From Redding to Waterbury
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Fri, 03/27/2009 - 18:39It is a short ride from Redding to Waterbury, only about thirty miles, but it can be an interesting trip. You head out of a gated community on Mark Twain Lane and turn on to Diamond Hill Road. It is the beautiful bucolic Connecticut. You take Green Pasture Road and eventually end up on Church Hill Road before heading north on Poverty Hollow Road. You pass between Huntington State Park and Palestine. After Sugar Hill and a few more turns you are on I-84 heading into Waterbury.
Yet in many ways, these two municipalities are worlds apart. Jake DeSantis lives in Redding. Until recently, he was an Executive Vice President at AIG Financial Products. Yet with all the complaints about taxpayer money going to AIG Executives, Mr. DeSantis resigned from AIG and promised to give the after tax value of $742,000 of the bonus he received to charity, and complained about people being upset about the AIG Executives.
Back in the 06702 zipcode of Waterbury, the median household income is $11,913. In other words, this bonus that Mr. DeSantis can afford to give away, after quitting his job is equivalent to the median household income of over sixty-two households in Waterbury. Of course that’s not completely fair. That is comparing his after tax dollars with Waterbury residents’ pretax dollars. If you compare the pre-tax dollars to pre-tax dollars, the ratio is even more striking.
With the hundreds of homes in foreclosure in Waterbury, I suspect there aren’t many people that could afford to quit their jobs. Perhaps Mr. DeSantis can use some of his free time and volunteer at the St. Vincent DePaul Society Soup Kitchen or homeless shelter.
#followfriday – CT News Edition
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Fri, 03/27/2009 - 09:46@hartfordcourant @wherewelive @connpost @rep_am @CTNewsJunkie @hrtfordadvocate @NwHavenAdvocate @FairfieldWeekly
In last week’s #followfriday, I highlighted some of my friends from Connecticut that are on Twitter. This week, @joeCascio and @keachymama are doing CT Editions of #followfriday, so I decided to stay with it.
My list this week is of Connecticut media outlets on Twitter. I hope the list is obvious to everyone. The Hartford Courant. WNPR’s show, “Where We Live”. The Connecticut Post. The Waterbury Republican American, the great online site covering the State Capital, CTNewsJunkie, and the weekly entertainment alternatives the Hartford Advocate, the New Haven Advocate and the Fairfield Weekly.
Each of these are worth a follow to get information about what is happening in our state.
Am I missing any? Who else do you follow?
A Lenten Political Reflection
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Thu, 03/26/2009 - 13:37On Friday morning, Timothy Kane, a sixth grade math teacher at Pulaski Middle School in New Britain will be arraigned in Hartford Superior Court for second-degree harassment after he allegedly sent “an email containing an alarming statement” to State Senator Andrew McDonald and State Representative Michael Lawlor.
It appears that all of this comes from a long battle over what role lay people should have in the financial affairs of their churches. As best as I can tell, a year or two ago, Catholic Activist Tom Gallagher asked State Rep. Claudia “Dolly” Powers, a Republican from Greenwich to submit legislation to make it easier for lay people to hold Priests and other church officials accountable. Rep. Powers submitted the legislation on behalf of her constituent. The bill did not go very far and he Catholic Church did not go after Rep. Powers.
Rep. Powers has retired. This year, when Mr. Gallagher managed to get it resubmitted by State Sen. Andrew McDonald, it became a whole different matter. Sen. McDonald is co-chair of the Judiciary committee and bills submitted by a committee co-chair tend to get a lot more attention. In addition “pro-family” Catholic Activists appear to dislike Sen. McDonald and Rep. Lawlor for their support of same-sex marriage.
The Family Institute of Connecticut, which has fought long and hard against same-sex marriage is using the introduction of what they call “the bishop removal bill” to call for the removal of Sen. McDonald and Rep. Lawlor from their roles as co-chairs of the judiciary committee.
While I believe this is about as warranted as their call for a Connecticut Constitutional Convention, and I hope they have as much luck calling for Sen. McDonald and Rep Lawlor’s removal as they did calling for a Constitutional Convention, I do commend them for attempting to approach their grievances through legal channels. We need to voice our grievances through legal channels, and we need to voice them with civility.
Calling SB 1098 “the bishop removal bill” misrepresents what the bill is about. It is needlessly inflammatory and the Family Institute should be ashamed of themselves.
All of this comes back to some important underlying questions. What type of country do we want to live in? I value basic civility, willingness to help one another, and accountability. These are things that have helped make our country strong. I believe that separation of Church and State should not be used to protect Priests or others engaged in criminal activity, such as embezzling church funds, and that we need to find ways to make it easier for members of a Parish find out the true status of their churches finances.
How do we do that? We need to have honest discussions about the issues that SB 1098 raises and not try to deflect the discussion by conflating it with culture war issues like same-sex marriage. We don’t do it by inflaming the discussion or sending threatening emails.
For those seeking to observe a Holy Lent, take a few moments to think about your beliefs. If you have acted in ways that don’t glorify God as part of your political activism, ask God’s forgiveness. Then, pray for those who are persecuted for doing their job, for doing their best effort to bring civility and accountability to our state, including Sen. McDonald and Rep. Lawlor. You might even want to offer thanksgiving for people like Sen. McDonald and Rep. Lawlor and others who fight for civility and accountability in our state.
What Next for the Woodbridge Country Club?
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Wed, 03/25/2009 - 21:13Woodbridge – An estimated 300 citizens of the Town of Woodbridge crowded into the Center Gym to hear the Board of Selectman discuss the financial status of the Woodbridge Country Club and the options available to the town. This was followed by a period of public comment.
Depending on your perspective, it is the classic story of a wealthy community bailing out a failing country club with overtones of a ‘not in my back yard’ philosophy or it is the classic story of concerned citizens gathering to protect the community and its open space from the efforts of a greedy developer.
Depending on your perspective, it was a discussion about a town increasing its debt load during a financial crisis or about a town acting to preserve the character of the town, thereby protecting property values and protecting against an increase in taxes that the developments increased need of services would cost.
Yet in the end, what it really boiled down to was the question of whether or not the town should take an active role in determining what happens to the largest land parcel in town.
For now, the town seems unified. The selectmen voted unanimously to authorize the town to enter into negotiations with the Woodbridge Country Club to explore options for the parcel that will be in the best interest of all the citizens of Woodbridge.
On Sunday, the Woodbridge Country Club will gather to consider the proposals of the town, of the developer, and of anyone else that chooses to make a proposal. The members of the Woodbridge Country Club should be heartened to know that the people of Woodbridge feel strongly about what happens to the land. The developer also needs to carefully consider the showing, realizing that many of these 300 citizens are likely to fight every step of his efforts to develop the land.
What the Country Club will do, what the developer will do, what will happen in the courts, and what will happen moving forward remains very up in the air, and based on the discussions of small groups of people after the public comment section of the meeting, there is not consensus about what should be done with the land.
All the more reason for the town to enter into the discussion and seek a more deliberative process about what should happen with the land.
