New Haven Independent

Posted by: Marie | September 24, 2008 6:32 PM

Lonnie Reed is not becomniing forthcoming on her voting record including when there were seven RTM abstentions on granite gate. Was she one? Reed fails to mention how she climbed to become "nominated" through Branford's Town Democratic Committee. Penny Bellamy and Daros control the party's nomination process through James Pertito. She votes for $90,000 in additional pay town employees including from stony creek. This is the time with financial turmoil, people suffering to pay their bills, high heating oil. Her record is a just another political elitist liberal. Then she has people write letters in the papers. Marcia forgets to mention this "meeting" is a political stunt. Why was this "meeting" held just several weeks before the "election", when she has no opponent because of throwing out a fine person in Peter Panaroni, Jr. but she has Daros make an announcement four months ago in his state of the town address? Ask daros if daros used Perito's services while daros was 1st selectmen and bellamy was town attorney? About time people to understand reed

Posted by: Gary Doyens | September 24, 2008 10:33 PM

This is a stunt. What fresh ideas are they talking about? A local income tax? That has chin whiskers on it and stinks like three week old milk. The local income tax plan, which Mayor DeStefano supports, will actually yield higher tax payments than property taxes do. And Myers and Sharkey both fought vehemently against reducing both the double taxation on a gallon of gas, as well as a reduction in the car tax. This whole confab is about how to generate more dollars for the towns and cities. Taxpayers should be very afraid of anybody with their hands on any of these ideas.

Secondly, perhaps these good folks could start including how to limit the runaway spending that has lead to the current fiscal crisis. Branford condemns land it doesn't need for a park it won't use or mantain well..and New Haven launches programs for which it has no money; hires people they can't afford, agree to union contracts with sweetheart components and build schools that with other uncontrolled spending, results in nearly $750 million in debt. No wonder our property tax increase this year is nearly 15%.

What we need are REAL leaders. Where are they?

Posted by: Pam | September 25, 2008 1:32 PM

Gary is correct. Reed's "meeting" was only a timed political charade by a elitist liberal several weeks before the election. I attended and left. She refuses to disclose her voting record.

Posted by: Marty | September 25, 2008 11:15 PM

I'm not involved in Branford politics at all (I don't live there). I'm astounded that the 3 posts so far are about Lonnie Reed, instead of the issue. She doesn't need political stunts-she's running unopposed, so give her some credit.
Property taxes are virtually the only way the state allows towns to raise money for their expenses: municipal services, but especially schools. Maximizing the town grand list to raise taxes drives towns to make VERY bad land use decisions, and is a major contributor to sprawl and loss of open space. We must reduce our reliance on property taxes, replacing them with taxes more correlated to ability to pay (did someone say 'progressive income tax'?).
We consider this a significant environment issue-one of our top legislative priorities, to help protect our land (and our quality of life).
Anyone who makes an effort to help find a solution (and solutions here are incredibly difficult to craft) deserves both our praise and our attention. If you understand the significance of this issue, or think you should, attend the conference and speak up.
Marty Mador
CT Sierra Legislative and Political Chair

And, oh yeah, drop the "liberal elitist" nonsense. Its Rovian double speak, pinning a derogatory label which has no basis and no meaning on a group you oppose. Lets bring some actual substance to the election debate.

Posted by: Gary Doyens | September 26, 2008 9:04 AM

Marty:

I don't know Lonnie Reed and I didn't comment on her or her involvement. I am a big supporter of Smart Growth and limiting sprawl, but I'm also a big supporter of Smart Spending of which there is a short supply. You can have both, but right now, you have neither and its the spending that's driving the state and its individual cities and towns in the ground.

I used to live in Branford and still return often. It's parks, with the exception of Harbor Point are virutally unused or severely underused and the park by the pond is a disgraceful collection of dog droppings and a half ass walking path. The town needed more property for another park like taxpayers needed another tax increase. It could have negotiated a better density model, more open space etc - instead it bit off the whole nut for which it has no money and now is on the hook for a huge judgement - that's not smart growth or smart spending.

New Haven is essentially broke and is in dependency care of the state from decades of mismanagment and overspending (one year, the spending increase was $40 million - more than twice the historical annual increases). Not only is there no smart growth or smart spending, when they have a chance to do smart growth, they turn away in favor of job creation.

When the very same people who support double taxation on a gallon of gas, car taxes, hidden sales taxes on our homes, an increase in state income taxes - giving tax refunds to people who pay no income taxes - and then turn around and start talking about a local income tax and other ideas that will just add to tax burden in Connecticut - I'm not buying and this confab is a stunt. You have to marry Smart Growth with Smart Spending - just taxing us to death isn't going to achieve your goal.

Posted by: Sharon | September 26, 2008 1:35 PM

I would like to respond to Marty's statement. I agree with Marty the election should be about "actual substance". That is the exact point. Democrat Lonnie Reed, filed her papers to run against Democrat State Representative Peter Panaroni, Jr. in February 2008. Both were on the town democratic committee and I know for a fact Peter has helped Reed. 1) Reed did not even have the courtesy to call Peter Panaroni, fellow democrats of her intention to run against State Representative Panaroni. 2) Reed will not disclose her voting record on the RTM. 3) Frank Carrano, chair of the town democratic committee and also the chair of Branford's board of education, has refused to disclose the names on the town democratic nominating committee, which should be public. 4) The point is there was manipulation by the town democrats nominating process for Daros and Reed, to ensure they were nominated by the placement of James Perrito as chair of this important committee. Also, there should be disclosure if Perrito was paid, including attorney services from the town of Branford, when Daros is 1st selectman and involvement of then town attorney Penelope Bellamy. 5) the democrats carefully planned, by Carrano, Reed, Daros and Bellamy to ensure daros and reed will get the democrat nominations and discredited anyone who disagrees with them. I understand you are not from Branford, and again you are perfectly correct "actual substance" is important. This is includes voting records, how Reed was nominated, and character. Many people in Branford are disgusted with Branford's politics because of these type of actions. People should vote on facts, but unfortunately people do not vote this way because of their busy schedules limit their time to learn about each candidate. I agree with Marie and Gary about Reed. Marty, you should also know that anyone who disagrees with these democrats they will run negative unfactual information to attempt to discredit one's character . This is why people are afraid to speak up.

Posted by: Jessica | September 26, 2008 4:23 PM

Relating to Marty's comments, the comments made by other readers also concerns substance. The reason Reed is unopposed is because Reed a democrat did tell Peter Panaroni, who is the current democrat state representative she was going to run against him. This occurred even though Reed volunteered on past campaigns for Peter. Yes, issues are the key, which is character, experience and how she votes, when I asked her, she dismissed. Ask how Reed "won" the nomination. I also attended this so called gathering and walked out because all this was about getting liberal biased press coverage. Substance is facts. In all due respect, I agree with others that Lonnie Reed is a elitist liberal. If you want to learn what Branford's politics has turned to, just go to a local diner. Please talk to Gil Kelman who states the press sole goal is truth, not a blog. Truth is substance.

Posted by: Karen | September 27, 2008 9:17 AM

Correction to Jessica. Lonnie Reed did not tellState Representative Peter Panaroni she was going to run against him. All this nonsense will cease if Reed and Daros will become forthcoming. From meetings today is the political conference timed five weeks before the election. Marcia, please check if Unk has settled any lawsuits this term and the reasons and how much. People need to know include the one he instigated.

Posted by: Enough is Enough | September 28, 2008 12:46 PM

The subject of the article is about meaningful property tax reform, well as one resident of the town of Branford, state of CT, I am looking for a candidate who is talking about "meaningful spending reform".

Maybe if we had a State Representative and State Senator who focused on how CT spends money vs. alternative ways to take peoples money, we would not be in the mess we are in today. Meyer has been in office for 4 years. 4 years and we are no better off today with regard to our state finances and the ECS (Educational Cost Sharing) formula that unfairly cripples shoreline towns like Branford. He promised change in Hartford and honestly delivered more of the same. Here are the facts, as of today for every state income tax dollar a Branford resident pays to Hartford; the town of Branford gets back $0.09. That's right nine cents!!! Compare that to a Bridgeport resident who for every $1.00 gets back $2.30. Enough is enough!!! I am for supporting those less fortunate than me, but not at these levels.

The problem with our current elected officials is that they don't cut spending. When money gets tight in the private sector, businesses cut costs, and families stop spending... We need elected officials to do the same.

Tax and Spend politicians like Sen. Meyer are not what our CT economy needs. It is time for residents to remove him from office. He has not done what he promised which was to use his party's majority in both the State House and State Senate to help the Shoreline residents he represents. In the private sector if some fails at their job, they are terminated. Let's give Meyer the pink slip this November and elect a candidate who will focus on decreased spending, not alternative ways to take our money.