Increasing the use of solar energy in Cheshire (1 of 3)

The State of Connecticut has major electricity difficulties in our future.  It's true that CT produces (~33million MWh) more electricity than we consume (~30million MWh) annually, but peaking issues complicate the matter.  In other words, we consume a lot more energy on July afternoons than we consume at 3am in mid-May.

Peaking issues lead to our current transmission need for importing electricity from other places, such as Quebec's hydro power, via the Northern Pass that cuts south through New Hampshire and Massachusetts.  Obviously, this leads to environmental concerns.  But the transmission issues are not the only delivery problem we face.

We have delivery service problems with both transmission and distribution.  While transmission services bring electricity across great distances at high voltage, distribution services bring low voltage electricity from the "step down" transformers to your house.  And it's with the power lines on your street that we face another problem:  old infrastructure.

So our electricity problems face both transmission and distribution issues, along with other issues, such as the emissions from fossil fuels plants.  One way to address these issues is to generate electricity in CT.

Solar photovoltaic arrays (PV) are one way to do this.  Although current PV technology is not a panacea, it would mitigate the problems we face in the Constitution State.  That's why we're trying to take action in Cheshire.

The idea started with the state program Solarize CT.  I'll explain that in an upcoming post, but I need to sign off for the night.

Tim White

Sequester closure date for Connecticut airports

For all the bluster over the dire consequences of sequestration, the only thing that's caught my attention has been airport closings.  I've used Tweed New Haven in the past and could use it again.  But when March 1st came and went and nothing changed, I finished my yawn... having had my views of government officials reinforced.  (That is, they knowingly lie or are too clueless to ask the right questions and get real answers.)

Anyway, for the Nutmeggers who are interested in when the sequestration is supposed to impact CT airports, I found the airport closing list here.  CTs airports are listed as follows:

Stratford (BDR) -- 5 May 2013
Danbury (DXR) -- 5 May 2013
Groton (GON) -- 21 April 2013
Hartford (HFD) -- 5 May 2013
New Haven (HVN) -- 5 May 2013
Oxford (OXC) -- 5 May 2013

Just outside of CTs borders is Westchester Airport.  I don't see it on the closure list.  As well, news reports seem to say that Hartford's Bradley (BDL) isn't impacted.  And I'm guessing that small airports, such as Meriden, don't have towers?  Regardless, I was curious about Tweed.  And I got my answer:  May 5th is the targeted date for closure.

Tim White

Summer-only pool?

At the February Council meeting I voiced my opposition to spending more money to fix the bubble damage that occurred during Nemo.  I've been tired of the pool spending for years... as I think a majority of town residents have been too.  But for years the Council had supported the never-ending spending that had been predicated on the 1996 fallacy that the pool would be:

1) open all year; and

2) self-supporting.

But is the never-ending supporting coming to an end?

Is the Town Council's view of the "need" for a year-round pool -- broken from the attached promise of self-sufficiency -- moving?

The MRJ is reporting on that two Council members, Tom Ruocco and David Schrumm, are also voicing spending concerns.  And while Tom has fought the unnecessary pool spending for years, David's shift is significant in the movement toward ending the wasteful pool spending.  While there have been many such pool spending votes, one of the more memorable that comes to mind is the $20,000 that got thrown away on a pool consultant.

The MRJs Eve Britton reports:

Town Council Budget Committee Chairman David Schrumm agreed that a permanent solution has to be found, and if it can’t be, making it a summer-only pool is the only viable option.

If David is serious about moving beyond the bubble, then the Council may finally be moving toward a real solution -- summer only.  As a member of the Council I voted to send the failed $7,000,000 permanent structure to the voters for consideration.  We've already gone down the path of a permanent structure and the voters rejected it 61% to 39%.  And considering the costs involved, I find it hard to believe a not-for-profit will want to take on the pool.

The logical option is summer-only.  Particularly if the cost to fix the bubble -- less insurance reimbursements -- is significant, I hope the Council seriously considers moving to a summer-only pool.

Tim White

Cheshire's census data: mapping income

While the US Constitution calls for an actual enumeration of Americans, the enumeration (basically the US Census) no longer includes income data.  It's now conducted via the American Community Survey.

If you're interested in learning more about Cheshire's income, you can click here.  It's a map that shows Cheshire as five neighborhoods:  northeast, northwest, southeast, southwest & east (central).  The "neighborhoods" generally mirror Cheshire's four Council districts and have median household incomes as follows:

Northeast:  $124,000

Northwest:  $112,000

Southeast:  $98,000

Southwest:  $112,000

East (central):  $99,000

So I guess I live in Cheshire's "poor neighborhood."  j/k.  There certainly are some people in need, but I don't think any 20% segment of Cheshire can be considered poor.

Tim White

Cheshire election history (1979-2012): CEO turnout

In the continuing series on Cheshire's election history, here you can see three data points for Cheshire's elections for POTUS:

1 - voter registration

2 - voter turnout (total # of voters who cast a ballot); and

3 - votes for President (total # of voters who cast a ballot for President.



Here are the equivalent data for Gubernatorial races:



Due to my inability to manipulate excel, I separated the two trends into two different graphs. Furthermore, I matched the voter registrations to the year of the election. As a result, the voter registration trends for POTUS and Governor are different.

And here's the graph that I thought may be of most interest to you, % turnout by year. Again though, I faced system constraints with excel. So I coupled two successive elections together for each point on the horizontal axis. Anyway, you can see here that about 80% to 90% of Cheshire voters typically turnout for a Presidential election... while 60% to 70% turnout for Gubernatorial elections.



And of course, you can find my source data here.

Tim White

CCM vote: Forget R vs. D, think Authoritarians vs. Populists

As I noted in a recent post, some Council members were surprised by -- and concerned about -- a recent TM vote at a CCM meeting. And the concern did not fall along party lines.

Council members David Schrumm (R) and Peter Talbot (D) were quite comfortable with the TMs vote. Some Council members -- including Patti Flynn Harris (D), Tom Ruocco (R), Jimmy Sima (R) and Chairman Tim Slocum (R) -- were not happy with the TMs vote because he spoke for the Council without ever having received any Council guidance. One Council member, Mike Ecke (D), saw "both sides" of the issue.

This non-party line view reminded me of a little discussed concern that was addressed in 1824 by Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Henry Lee:

Men by their constitutions are naturally divided into two parties:

1. Those that fear and distrust people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the hands of the higher classes.

2. Those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most honest and safe, although not the most wise depository of the public interests. In every country these two parties exist; and in every one where they are free to think, speak, and write, they will declare themselves.

Far too often the public discourse focuses on Republicans vs. Democrats. But much of the time, I feel that the less discussed issue -- authoritarianism vs. populism or aristocrats vs. republicans / democrats -- is the more important issue.

In this situation of the TMs vote, it seems likely to me that you have a possible window into the authoritarian / populist tendencies of Council members.

And as Jefferson wrote that I would... I declare myself as an aspirant for belonging to the second group.

Tim White

Cheshire election history (1979-2012): The power of incumbency

From 1979 to 2012, we've had 17 local elections.  We've also had four Council districts (1st District, 2nd District, 3rd District, and 4th District) since Cheshire got a Charter with elections beginning in November 1971.  So since 1979, we've had 68 Council district elections.

Of those 68 elections, only four elections have seen elected incumbents defeated:

1991 -- 3rd District, George Bowman (D) defeated Gil Leslie (R)

1995 -- 2nd District, Tom Stretton (D) defeated John Perotti (R)

2003 -- 4th District, Tim White (R) defeated Lynn Salzer (D)

2009 -- 3rd District, Andy Falvey (R) defeated Laura Dicaprio (D)

There have been a number of appointed incumbents defeated at the polls.  But my point here is about the power of incumbency for elected Council members.

So only four times in 68 elections* have elected incumbents lost reelection.  Elected incumbents normally win.  And two times, elected incumbents were not even challenged:

2001 -- 1st District, Sheldon Dill (R)

2011 -- 1st District, David Schrumm (R)

Before I began this study of Cheshire's election history, I knew that the federal and state levels reelected incumbents about 95% of the time.  Now we know that the same holds true for local elections in the Council districts.

And one last tidbit... of the four challengers who won, three of them won on their first time out.  Who was the stupid one who thought he could beat the odds even after losing once?  Me!  :)

Tim White

* Of the 68 elections, I'm not really certain that it was all elected incumbents who ran in the 1979 contest.  And I did find the 1971 to 1977 election records in the Town Clerk's Office, but they're not a high priority for me.  So that data collection will wait.