining the charm of the Quiet Corner.

"It's about keeping the rural character, and at the same time growing the grand list," he said. "All these town's are concerned about developing because of rapid growth."

Part of the council's mission is to work with its 11 member towns, specifically concerning land use and engineering, Filchak said. The council is hiring a regional planner, who would be a full-time staff member. That person would divide time among the towns that purchase the services, Killingly Town Council Chairman Janice Thurlow said. The council also is hiring a regional engineer, a brand new position, she said.

"As towns become larger, there's going to be more and more expenses that we may be able to do on a regional level," Thurlow said.  Thurlow said she did not know exactly how much individual towns would save by buying into the program, but called the savings "significant."

Regionalization has its pitfalls, however, as many of these small towns cherish their own identity and see regionalization as threatening.

"Planning and zoning issues can be touchy," Thurlow said.

Many of Connecticut's 169 towns go it alone.

"Really small towns are trying to do it 169 different ways -- we need to regionalize," said Michael Saad of Moosup.

Saad said municipalities would benefit greatly from regionalization and sharing the cost of services. A regional high school, Saad said, could take pressure off some towns.

"There's nothing wrong with a regional school system. Sometimes you need to stop and say 'Hey. I need your help,' " he said.

Thompson First Selectmen A. David Babbitt said it's not likely his town would buy into regional services, but he said the monthly meetings with other town leaders is very helpful.

"The exchange of ideas -- that's just wonderful. We sit at a roundtable discussion and just talk about issues," he said.

The town of Ashford, which joined the council this summer, intends to employ the regional planning and engineering services, First Selectman Ralph Fletcher said.

"There are 4,400 people in the town of Ashford -- most of the towns in the NECCOG area are small towns similar to us," Fletcher said. "We can't afford all the situations that some of the other towns can, services we need that we can't afford individually."

Ashford, formerly a member of the Windham Regional Council of Governments, still needs approval from the Office of Policy and Management to join the Northeast Council. Fletcher said the Northeast Council is a better fit for Ashford because it's made up mostly of first selectmen. The Windham council has larger towns in its membership, which employ professional managers and administrators.

Plainfield First Selectman Kevin Cunningham, a strong supporter of the council, touted the facile way towns can share, loan or sell equipment to each other. Plainfield has sold older highway equipment to Brooklyn, a less expensive proposition for Brooklyn than purchasing new, he said

"Just by talking about it at a roundtable meeting we were able to sell equipment to a town that needed it," Cunningham said. "That stuff saves COG towns tremendously."

Brooklyn plans to use the regional engineer services, First Selectman Roger Engle said. As a council member, Engle has discovered a willingness to help from the member towns.  Engle mentioned at a recent meeting Brooklyn planned to repaint its Town Hall in July and several towns volunteered bucket trucks for the all-day project.

"I think that we can get a lot of good out of the council, because there are many things we can share," he said. "There's just so much we can do if we work together."

Filchak said future plans for the council could include expanding the regional dog pound, working on the proposed regional recreational center in Putnam or completing a visitor's center at Exit 100 on Interstate 395.

"There are no shortage of projects," he said. "We're never bored."

Intertwined economies quantified; 'trade imbalance' hurts state, report says
PAM DAWKINS pdawkins@ctpost.com
Article Launched:11/02/2006 04:49:00 AM EST

Gross state product isn't the only measure of an economy — especially when that state is Connecticut, according to a senior economist with the state Department of Labor.

In an article in the Connecticut Economic Digest, released Wednesday, Daniel Kennedy examined the apparently mutually exclusive realities of slower growth in gross state product, which measures the value of goods and services produced in a state, and high per-capita income.

"A major factor that resolves that paradox" is the two concepts at work, Kennedy said.

Namely, gross state product is a geographically based measure but many state residents, particularly those "south and west" of New Haven work in New York City.

"Fairfield County is basically a satellite of the New York City economy," Kennedy said. "There isn't really a 'Connecticut economy' because you've got a substantial amount of people that are working in New York City," said economist Todd Martin, who advises People's Bank.

This is also becoming true elsewhere. For example, Hartford and Springfield, Mass., are evolving into a regional economy, as are the New London area and southern Rhode Island, Kennedy said.

Connecticut, he said, has what amounts to a $4 billion "trade imbalance" with neighboring states. In 2004, that was the difference between what Connecticut residents earned in other states and the residents of other states earned in Connecticut. Kennedy also showed commuting from Connecticut to another state pays off, at least financially.

Fairfield County residents in the finance, insurance, real estate and information industries who worked in the county earned less than neighbors doing the same jobs in New York City, he said. While that's not a surprise — and is partly a function of the city's higher cost of living, which translates into higher salaries — residents of Westchester and Rockland counties in New York doing those jobs in Fairfield County tend to earn more than the Fairfield County residents working here. Kennedy said he wasn't sure whether the Fairfield County paychecks were larger than what the New Yorkers could earn in their home counties.

Fairfield County commuters aren't the only ones earning higher salaries in other states, Kennedy said.

Connecticut residents' average wage, based on U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis data for 2004, was $42,444. But for people working in Massachusetts and living here, that number grew to $54,079. For New York workers, the difference is more striking: the average was almost $132,000. Only residents working in Rhode Island lose out — their average wage was $38,474.

"Our geographic proximity to New York makes that a very attractive prospect" for job seekers, said Lisa Mercurio, spokeswoman for The Business Council of Fairfield County.

The proximity also attracts businesses to Connecticut, Mercurio said, because they gain access to the city and its infrastructure at lower costs.

Kennedy's report, she said, is a "data-based reinforcement" of how much of southwestern Connecticut's economy is tied to New York's and the importance of having the ability to move freely around the region.

Of course, the states where the income is earned take a piece of it before the Connecticut income tax gets its bite. People working in New York City pay city and New York state income taxes, Kennedy said; neighboring states tend to have agreements to facilitate this and make sure no one gets away without paying. So it is difficult to be sure whether Connecticut actually takes in more tax dollars from the New York workers than it would if those people worked in Fairfield County.

"They want that before it leaves the gate," he said of governments and income taxes.

Kennedy stressed he is not making value judgements about the state's economy, but said if people want an accurate picture, "You've got to understand the delineation" between the geographic production and residents' incomes.

"There tends to be a real parochial view" among officials and economic development specialists, Martin said. "It's really an us-against-them mentality," but Kennedy's research shows taking a regional view is better, Martin said. Some groups, he said, are already looking at the big picture.
Ledyard Mayor Seeks Regional Cooperation;  Major developments affect more than just host town
DAY
By Paul Choiniere
Published on 9/21/2006

Norwich — Stung by criticism that her town, in hopes of generating commercial development by the Mashantucket Pequot tribe, approved zoning changes along Route 2 without acting in concert with its neighbors, Ledyard Mayor Susan Mendenhall called Wednesday for a greater spirit of regional cooperation.

“Now the towns are basically pitted against one another,” Mendenhall said, addressing fellow elected officials from throughout the region. “It's all about generating the property tax dollars.”

The region, she said, needs to develop some mechanism to address major planning and zoning issues on a regional basis. It is beyond the ability of small towns to consider all the implications of the major projects that appear on the horizon, she said.

Mendenhall made her comments at the start of the monthly meeting of the Southeastern Connecticut Council of Governments.

The tribe, operators of the Foxwoods Resort Casino, appears to be eyeing the Route 2 corridor near its casino for a major resort development. Unlike development on the reservation, however, the new enterprise would be taxable and subject to approval from town land use commissions.

Tribal officials have not released any details about their development plans.

In neighboring Preston, voters on May 23 approved a development agreement that could pave the way for the massive Utopia Studios Ltd. project on the former Norwich Hospital property.  That $1.6 billion project would include 4,500 hotel rooms, enclosed theme parks, movie studios and a performing arts college.

“The issue that Preston and Ledyard have is not going to go away and, in fact, it is only going to get worse given the development we are facing in the future,” Mendenhall said.

The Ledyard mayor did not offer specifics for dealing regionally with large-scale development issues but said she saw a role for the council of governments, a largely advisory group that is the closest thing Connecticut has to regional governance.

Ledyard, Preston and North Stonington all added “resort districts” along Route 2 to their zoning regulations in the early 1990s, hoping to spin off some development from the casino. The strategy has met with little success.  Last month, acting on an application from the tribe, the Ledyard Zoning Commission agreed to broaden the types of development it would permit along Route 2, including condominiums, time-share units; parking garages; multiplex cinemas; gas stations; amusements; water parks; bowling centers; mini-golf; boat rentals; business and government offices; campgrounds; and retail stores of up to 50,000 square feet, which would accommodate so-called “big box” retailers.

Ledyard approved the changes despite opposition from the Reference Committee of the Regional Planning Commission, which reviews zoning changes that have ramifications for neighboring towns. The committee, part of the COG, concluded the zone change in Ledyard “would have adverse inter-municipal impacts” and “would significantly intensify the already intense activity in (the) area.”

Officials in Preston and North Stonington also questioned Ledyard's decision to move forward without consulting its neighbors.  Those towns only learned of the proposal when they were mailed copies of the tribe's application, as required by state law.

“In retrospect, should their planner have met with our planner and gone over this first? Yeah, probably,” said Preston First Selectman Robert Congdon. “But hindsight is 20-20. The important thing is that we work together going forward.”

The tribe has said it also plans to seek similar zone changes in Preston and North Stonington, but no applications have yet been filed. At a recent meeting of the Regional Planning Commission there was discussion of creating a subcommittee with representatives of Ledyard, North Stonington and Preston to monitor future development plans along Route 2.

As for Utopia, Congdon said the town should know by Nov. 20 if the project will be moving forward.  That is the deadline set for the developer to meet a series of requirements in the development agreement.  If the project does move forward, Congdon said Preston officials expect to work closely with the neighboring towns of Ledyard and Norwich in planning for the impacts of the entertainment complex.

The council of governments is also planning to do a regional analysis of large-scale developments, such as Utopia and the current expansion of the Foxwoods Resort.
Support Grows For Regional Solutions To Regional Issues
DAY
By Paul Choiniere
Published on 6/5/2006
  
Norwich doesn't have a casino, but its schools have plenty of casino kids.

The student body at Greeneville Elementary School is an ethnic and racial melting pot, with two-thirds categorized as minority students. For many, English is a second language. More than one-third have parents who work at one of the region's two casinos. They bring both a cultural richness and an educational challenge.

Griswold doesn't have a major shopping center, but its business district in the Borough of Jewett City felt the pinch six years ago when Lisbon Landing — with its Wal-Mart, Home Depot and several other big- box retailers — opened just a couple of miles down the road.

Big projects have consequences that spill over town borders, but Connecticut, governed by a system in which decisions on development, zoning and education are left to each individual town, is particularly ill-equipped to plan for and address those impacts.

But that could be changing. The public, it appears, is in a mood to explore new approaches — regional approaches — to the challenges facing this corner of Connecticut.

Utopia Studios Ltd., the next potential big project, was given a green light May 23 when Preston voters approved a development agreement to allow planning to move forward on the $1.6 billion entertainment and studio complex. It is proposed for the 419-acre former Norwich Hospital property in the southwest corner of town.

A poll of likely voters conducted for The Day prior to the referendum asked residents both in Preston and from the surrounding towns if there should be a mechanism for large projects to be decided regionally, not just by the host community.

A large majority said yes.

Sixty-nine percent from outside Preston agreed or strongly agreed that there should be regional decision-making, while 66 percent of Preston respondents also agreed or strongly agreed.

“Based on those numbers, more and more people are realizing that if it happens in one town, and it is of any scope, it is going to affect everyone,” said Bozrah First Selectman Keith J. Robbins, the current chairman of the Southeastern Connecticut Council of Governments.

“That 66 percent of the people in Preston said we have a responsibility to the region, I think it's encouraging,” said Preston First Selectman Robert Congdon. “They could have said no one asked us before they built Millstone in Waterford or before they put the Pfizer global headquarters in New London, but they didn't. They said this is something there should be a regional discussion about, and that's good.”

Robbins says many constituents he speaks to want to see more regional approaches to education, emergency services, infrastructure and the pursuit of major new employers.

“We have to make structural changes in Connecticut, big time,” Congdon agreed.

•••Councils of government are the closest thing Connecticut has to regional governance. The southeastern council, made up of the chief executive officers from each of the region's 20 towns, cities and boroughs, is one of 16 “COGs” in the state.

In 1960 Connecticut abolished its eight county governments. Lawmakers saw them as outdated and concluded that local administration of government was best.

Some 30 years later, the General Assembly acknowledged something had been lost, and in the early 1990s authorized the creation of COGs to assess regional needs and conduct regional planning — but with no real authority.

Now the local COG is undertaking one of its most important functions, updating the Regional Plan of Conservation and Development for the first time in a decade. The plan is intended to guide development at the municipal level with an eye on the needs of the entire region.

The revision comes amid growing interest in regionally addressing the challenges of economic growth, open space, transportation and affordable housing, said James S. Butler, executive director of the COG since 1998.

Regional success stories he cited include the Southeast Area Transit bus system and the waste authority that deals with the region's trash disposal needs. There has already been extensive regional emergency planning, and in 2004 towns throughout the region joined the Mohegan and Mashantucket Pequot tribes to lay the groundwork for a regional water system.

But now for the first time, said Butler, political leaders are considering the need to review and plan for the effects major developments can have on the region and perhaps share some of the resulting tax revenues.

“No one is yet suggesting how it is done, but the fact that it is being discussed is significant,” Butler said.

Development is now closely tied to the property tax system. Towns compete to attract commercial taxpayers. Conversely, zoning is often designed to discourage affordable housing for fear such housing attracts families with children, raising expenses in the school system.

Congdon has promised regional involvement in guiding the development of Utopia, which company executives claim will create 22,000 permanent jobs and generate 22 million admissions annually. He has said the door remains open to some form of revenue sharing to deal with its impacts.

The same suggestions are being heard elsewhere.

Last year a steering committee of local leaders, developed a “Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy” for southeastern Connecticut. Intended to serve as a blueprint for growth in the region, the plan went to the federal Economic Development Administration and is meant to help qualify the region for federal economic improvement grants.

Douglas Fisher, who chairs the Governor's Commission for the Economic Diversification of Southeastern Connecticut, formed last year after the Naval Submarine Base in Groton narrowly escaped being closed, said the region could become an economic leader in the state by creating business parks in which both the cost of development and the resulting property taxes would be shared by multiple towns.


In 2000 the legislature passed a law that would allow municipalities to voluntarily share property tax revenues.  So far no region has utilized the law.

•••Those who have watched Connecticut's parochial approach to government say the time for a regional approach is long overdue.

Kathy McCoy, a Norwich resident, is concerned as plans move forward for the Utopia project in neighboring Preston. McCoy expects Utopia would have a major effect on Norwich, much like the region's two Indian casinos. She wants a regional discussion on how to deal with it.

“It should have been a regional decision,” said Richard L. Humphreville, a New London resident who has long complained about that city's high tax rate. Confronted with urban issues but with limited land for commercial development, New London has not been well served by a system dependent on property taxes and home rule, he said.

“One reason Connecticut is hurting so much is 169 towns have their individual infrastructures, their individual administrations. It creates a level of government that is a burden and could serve many more. It needs to be cut in half so we can compete for economic development,” he said.

A regional effort to attract new major businesses, and sharing the resulting tax benefits, would be a step in the right direction, he said.

“This fiefdom mentality in New England is killing our economy, with everyone one fighting to get these big guys,” Humphreville said.

Peter Roper, a Groton resident, is on a steering committee guiding the new regional plan of development. He feels there was a major shift toward regional cooperation as the public witnessed over the last decade the effects of the Foxwoods Resort and Mohegan Sun casinos.

“I really do think there is more of a mood for it,” said Roper. “I don't think it's a foreign concept anymore.”
 

The New England Approach:
Some of America's smallest states are learning the value of a bigger picture. Transportation is a good example.
Editorial By Day Staff Writer
Published on 6/4/2006
 
It is starting to dawn on policymakers and planners in Connecticut and other New England states that they are part of a bigger picture, and that it would pay to consider that reality in planning for the future. For tourists traveling from outside the region, Mystic or Litchfield County might not yet be a clear destination for a week's vacation, but New England is. So the New England states should cooperate in marketing rather than doing their own thing.
Added to the “brand name” of New England is the fact that the New England states are among the smallest in the country and more often than not, it makes no sense for them to wall each other off in formulating policy. A nearby example of this is the common interests that exist between southwestern Rhode Island and southeastern Connecticut in such matters as water issues, transportation policy and tourism.

The common challenges to the New England states have been the theme of a series of articles run in the Perspective section the past several months under the rubric of the New England Futures Project. The latest of these appears in this section today, and addresses the issue of rail transportation. The writers describe the importance rail could play in unifying the region. What they're talking about isn't pie in the sky, for they describe steps that states are taking to get people off the region's already overstressed highways and onto trains and other mass transit.

One promising development is addressed in the latest transportation legislation to come out of the Connecticut General Assembly. The measure authorizes state investment in a commuter rail line between New Haven and the Massachusetts state line, with bus links to Bradley International Airport. The article points out that Connecticut's original plan would have stopped short in Hartford, but a regional agency in Massachusetts persuaded ConnDOT to look further, with the goal of a rail connection to Springfield, Mass., and eventually Brattleboro, Vt. The Massachusetts legislature is deliberating on funds for its part of this plan.

Evolving New England concept

This new focus has its origins in another evolving New England concept, “The Knowledge Corridor,” an economic development strategy tying together the Hartford, Springfield and Northampton area, home to more than 30 public and private colleges and universities. Connecting these dots could create a knowledge-based, economic powerhouse equivalent to the Raleigh-Durham, N.C., metropolitan region.

Connecticut has been scrambling to revamp its transportation policies to address the mounting highway congestion on its interstate and state roads, a situation a planning report warned could deprive the state of benefits from the global economy.

The same transportation problems cross state lines, and require regional attention. The sort of collaboration that is taking place between Massachusetts and Connecticut also is developing between Rhode Island and Massachusetts. Rhode Island is moving ahead with an ambitious transit plan that will connect Boston metropolitan area mass transit with new rail service to Providence and Green Airport west to North Kingston, not far from Westerly, which is right next door to Connecticut.

Shift in Connecticut's emphasis

The entire topic is highly pertinent to this part of Connecticut, where planners are grappling with the potential impact of a burgeoning tourism and entertainment industry and billions of dollars in potential new development. While the focus in the past has been on road improvements (widening I-95, improving Route 2 and completing Route 11), a new emphasis is developing on mass transit. Molly McKay of Mystic, transportation chairwoman of the Connecticut Sierra Club, points out in another article in this section that the shift in emphasis in Connecticut to public transportation extends into Eastern Connecticut. The new transportation law calls for a study into reviving rail passenger service on the New London-to-Worcester line, an idea previously dismissed in a ConnDOT study. The transportation bill also raises the chances for expanding the Shoreline East rail commuter service to New Haven and New York. While they're at it, planners should look at developing public transit links northeast toward Providence, Boston and Green Airport.

It won't be long before the casinos and other players in the region's tourism and entertainment industries will realize the drawbacks of relying on roads to get increasing volumes of people to their businesses and turn to mass-transportation solutions such as light rail and monorail. Such solutions would improve their competitive advantage over regions known for their highway congestion and reduce the damage of highway construction on the area's countryside. Good businesses would be attracted to such an on-the-ball region.

One day it will be possible for a family from Iowa, planning a New England vacation, to fly to Providence, shuttle to Mystic, New London or Norwich by public transportation and move among the region's attractions without having to rent a car.

The idea is no longer merely fanciful.
 
Dear Electees: Get Smart About Growth
By Lisa McGinley, Night City Editor, DAY
Published on 11/9/2005

Congratulations and good luck to all who woke up elected this morning. The terms you start now could be among the busiest your towns have ever seen.

Eastern Connecticut is HOT.

Growth is going to be on the agenda of every board and council, so before the dust settles on the leftover campaign signs, study up on “Smart Growth,” a buzz phrase that some candidates have been using without understanding all its implications and ideals.

The opposite of Smart Growth is not Dumb Growth. In every development project there is at least one smart guy, the person who sees an opportunity to build something profitable. Smart Growth depends on all the players — land-use officials, taxpayers, users of highways and water systems and breathers of air — knowing as much as the developer about the pros and cons of the proposal.

Smart Growth aims to counteract sprawl, which uses up land and leaves towns and cities and their schools to waste away.

Anthony Downey, a senior fellow in economic studies for the Brookings Institution, the well-known independent think tank, listed the goals of Smart Growth in a speech in 2003:

• Limit outward expansion

• Encourage higher-density development

• Encourage mixed-use zoning;

• Reduce travel by private vehicles

• Revitalize older areas

• Preserve open space

Affordable housing can be a goal, but usually is not, he noted, because of homeowner fears it will drive down the value of their own investments.

Nor — in spite of campaign remarks by some local candidates — does Smart Growth aim to find a good tract by the highway for big-box retailers. Nor does it support carving new villages, however clustered the houses, out of the woods.

If you are an incumbent on a land-use board, you already engage in growth management by your votes on zoning, wetlands impact and related issues. Around here, Smart Growth is a relatively new idea for managing growth, although it is extensively used in Maryland, Michigan and other states.

You may argue with some of the principles, such as whether it's possible to reduce the use of cars in a region with so little public transit.

But you elected officials need to be ready to act when a developer comes and tells your town his plans for film studios (Preston, North Stonington, Waterford), a racetrack (Plainfield), shopping centers (Montville, Stonington), or a special taxing district for age-restricted housing (East Lyme).

And developers will come, followed by workers and their children, needing homes and schools and room on the highway for their cars.

No region, Downey says, can totally control its own population growth. The reality is that a town can control even less.

And that may be the most important issue on the table: Is your town willing to consult with others, in the absence of a regional planning agency with authority to make decisions?

If there had been a serious regional conversation in the 1960s, would the Millstone nuclear plants have been built? And if so, would only Waterford have gotten the tax benefits of a significant regional presence?

How many officials in other towns knew ahead of last month's announcement that North Stonington was talking to would-be developers, including the Mashantucket Pequots, about a major studio and science center complex right next door to the possible future home of Utopia, in Preston?

Don't let people wonder 40 years from now what this region would have been like if only officials had looked beyond their own town lines. Get smart about growth now.

Somebody Take Command:  Economic development is too important to Eastern Connecticut's future to be left in the hands of local governments.
New London DAY Editorial   
Published on 10/16/2005

The fight to save the submarine base demonstrated what an effective network of regional organizations the region has assembled since previous base-closing struggles in the early 1990s. But the important factor in that success — which few want to discuss — is the role leadership played. The organization would have gone nowhere if it hadn't been for strong direction by a few leaders.

Cooperation is good, but it was a command structure that overcame this crisis, and clear lines of command will be essential to make this region BRAC-proof in the future. Somebody, or some unified organization, has to take charge of uniting the region behind the complicated and arduous task of economic development. For a region as steeped in Navy tradition as this one, that point should be obvious.

Economic development needs to be carried out on a regional basis with people whose day job it is to be in charge.

Instead it's in the hands of an unconnected array of mom-and-pop economic development operations: first selectmen, local economic development commissions and underpaid local development coordinators who often double as town planners. Squeezed by the same property-tax pressures that force them to operate on their own, they have few resources to invest in research, business recruitment and other essentials of economic development.

There are good regional organizations, but nothing ties them together. And they have little relevance to what towns are doing to attract investment.

Local leaders say that's going to remain the case as long as the reliance on property taxes forces them to compete for development. But the situation the region is facing won't wait for the legislature to enact property tax reform, something that probably will take years.

The BRAC fight was an emergency, but one that pointed to a greater emergency. It was a short-term project, and will turn out to have been the easy part compared to the larger task.

Now Eastern Connecticut is confronted with the crisis underneath the crisis: The lingering possibility of another base closing in the shifting world of national defense spending and the unsettling reality of an economy that still isn't strong enough to withstand such a blow without serious dislocations. An economic development policy based on the hope the Navy will start building two submarines a year is not going to get the region there.

Deal with the weaknesses

The region has a new plan to deal with these weaknesses, among which are the dependency on defense that continues to exist and a new dependency on tourism, the high cost of living in Connecticut, growing congestion on the highways and the absence of a local research university to stimulate the growth of biotechnology businesses.

It is a sound plan, called the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy, in which many people from around the region participated.

The region has an agency that was set up to lead in economic development, the Southeastern Connecticut Enterprise Region. But the agency is understaffed for that task and has little financial support from communities in the region. If it is to lead, it needs vastly more resources and authority. But this plan is a start in that direction.

SeCTer has named a committee, headed by the respected regional planner, Richard Erickson, to implement that plan.

The question remains who will make sure the tasks that are assigned are carried out, and be held accountable if they're not. That's what Mr. Erickson's committee needs to figure out.

The need for a clear chain of command for economic development was embedded in the message Thomas Marano brought to The Day's recent forum on economic development. Mr. Marano, an economic planner for Northeast Utilities, this year visited places across the country where large military bases have closed. What he observed is that the ones most successful at bouncing back were those where someone was clearly in charge of planning economic development and carrying out the plan. The area around Denver, led by the mayor of the city and business leaders, united behind a plan to redevelop Lowry Air Force Base. In 12 years, the development authority the communities formed had turned the base into a thriving business and residential community.

Could this region have done the same with the submarine base?

It's not likely if past experience is any indication. The Norwich Hospital property in Preston and Norwich is a poster child for dysfunction in economic development. During the period when the Denver area successfully redeveloped Lowry Air Force Base, the state property has sat idle. The region, despite its network of organizations and substantial leadership pool, never united behind the task of redeveloping the property. Nobody asked it to. A state bureaucracy was in charge until the town of Preston assumed the job. But small towns are not any more equipped to do the painstaking work of economic development than politically insulated government bureaucracies.

The same can be said of another decommissioned government installation, the Naval Undersea Warfare Center in New London. It was closed at about the same time as Lowry Air Force Base, and remains undeveloped, enveloped from the beginning in bickering and controversy. Seaside Regional Center in Waterford, occupying one of the most beautiful tracts left undeveloped on Long Island Sound, is still vacant years after the center for the retarded was closed.

Regional assets for regional growth

These tracts are regional assets, but they're handled as local possessions. The opportunities they present for regional growth are being squandered at the hands of local governments with short-term goals.

The corridors of undeveloped land along Interstate 395 north of Norwich and I-95 in North Stonington and Stonington are similar to these. Abandoned airports and old golf courses are all part of the region's inventory of potential sites for corporations looking for good places to locate operations.

Developing these sites cries out for regional management.

Ledyard Mayor Susan Mendenhall offers one way of doing this. She favors a system in which neighboring communities would share in the costs and benefits of developing such assets, regional asset districts. In line with such thinking, Norwich Hospital probably would stand a better chance of sustainable redevelopment under such an arrangement. Connecticut law, while it doesn't provide for regional taxation on this scale, does permit towns to share industrial parks that straddle several neighboring communities. Regional economic development will require further such changes in the law.

The idea of sharing anything elicits anger among most local leaders. But the region ought to be considering Mayor Mendenhall's idea, and any other one that would increase collaboration in economic development. Otherwise, Eastern Connecticut can look forward to little more than more big-box stores, factory outlets and warehouses on its prime land along the highways and more 50-and-older housing developments inland from the highways.

Mr. Erickson's committee needs to do more than assign tasks. It must nudge some entity, whether it's SeCTer, a regional alliance of chambers of commerce, or both, into taking charge of making this plan work. If that doesn't work, maybe Thomas A. Sheridan, president of the Chamber of Commerce of Eastern Connecticut is right: the area needs an entirely new development authority to take charge.

Strong organizations rooted in the business community commonly provide the leadership in economic development in other parts of the country. A league of chambers is in charge in Columbus, Ohio. The business-based Hartford Alliance has become the development arm for 32 cities and towns in the Hartford metropolitan area. The same should happen here.

Economic development is too important to be left to chance, which is what this region does when it surrenders the task to local governments.


THIRD RAIL OF GREENWICH POLITICS RUNS ALONG LONG ISLAND SOUND SHORE.
Bronx residents Melanie Paredes, 15, her friend Kiara Figueroa, 15, and Melanie's sister Rachelle Paredes, 4, take in the scenery on a ride to Island Beach. (Helen Neafsey/Staff photo )

Many residents agitated over new island policy
Greenwich TIME
By Neil Vigdor
Article Launched: 06/16/2008 01:00:00 AM EDT

If only Gerry Christophersen could vote people off the island the way contestants do on the show "Survivor."

Like a number of Greenwichites out at Island Beach yesterday, Christophersen objected to the decision to allow nonresidents on town-owned ferries without the company of a resident for the first time in at least 25 years.

"This is our island," Christophersen said, arguing that ferry privileges should be reserved for taxpayers.

Up until this year, nonresidents were allowed to visit Island Beach and neighboring Great Captains Island, but with one major barrier - they had to find their own transportation there unless they were accompanied by a resident on the ferries.

Fearing another lawsuit like the one that forced the town to open its beaches to outsiders in 2001, officials quietly changed the policy this past off-season. Not since Grenada has there been as bitter a fight over an island, however. On the first weekend of ferry service, the move sparked a broad spectrum of reactions, from outrage and resentment to praise and a sense of resignation.

"I think everybody should stay on their beach," resident Miki Dougherty said. "We pay for the repairs of the beach. Everybody in the world wants to go."

While the senior and her husband were waiting for the ferry, the couple got into a disagreement over the change, however.

Bob Dougherty argued that many people in the area cannot afford to live near the water or reside in land-locked communities.

"They don't have a beach in Danbury," Dougherty said.

"That's too bad," his wife replied.

"Where are you going to? Are you going to go down to Florida?" the husband answered.

According to Liz Fitzroy, the gatekeeper at the Arch Street ferry boat dock, 170 of the 519 people who rode the ferries yesterday as of 3 p.m. were from out of town. A round-trip ferry ticket is $8 per person for nonresident adults, compared with $3 for residents with beach cards. A card costs $27 for the season and is only available to a resident.

Orlando Gonzales, 29, a Peruvian immigrant from Byram, said the old policy made it difficult for nonresidents to enjoy the islands.

"I've got a couple of friends and they asked, 'Can I come?' And I said, 'No.' My friends, they live in Port Chester," Gonzales said.

Out on Island Beach, which is about two miles off shore or about a 15-minute ferry ride, a family from the Bronx waded in the water and snapped photos. In the distance, the Jeffersonian-style Belle Haven manse of hedge fund kingmaker Paul Tudor Jones II rose up along the coastline.

Asked how the island compared with Orchard Beach or City Island in the Bronx, Melanie Paredes, 15, said "Way better."

"And it's clean," added Melanie's friend, Kiara Figueroa, 15. The teens said they learned about the island from one of their fathers, who works in the area.

Near the island's pavilion, it was no day at the beach for longtime resident Cliff Kreuter, however.  Kreuter complained that the island was already crowded when just residents could take the ferry.

"I think it stinks," said Kreuter, 73, who read about the policy change in yesterday's newspaper. "When I saw the headlines this morning, I almost died. I think the residents are getting ripped off."

Linda Fiorito, 45, a lifelong town resident, shook her head in disgust while sitting with her family at the beach.

"I don't think anybody should be able to walk off the street and use our beaches," Fiorito said. "We pay taxes to have our beach."

Fiorito said her objections to allowing outsiders had nothing to do with being elitist or discriminatory, as some critics of the town's old beach policy have alleged.

"It's not that we're trying to be frou-frou Greenwich," Fiorito said.

Aboard the ferry Indian Harbor, some residents expressed a sense of resignation and said the change made sense.

"It was inevitable. I'm a lawyer. It would have been ordered by a court," said Peter Saxon, 67, who was on a Father's Day outing with his family to Island Beach. "I think the seashore should be open to everyone."

By the town quietly changing its policy to allow nonresidents on the ferries, Saxon said officials were taking pre-emptive action to avoid another legal setback.

"I know the town would have been sued and lost. They did the right thing," said Saxon, who does not believe the island will be overrun by outsiders. "I don't think, given this economy, a huge amount of people will take advantage of this."

Fred Chimblo, 56, who was spraying sunscreen on his daughter, Teresa, 8, on the ferry, said everyone should have access to the waterfront.

"They should strike some balance," Chimblo said.

Sun-burnt from three summers as Island Beach's caretaker, Lenny Nielson greeted residents and nonresidents indiscriminately yesterday.

"I'm nice to everybody," Nielson said, cautioning, "If we get too many out-of-towners and they start to get rude, I'll be strict."

On Saturday, the first day of ferry service to the islands, some residents praised the new policy.

"I think it's going to be great. It's so beautiful, why not share it?" said Carol Wright, a longtime Old Greenwich resident riding the ferry to Island Beach with her husband, Wayne.

Sam Fitzgerald, 38, who lives in Norwalk and works in Greenwich as an architect, said he and his family felt at home yesterday as they rode the ferry out to Island Beach.

"I don't feel unwelcome," said Fitzgerald, who learned about the islands from colleagues.

Fitzgerald laughed when told he could have visited the island in the past but had to get there on his own. He owns a boat, but it's not motorized.

"It would take me a while to get out there," Fitzgerald said while sitting next to his son, Ben, 5, on the top deck of the ferry.

The Norwalk resident then offered to reciprocate.

"For the record, if anyone from Greenwich wants to come to Calf Pasture Beach in Norwalk, come on down," Fitzgerald said.
RTM member can't vote: Town rules against Porricellis' voting rights claim
Greenwich TIME  
By Martin B. Cassidy
Published January 8 2007

A town voting eligibility panel denied a local grocer and his wife status as Greenwich voters yesterday, saying that at least part of their house must be in Greenwich to qualify as residents.

The Board for Admission of Electors voted 3-1 to adopt a 10-page decision denying Jerry and Marianne Porricelli voting and residency status, noting that even though their property straddles the Greenwich-Stamford border, their house is entirely in Stamford.

"I think that the decision is incorrect and that I look forward to the appeal," the 58-year-old Jerry Porricelli said yesterday. "Saying something is a certain way doesn't make it so, and I think they are refusing to recognize their erroneous actions."

The Porricellis have argued that before they moved to the 9 Hillcrest Road home, the town's registrars assured them in writing repeatedly that they would remain Greenwich voters. The couple purchased the home in 2000, Porricelli said.

The board consists of Republican First Selectman Jim Lash, Republican Selectman Peter Crumbine, Democratic Selectman Penny Monahan, and Republican Town Clerk Carmella Budkins.

The Porricellis will appeal the decision to the state Election Enforcement Commission, according to Alan Neigher, their Fairfield-based attorney. Further appeal could be made in state Superior Court.

The grocer and his wife filed a complaint with the panel in May after being removed from the voter rolls as part of an annual review by the registrars, part of a standoff that began in 2001.

While the Porricellis' mailing address, mailbox, and part of their driveway are in Greenwich, their entire house is in Stamford, which, under the standard adopted yesterday, disqualifies them for Greenwich residency or services.

With the decision, the town has established a new criteria for residency, saying that at least part of a home must lie within town lines for those who live in it to qualify as residents.

Budkins, the sole vote in favor of granting the Porricellis voter status, said she thought the circumstances of the case made the decision to deny the Porricellis unfair.

"I think the facts dictated they should be allowed to vote in Greenwich as long as they resided at that address," Budkins said.

Town Attorney John Wayne Fox declined comment.

The town's two registrars, Republican Registrar Veronica "Ronnie" Musca and Democratic Registrar Sharon Vecchiola, removed the Porricellis from the voter rolls for the first time in 2001.

But in 2003, the Board for Admission of Electors voted 3-1 to restore the Porricellis' status as Greenwich voters for procedural reasons, finding that the registrars failed to properly notify the family of their removal from the voting rolls.

In 2005, the State Election Enforcement Commission also dismissed a complaint from Vecchiola and Musca that the Porricellis intentionally misled the registrars to believe they lived in Greenwich, but concluded that Greenwich was entitled to establish its own criteria as to whether the Porricellis were town voters.

Because of the registrars' assurances, the town is obligated to grant the Porricellis the right to vote, Neigher said.

"They can't do one thing and say one thing, and then take it back and say you are the one who has to pay for it," Neigher said. The written decision issued yesterday said that assurances given by the registrars do not prevent the registrars from revoking the Porricellis' voter status when it became apparent their home was in Stamford.

Municipalities have wide latitude in deciding what factors to use to determine voting eligibility. Neigher questioned whether the town can apply its new residency standards retroactively to the Porricellis' situation.

Jerry Porricelli, who has lived in the town since 1972, has served two terms on the Representative Town Meeting of Greenwich while living at his current address and owns the Food Mart supermarkets in Cos Cob and Old Greenwich.

"I think the language of the decision speaks for itself," Lash said. "It establishes a standard for what is a resident and denies the appeal."