Council mtg 3/13
While the meeting took a while, it did go more smoothly than I had expected.
The main discussion item was Elderly Tax Relief. It's late and I need to get to bed, but the highlights of this were three votes:
1) Increase the tax credits - I think the credits are good tax policy. So I supported this while pointing out that I think our legislature has failed us. They have failed to provide meaningful or "comprehensive" property tax reform, despite my continued calls for reform with suggestions that I consider true reform. Furthermore, I believe we could use the credits as a "tax freeze." (passed 8-1, Visconti opposed)
2) Lien on the tax freeze - I think Elizabeth Esty stole the show here. The room burst into applause when she announced her support of removing the lien. For me, while I think the "tax freeze" is not good tax policy, I don't see the point in having a lien on a freeze. It defeated the whole purpose, so I voted to remove the lien from the freeze. (passed 8-1, Visconti opposed)
3) Tax freeze - There are too many uncertainties with the freeze. I gave one example, but there are many. For such reasons, I believe the tax freeze is not good tax policy. And since we could use the credits to get to the same end as the tax freeze, I didn't support the freeze. (passed 7-2, Visconti & White opposed)
Finally on ETR, I voiced my disappointment of the inability of the town to offer a referendum on such a significant issue. So I suggested that we should consider revising the charter. It's been ten to twelve years and I think it would be worthwhile to consider it for a variety of reasons. This though is nothing new for me. I made this same suggestion several months ago here on the blog. (As well, at the end of the meeting, Ray Squire suggested the Council consider revising the charter. So I know there are others who support the idea of a charter revision.)
(See WRA, by Lauresha Xhihani)
Fire house - I don't recall this vote, but I'm guessing it was not unanimous with David Schrumm voting against. Is that correct?
Waiver of bid for removal of bubble - Last year I suggested turning the pool into a summer facility because it was too much of a drain on taxpayers. I wouldn't necessarily mind spending some money on the pool, but the current subsidy is too high. So I voted against this. (passed 8-1, White opposed)
The Government Access Channel report - This got quite a bit of discussion. The questions revolved around the appropriateness of including some "quasi-governmental" tv show. I didn't say anything, but since C-Span covers "The Road to the White House" and CT-N covers the federal and statewide office elections, I think our government channel should also allow political shows, including not only League of Women Voters forums, but also straightup political shows. Why not? You're voting. You should know as much as possible about the candidates. Not to mention... by allowing only government shows on Channel 14, a certain benefit accrues to incumbents. And while there is no way to eliminate that, I think allowing pure political shows would be a way to combat the inherent benefits of incumbency. I could go on and on about this. I really don't think there's any right or wrong answer though. Reserving government tv to government forums does make sense.
During the Town Manager's report, we got an update on the pool consultant. He's expecting to get the report within a few weeks.
And I think that's about it.
Tim White
Town Council, 4th District
19 comments:
Good meeting Tim. I thought that Esty did a good job with the ETR program. She knew her stuff. I hope that the budget goes well.
I was suprised that the fire house came in so under plan.
Tim, your comments were confusing but Im glad you voted against the freeze. It will never be enough.
CAVE men voted with the democrats. The Republican party is useless.
It appeared that the Republicans went against what they believe just to try and win the election in the fall. If they wanted to do more for the seniors they had their chances and never did anything. These are not good guys.
Schrumm's comments about the medical hardship waiver and the seniors trying to use the systems-that was an all time low for him. God will this man ever learn??!
the big story was the shock and awe on the face of Dave Orsini and the seniors when Esty announcement about no lien. I guess the Republicans will have to run on their own sorry record instead of false charges against the Dems My predictions that the Rep will be lucky to get minority repersentation on the council this fall.
Since you people insist on putting a spin on things, I guess I'll add my two cents worth.
The way I see it the dems originally presented the ETR with a "lien" clause. The "R's" clearly didn't agree with the lien and it was not until the dems got so much negative feedback from the elderly citizens themselves that they decided they'd better remove the lien clause. If people hadn't made such a fuss, I'm sure they would have kept it in.
Also you should note that Esty and other dems, as they spoke about the ETR program, repeatedly said that they were making increases to the credits on an "already excellent ETR program - one of which has been the best around compared to other towns." An already excellent program - we can thank the "R's" for making it that way. Each year it's looked at and the dem's had to do something. And it was pointed out that what they (the dems) did as far as increases to credits was not the same as what they promised back in 05 - of course many of us already know that. So the dems actually fell short of what they said they'd do.
And how about Visconti? Seems she wasn't in favor of any increases. Shame on her. I guess she should pack her bags now.
As far as Mr. Schrumm pointing out the possible flaw with the medical hardship clause - it's exactly that - a flaw. He clearly was NOT saying that any seniors would try scamming anyone. At least I know he thoroughly reviews things, which is something I wish all councilors would do.
Dave were are not dumb just sign your posts. Come on! And yes, last night was even a new low for you.
4:37 "Dave were are not dumb?"
Are you sure about that?
Guess again - not Dave
4:22
Let's recap:
1. Dems make big ETR promises, fail to deliver.
2. Seniors gather 3,000+ signatures after lame '06 effort by Dem leadership.
3. Rep's propose study group.
4. Dem's feel pressure, offer more credits and phony freeze program.
5. Seniors and Rep's make clear that tax freeze badly flawed.
6. Dem's feel pressure again, agree to freeze.
7. Dem's want credit for all their hard work and generosity.
You can't take credit - you have to be given credit. Seniors have good memories.
I hope I live long enough to get any tax relief here in the state of CT.
I suppose the next step will be the Adinolfi plan to give the wealthy (yes, as they most have no mortgage and no kids at home) elderly a tax break too
Dems 12088467784848
Republicans 0
Check the scoreboard sonny the game is being dominated by the Dems
Tim - Why did the Republicans not do anything with the ETR program when they were in control?
What did the republicans do when they had control for this program? Did they do anything? Why is it so important to them now? Very strange. You would think if it was so important to them they would have done an overhall of the program, but I don't think they did.
Why did they not do more? I am sure it was because the Davids wanted a zero education budget and while you are doing that you can't expand ETR can you? I hope the senior realize that the Republicans are not their frineds just a group that they are using in a political year.
Last year the Republicans asked for an increase in the upper income brackets. The Democrats voted against it with Visconti stating "she couldn't approve the expenditure because she didn't know where the money would come from". The total for this was $6,400. $6,400 in a budget of almost $90M is petty cash. It's not a bad trait for an elected official to be fiscally responsible but Viconti is only responsible when it comes to appropriating money to help our seniors. She has no problem approving spending for anything else that comes up. Councilmen are elected to represent all their constituents and I don't think she has gotten that message (maybe in November she will).
No your thinking is this=IF you agree with me you are a good rep. If you dont you are not/ Just admit it old timer=You are bitter and angry and you are a CAVE man
THe problem with this group of republicans is there are no leaders. If your come back for doing nothing for this program in the past is to say last year we wanted to increase the upper income bracket's credit is really a joke. Your are basically saying we did nothing, but the Dems should have done more. Very weak, but why expect more? Great leadership skills.
Tim, all I've been reading is the Dems did this and Rep did that. For the sake of argument can you please find out what increases were made under the two parties. I'm sure there have been increases under both.
Post a Comment