Editorials

Tolls only on trucking? Pardon our skepticism

When I-95 was opened in the 1950s, tolls were set up at several points, especially around well-traveled areas where traffic was heavier and revenue more available. From Old Saybrook (later Madison) to Bridgeport no less than four tolling stations were erected with more toward New York. The tolls were for the upkeep of the highway.

In the 1980s, the move to get rid of tolls was growing. People in the southern part of the state saw other highways built, including I-91 and I-84, which had no tolls. That was seen as unfair to the commuters in the southern tier of the state. Eventually, a catastrophic accident, resulting the deaths of many, happened at Stratford, and the General Assembly eliminated tolls. But, we were told, federal funds would be further available, making the need for tolls unnecessary.

The General Assembly found other ways to repair and maintain highways, especially after the Mianus Bridge disaster, increasing the gas tax to stockpile funds for roads. But as with many “earmarked” funds in Hartford, they find their way into other programs, while spending increases at three and four times the rate of inflation.

In the last decade, ideas for bringing back tolls have been floated because we need funds for maintenance of bridges and highways. What happened to the “earmarked” funds from the gas tax? We know. The General Assembly spends it. And, it is easier to push through a tax than to exercise fiscal restraint.

Now, Gov. Ned Lamont is pushing through a proposal to erect toll gantries in various parts of the state, but we are told these will be for trucks and commercial vehicles only. Really? This is the “camel’s nose in the tent.”

Let’s take this idea. First off, trucks will be able — to a greater or lesser degree — avoid many of the tolls. Those tolls that are paid will result in increased costs not for the trucking companies per se, but for the consumers who purchase those products transported. The ripple effect will make families and individuals pay more.

We are told by assembly officials, particularly Sen. Martin Looney, majority leader, no one should fear expansion of the tolls to cars. Maybe not now, maybe not in five years, but we know how these things work. Make no mistake, this is the “camel’s nose in the tent.” Getting people used to seeing toll gantries is the first step, along with sequestering those tolls to only commercial vehicles.

As with the gas tax and other levies earmarked for roads and bridges (think driver’s licenses, registration, etc.), the revenue is too enticing for a state that cannot curb its budgetary bloating. Remember when the income tax was passed. The General Assembly passed with it a 2 percent spending cap – one that was ignored and now is all but moot.

We live in a state bleeding residents. Yet, instead of finding ways to curb spending and reorganize governing, we find more ways to raise revenues.

We don’t believe the mandarins of the General Assembly telling us this will not lead to toll expansion. The temptation is too great. They will find a way to expand the tolls, and residents will be forced, again, to foot the bill for the legislature profligacy.

Dems divide nation

By the time this publication hits the streets, the Senate impeachment trial will reach its third day. No one knows where it will be at this point, but we should be very cognizant of how we got here. Simply put, this impeachment – the finding of “high crimes and misdemeanors” by the House of Representatives marks new low point in the political life of this nation. It has accomplished two things: made us more divided than at any time since 1861; and has infected the nation with doubt about its institutions.

On the first point, the argument can be made that we’ve been headed in this direction for decades. The post-war notion by liberal elites that the United States is an illegitimate and dangerous nation has become main-stream. It is taught in our universities and public schools. In the name of diversity, these elites teach of oppression of native peoples and the imposition of slavery. Yet, they never complete the story. They never put a context other than the darkest and most evil on the events of our nationhood.

Slavery is considered the original sin of the nation. That argument can be made. But let us remember that slavery was a worldwide institution, and importation of African slaves was the work of other Africans, Middle Easterns and Europeans. Slaves were usually the vanquished tribesmen, captured or defeated in battle. Many times, whole populations were killed, other times they were put into slavery, and either kept by the victorious warlords or sold to others. Is that context ever taught?

We don’t condone slavery. We fought a civil war because of it. Imprudent attempts after that war to vanquish the South caused many of the subsequent problems. Yet is was the moral code of a Christian nation that brought about the end of slavery. And it took more than a century to bring about the changes that we have today. Yet, there are those who would divide us again by race, ethnicity, social status and sexual orientation, not to mention the faux issue of “gender.”

The second division, distrust in our institutions is a lesson in irony. It was the Democratic National Committee, the Hillary Clinton campaign and an Obama Justice Department that used false information against an American citizen to get into the Trump campaign. It was they, not Trump, that used this information to do what they accuse Trump of doing: sowing discord and distrust.

Irony is lost on the Democrats, but they accuse Trump and his supporters of destroying our political institutions, when it was their actions, their constant investigations, and their disinformation campaign that has brought distrust to many. Russian leader Vladimir Putin could not have done a better job – the job he is accused of – than the Democrats did.

Democrats have also done what Trump himself could not have done: brought many people to his side. Their constant call to “resist,” their incessant insanity, and their desire to impeach from Day One of his administration have turned many people against the party and tacit supporters of the President.

Recent reviews show that more than half the people attending rallies for Trump were either Democrats or Independents. That should scare the hell out of the Dems. But they are too focused on this fool’s errand of impeachment to mollify their rabid base. We hope they enjoy it…while it lasts.

Resident goals listed for the next 12 months

Last week this publication named three “goals” or areas of improvement we would like to see in the next 12 months. Those goals were directed at the city’s political class and administrative officials. This week we seek to take a different tack, and put forward three goals we would like to see city residents and taxpayers take over the next 12 months that would make our city a better place to live and work.

Property upkeep – West Haven has many private residences, but it is also flush with rental properties. From three-story homes to multi-unit apartment houses, the city has many residents who do not own, but rent. Unfortunately, many of these rental properties are absentee ownerships and that creates problems for the rest of us.

Cars parked on front lawns are becoming a big problem, not only along major thoroughfares, but in all parts of the city. Property owners, whether they be agencies or private citizens who live elsewhere, should be strict prohibiting the practice. It speaks ill of the owners and the people who leave the cars. Renting a property doesn’t mean you can trash it. This is a type of blight that brings down property values, and, in turn, brings down the pride people should have in neighborhoods.

Similarly, renters are not exempt from keeping their residences tidy. Putting out trash in front of the property for pick-up much later, mounding refuse along the curb, and not helping with sidewalk maintenance are things that harm the upkeep of the city.

Red, Yellow, Green – This is not only a city problem, but something we have seen all over the state. In the State of Connecticut, yellow means to begin to stop, not gun right on through the intersection. Only those cars unable to stop or already past the stop line may proceed. Over the last several years red lights seem to be thought of as a suggestion, rather than a responsibility.

We have seen drivers slow at a red light, see no one is coming from the other direction and just go right through. This is a problem waiting to become a tragedy. It is a symptom of a bigger illness: the dismissal of authority and authority figures. That is the topic of a future editorial.

Understanding city issues – Despite publications, news reports and social media, there are too many of us who have very little understanding of how things work in the city, and what issues are facing it. Understanding leads to involvement. One of West Haven’s difficulties over the years are too many of us just allow things to go on unchecked or unquestioned. This has allowed factionalism, bossism, and a certain style of elitism to enter into our politics and our way of doing things.

It takes very little effort to get to know and understand why the city is in a financial mess. It takes very little to understand the problems that face the city’s school system over and above funding. It takes little to understand that the district in which you are residing has its own set of difficulties and problems that need input.

We all work, we all have lives, but that doesn’t mean we can drift through and not be informed individuals. This last goal is one that can transform the city

Over the next 12 months we hope to see one or all of these goals attempted by our residents. Implementation will make our city a better place to live and work.

New Year’s wishes – 2020

With the coming of the New Year – and no, the new decade doesn’t start until 2021 – the West Haven Voice has given three major goals it hopes the city and residents accomplish in the next 12 months. In many cases over the years, the goals and accomplishments are recurring. Brevity and expediency – getting things done in a timely manner under this definition – are not the city’s strong suits. As we enter 2020, we hope the coming year finds us fulfilling these goals:

The Haven – This has been a goal for the last several years, and we’re unsure it will be accomplished in 2020. The revelation last year that the Haven Group, the developers overseeing the site, have expected state funding to help the process puts much of the last four years into perspective.

According to the developers, certain promises were given to the group regarding city attempts under the O’Brien administration, to gain state funds to help enable the project. The languishing and decay of the site area then becomes more understood. The developers might have, indeed, sought DOT plan approvals, and other bureaucratic red tape might have been cut through, but the major hold up is the promised funding.

This makes the success – or even the potential completion – of the project murkier. For years we were told permits would be sought, giving the city millions in revenue. When it came down to it, the group was looking for funds.

What we hope for in the coming year is closure one way or the other. Is the Haven going to be completed? If so, when? The promise of the Christmas of 2021 or 2022 seems somewhat remote at this point. We are at a point when a decision one way or the other must be made crystal clear by the developers to the city. Full stop.

Charter Revision – The 18-month review of the charter and proposed revisions were filed last summer. We hope over the first quarter or at most by the end of the second quarter the revisions will be put to the voters. The City Council in its last term completed its work, what needs to be done now is setting a date for the referendum.

Because of the interweaving of the revisions, one to another, that vote has to be an up-or-down one. Some members were hoping for the city to slice and dice the questions into several, making it easier for the voters. However, doing so would play havoc with the whole document. The changes are so interwoven, doing so could potentially set up a chaotic situation with some parts approved and others not – thus making the whole document inoperable.

Return of the Savin Rock Festival – It has been two years since the Rossi administration canceled the Savin Rock Festival because of financial constraints. While we concur the city should not spend money it doesn’t have, we wonder if some other accommodation could have been made.

Regardless, with the city having a better bankbook, the festival’s return was mentioned as a probability this year. We hope so. The taxpayers of West Haven get very little in the way of payback for their levies. This is one of them.

We hope over the next several months a committee will be formed and the three-day celebration be put back on the schedule of events. We also hope that concerts, once a summer-long staple will be increased. Finding sponsors and getting performers for summer music lovers should be another “perk” taxpayers get for their buck.

In the next 12 months, the city can make great strides in becoming an even better place, and solving some of its internal problems. We hope in the first editorial of 2021, we are able to tout those accomplishments.

Impeachment ‘present’ readied by Democrats

As we approach the Christmas holiday, it seems the Democrats in Congress are going to give the American people a gift, but it is not one that seems to be very popular. The oldest political party in the world is going to gift-wrap an impeachment vote on the floor of the US House of Representatives this week. In fact, by the time this editorial is read, it might have been done already. The vote will be the culmination of a three-year temper tantrum by the Dems, who have proven nothing regarding impeachment, but everything regarding their ability – or suitability – to lead the nation.

To call the impeachment proceedings in both the Intelligence Committee of the House, run by California Rep. Adam Schiff, or that in the Judiciary Committee, run by New York Rep. Jerald Nadler, fair, proper and fact-driven, would be a mockery to terms. They have been nothing but a cavalcade of left-wing academics with axes to grind and professional bureaucrats looking to protect their turf. Nothing, absolutely nothing, has been factual.

But in the process we’ve learned something about so-called “progressive” governance, and the media that clamors for it.

As we’ve said before, the basis of Progressivism from the early 20th Century onward has been the distrust of the average voter, and the belief that a benign class of experts and operatives would rule the nation. After all, the rubes that vote can’t be trusted to do the right thing. In his early statements, for example, former NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg has as much as said so, and anyone looking at his record while mayor will see a pattern of top-down governance “for their own good.”

Indeed, the socialist model that so many in the Democratic Party espouse is because the “deplorables” cannot be allowed to rule themselves. It takes a paternalistic group of politicians to show them the way. This will be done by taxation of things they shouldn’t have, control of health care, and divvying out “free stuff” in the form of education, child care, etc. No, Miss Ocasio-Cortez, these are not public goods.

The media, meanwhile, has shown that it has ceased to “speak truth to power” and did it long before Donald J. Trump was elected. We must remind our readers that for eight years anything negative about Barack Hussein Obama was as radioactive to the media as saying anything nice about Trump is now. Despite the obvious use of governmental authority against its enemies, incompetence in world affairs and wasting the government’s treasury, nothing got past the censors in the media.

The mainstream media is a propaganda arm of the Democratic Party because they espouse the same ideologies, attended the same schools, and live in the same neighborhoods.

The impeachment has set in aspic the facts that corruption in the Democratic Party, the federal bureaucracy and the media is working against the needs and desires of the electorate. Trump stands in the way of these actors to remake the nation, and set it into the machinery of a globalist, socialist solar system.

We are eerily reminded of the words of George H.W. Bush, a globalist, following the first Iraq War concerning the emergence of a “new world order.” That is, in fact, what we are seeing today unfold before our eyes.

The impeachment is part of that lurch to the left.

New term, same issues

As of noon Sunday, the city administration took its oath of office and begins the work of governing this city of more than 53,000 over the next two years. Mayor Nancy Rossi begins her second term in office, and a new City Council begins its own term.

This year, for the first time in recent memory, the city’s minority Republican Party, will have two members on the 13-member council. This is a major improvement over the past two decades, and allows debate of minority-generated issues to be discussed by the legislative panel.

With the new term, the administration must now formulate concrete programs to combat the city’s many issues. We, for our part, have a few hopes for the coming term, and hope they correspond with the desires and aspirations of the new administration:

Taxes, spending and staffing – When Mayor Rossi came into office, she entered with an admitted handicap. Unknown to her – or anyone except the former administration – the state had empaneled a review board to oversee city finances. The use of a bonding ordinance to cover a $17 million deficit triggered the action under what was then new legislation. Over the last two years, Rossi and the Municipal Accountability Review Board (MARB) have navigated some treacherous waters with not a little controversy.

As far as taxes are concerned, the die is cast. The MARB has dictated that taxes must go up over the term of the five-year plan to 40 mills. Spending is low, and has been cut by the administration to correspond with MARB’s desires. It is in the matter of staffing that we have, many times, asked for study.

The city is in need of a complete audit of staffing and needs. Personnel are the largest line item in the budget. The city should have a study on its needs, and the number of people working for it. Some of this has taken place via necessity with budget cuts, but this has been more of an activity of necessity, rather than a willful understanding of where personnel are needed. We hope to see something of this nature in the next two years.

Blight – The city has become, for better or worse, one of absentee ownership. This has led to a careless attitude on the parts of many property owners when it comes to upkeep. Meanwhile, on those properties owned by residents, we have seen deterioration, parking of autos on lawns, and other such nuisances. We hope in the next two years a comprehensive plan is laid out to combat this matter.

Redevelopment/Economic Development – During the campaign this issue came up as a matter of course, and, as a matter of course, generalities were used. Over the next two years we hope a plan of development can be issued by the city that will address several key areas: Allingtown and its continued upgrade, the Center and the use of empty properties or storefronts, and the shore (particularly Beach Street), where empty properties are hurting neighborhoods.

The Haven is a matter that, if it is ever begun and finished, would serve as an anchor for future actions, but outside that area of the city, more must be done. To say that areas of town are languishing is to understate the case. We hope that some type of coalition including the city, the business community, and representatives of the three major sections of town can work together to get some type of plan that will attempt to move the city forward.

Thanksgiving 2019

When Puritans left England in May of 1620, they were unsure what lay ahead for them, knowing they had to endure months at sea making the crossing. They were looking to create a “Shining City on a Hill” filled with believers in the Calvinist Christianity they had come to confess. They hoped when they landed in the New World, they would be able to create the type of civil and religious atmosphere that would make them prosper and, as was the case for all Puritans, get a sign they were, indeed, the elect.

Their brand of Calvinism was “covenant” centered. Throughout the Old Testament, God had made a covenant with men. This “Covenant Theology” prompted them to bind themselves into a civil body under a covenant. That document, signed before they landed to form the Plymouth Colony, was given the name, “The Mayflower Compact.”

Under this document, the first colony in Massachusetts Bay was established, and was to be the prototype of other covenants and constitutions that were to follow.

Later, decimated by exposure and famine, many of the signers never made it through the first winter. Those that did declared a day of Thanksgiving, which served as the point of origination for the New England holiday that was to follow well beyond 1620, into the 19th Century.

On this Thanksgiving Day, 2015, we present the Mayflower Compact and list its signers.

~~~

IN THE NAME OF GOD, AMEN. We, whose names are underwritten, the Loyal Subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James, by the Grace of God, of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, &c. Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith, and the Honour of our King and Country, a Voyage to plant the first Colony in the northern Parts of Virginia; Do by these Presents, solemnly and mutually, in the Presence of God and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil Body Politick, for our better Ordering and Preservation, and Furtherance of the Ends aforesaid: And by Virtue hereof do enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal Laws, Ordinances, Acts, Constitutions, and Officers, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general Good of the Colony; unto which we promise all due Submission and Obedience. 

IN WITNESS whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape-Cod the eleventh of November, in the Reign of our Sovereign Lord King James, of England, France, and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth, Anno Domini; 1620.

Mr. John Carver,

Mr. William Bradford,

Mr Edward Winslow,

Mr. William Brewster.

Isaac Allerton,

Myles Standish,

John Alden,

John Turner,

Francis Eaton,

James Chilton,

John Craxton,

John Billington,

Joses Fletcher,

John Goodman,

Mr. Samuel Fuller,

Mr. Christopher Martin,

Mr. William Mullins,

Mr. William White,

Mr. Richard Warren,

John Howland,

Mr. Steven Hopkins,

Digery Priest,

Thomas Williams,

Gilbert Winslow,

Edmund Margesson,

Peter Brown,

Richard Britteridge

George Soule,

Edward Tilly,

John Tilly, 

Francis Cooke, 

Thomas Rogers, 

Thomas Tinker, 

John Ridgdale 

Edward Fuller, 

Richard Clark, 

Richard Gardiner, 

Mr. John Allerton, 

Thomas English, 

Edward Doten, 

Edward Liester.

Impeachment charade

A Latin term needed for bribery is ditched for the term “bribery.” An accuser is “protected” by a Congressional resolution crafted specifically to hide the truth. The Speaker of the House now says that the accused must prove himself innocent. This is the topsy-turvy spectacle that has become impeachment. And, make no mistake, it was planned this way.

For more than three years – since Election Night, 2016 – impeachment has been talked about by Democrats who have never recovered from the shock of Hillary Clinton’s defeat. For three years they have put the nation, and its people, through the Hell of investigations. In all situations, whether it was Russia, Russia, Russia, or now Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine, we are told to believe them rather than our lying eyes.

Russia was used to get dirt not on Hillary Clinton, but on Donald Trump. It is without doubt that the bureaucracy, particularly the intelligence agencies and the FBI, were working with the Democrats in trying to foil Trump’s election, and then his administration. These are facts, not conspiracy theories. The Democratic Party, its members and the imbedded bureaucracy, now called the “Deep State,” worked in concert. They are working in concert now.

This Ukraine controversy would be laughable, but we’re dealing with actors who would rather tear the country apart than lose position and power. The impeachment “inquiry” is nothing more than an orchestrated Stalinesque show trial, used to mollify the base of the Democratic Party. It is fitting. The party is becoming less “democratic” and more “authoritarian.” It seeks to destroy those institutions and traditions that have made this nation great.

The politics of the proceedings is no more evident than the reports this past weekend that the Latin term, quid pro quo, was too exoteric for the average American, so “bribery,” is now the word being bandied about – except as legal analyst Greg Jarrett has pointed out, there is no bribery without a quid pro quo. The buzzword was changed via focus groups!! What more need do we have to see this has never been an inquiry, but a proceeding to write articles of impeachment.

Further, we cannot know the person who began this charade because it would undermine the predicate. There is sufficient evidence that a CIA operative originated the complaint and he did it with the aid of Rep. Adam Shiff’s office. Shiff is the new Joe McCarthy, and has shown, to quote Joseph Welch, he has “no decency.”

The rules of the “inquiry” were crafted so the name of the agent, erroneously called a “whistleblower,” cannot be said during the proceedings, nor can anything linking him to the complaint be used. Indeed, we are told his testimony is not needed at all. So, the complaint that started this proceeding is no longer part of it. Fancy that.

Then we have the Speaker of the House, the nation’s Theologian-in-chief, Nancy Pelosi, who when she isn’t praying for the nation, is telling the President if he has a way to prove his innocence he should present it. So the presumption of innocence is scuttled.

This is purely a political exercise. Rep. Al Green of Texas said so. Not to impeach Mr. Trump means he will be re-elected. Then, that perpetual indictment to American education, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said that the impeachment is necessary to prevent a “catastrophe” for her party in 2020.

This entire charade is an embarrassment to the nation and should be a permanent mark against the Democratic Party and its leaders. The only impeachment article that need be written is: Donald Trump won in 2016.

Rossi has her mandate

When it was all over Nov. 5, the majority of the voters who came out determined “stay the course” was the best path for the city’s future. By a whopping 60 percent, the voters gave Mayor Nancy Rossi a second term, and with it a mandate to keep on the path set out two years ago.

Rossi now has the voters’ imprimatur to continue the cost-cutting, budget-trimming program that she ran on in 2017, and continued in the past campaign. But besides that, the voters have also, by extension, given her administration and the Municipal Accountability Review Board a thumbs-up to the five-year plan.

Realistically, the voters had no way of reversing that plan, but the administration’s cooperation with the MARB was an issue in the last campaign. Voters seemed to understand the necessity for the drastic measures, and, while they might not like it, they gave approval to the incremental mill-rate increases that come with the five-year plan. In some sense, that takes that issue off the table for the present time, allowing the Rossi administration some freedom to implement its austerity program.

While Michele Gregorio ran one of the best GOP campaigns in recent memory, history was on the side of Rossi. One-term mayors have only been turned out of office twice in the city’s short history: William Heffernan and Clemente Evangeliste, Democrat and Republican, respectively.

Heffernan was caught up in the sometimes Byzantine machinations of West Haven politics, and was supplanted by Robert Johnson, who had four terms. Evangeliste took the city by claiming to be a businessman, and oversaw a budget that put the city into the red by $17 million.

Rossi, while she lamented the oversight of the MARB, had, it must be admitted, political cover because of the review board. While much of what happened in the city’s budgetary crafting came from MARB, the practical effects, the taxes and cost-cuts, were put all at the state panel’s doorstep.

Mrs. Rossi now has two years to implement her vision for the future of the city, while doing so with the restrictions MARB has imposed. The voters gave her that opportunity. We wait to see what the future brings.

GOP: grasp opportunity

Meanwhile, the city’s GOP should take the opportunity of polling its best numbers in recent memory as a sign there is interest in a two-party system in West Haven. Michele Gregorio polled more than 4,000 votes, and in a city where the number of Democrats to Republicans is about 6:1, that is worth noting.

In fact, Barry L. Cohen won the 10th District seat as a Republican, giving the incoming City Council not only its minority seat as mandated under the charter, but another voice. For the first time in almost 30 years a motion made by a Republican can have a second, and discussion actually take place. With only one minority member in that time, many an issue fell for lack of a second.

But, the possibility of a party resurgence did not come without some cost. Reports talk of a split in the small ranks of the GOP hampered the campaign.

That is not a good sign among some encouraging ones. The Republican Party must seize the opportunity to become relevant again. It must do so with one voice, and with strong leadership. Whatever the split in the ranks, it is past time for the city’s minority party to get back into the mix and become a voice in city affairs.