Editorial Page
Page 7 | Greenwich Sentinel
Letter to the Editor
Re-Elect Richman Tax Collector
You need a really, really good reason to remove an incumbent e l e c te d o f f i c i a l . A n d t h at i s especially so for a job that is more technical and managerial than overtly political. So it is with the position of tax collector. There is quite simply no reason at all to remove the
incumbent, Howard Richman, because he has gone above and beyond, achieving outstanding results: recovering over $4 Million of delinquent taxes and ensuring t h at t a xe s a r e c ol le c te d a nd deposited timely. Wait, shouldn’t that be a given? – well, amazingly, Howard had to correct previous
failings in that area! On top of that, for impatient Greenwichites, he has significantly reduced delays at the payment counter by improving and streamlining the online payment process. There isn’t a Democratic or Republican way to collect taxes, just the right way, and Howard
has demonstrated how it should be done. There is no reason to do anything other than ensure that tax collection remains in the hands of this dedicated public servant. As his lawn signs say: “Re-elect Richman tax collector.” John Blankley.
OpEd
The State Does Not Have Our Town’s Back As part of our dialog with you, our neighbors, we have talked about financial challenges facing Greenwich. We don’t need to tell you that many in Greenwich have seen erosion in their earnings and property values. You may also recall that, absent the extraordinary one-time transfer of Town employees to the State’s he a lt h c a r e pla n i n t he p a st two years, the cost of our Town government has continued to escalate at rates above inf lation. W h i le t hese cha l lenges have o c c u r r e d du r i n g a p e r io d of economic growth, that may be ending soon. What to do? In the face of these challenges, as your elected representives on the Board of Estimate and Taxation, we have consistently urged caution and restraint in the Town’s budgeting of its operating and capital ex penditu res. Un for tu nately, there are few other options. Why? To a great extent the State of Connecticut has been the major cause for our declining personal wealth and the higher cost of local government. Many believed that as the wealthiest town in Connecticut, Greenwich was relatively immune to the problems of Hartford. It is now apparent that the opposite is true. Because Greenwich is where t he money i s , a ny me a su r e s adopted by our leg islature in Hartford, either to raise taxes or to off-load costs, have targeted our Town. It’s that simple. Did you know that historically, our Tow n’s citizens, who are 1.7% of the State’s population,
contribute approximately a tenth of the total personal income tax revenues collected by the State? In 2017, Greenwich taxpayers paid $765 million in personal income taxes to the State. In contrast, the municipal grants and other distributions received by our Town from the State have shrunk to insignificant levels. Over the last ten budgets, the State has reduced its support of Greenwich by $ 5 m i l l ion a n nua l ly. Th is
Did you know that historically, our Town’s citizens, who are 1.7% of the State’s population, contribute approximately a tenth of the total personal income tax revenues collected by the State? means that you must again reach into your pockets to help make up this declining State revenue. But the issue is much worse than state income taxes per se. The State increases the cost of local government by imposing m a n d ate s on h ow ou r Tow n (especially our schools) must operate and arbitrating (often not to our favor) many of our Town’s labor union settlements. Additionally, the poor fiscal health of the State, which discourages the investment of capital and the creation of jobs, has contributed
Great Recession a decade ago. Compounding the f inancial challenges of our State is the need to fund repairs of its crumbling infrastructure. How is not clear. Increasing tax revenues through another increase in tax rates, however, would further erode the tax base. Additional borrowings would also be difficult. The State is already too-highly leveraged (third highest per taxpayer among all states) with $68 billion of debt and unfunded pension and other post-employment benefits (mainly health-care).
O n e -p a r t y d o m i n a n c e o f Connecticut’s General Assembly is also an obstacle to reducing State costs and reforming the poor financial habits of our State government. The General State budget requires the approval of the General Assembly. Currently, the Democratic Party controls 92 of the 151 seats in the House of Representatives and 22 of the 36 seats in the Senate. Since 1975 (which was 44 years ago!), the Democrats have held a majority of the seats in the House in all but two years and in the Senate in all but six years (two years of which the number of seats was tied with the Republican Party.) Led now by a House speaker who is also a union employee, the Democratic members of the G enera l A ssem bly app e a r to have little interest or incentive to reduce the high cost of our State government. Most egregiously, the General Assembly was complicit with then-Governor Malloy in 2017 when he pushed through a ten-year(!) extension of the State union agreements. All of these factors, as well as a concern about future actions by the State, are reasons why the Republican members of the BET will be especially careful with all town budget proposals with tax dollars that will come from you, while being mindful that we all want a Greenwich that is the best place to live, raise a family, work and retire. By Bill Drake , Andy Duu s , Karen Fassuliotis, Debra Hess, Mike Mason and Leslie Tarkington, Republican BET Members.
Character
Letter to the Editor Who do you know who doesn’t love living in Greenwich? Residents will tell you that their affection for this town has everything to do with the strong and enduring character o f t h e tow n a n d i t s g u i d i n g principles. While we residents collectively define what Greenwich is all about, our local leaders have a disproportionate level of influence
Letter to the Editor
significantly to the declining real estate values in our Town. It is unlikely that there will be any near-term cure for the State’s poor fiscal condition. Connecticut faces many substantial issues, including a lack of job growth these past two decades, the loss of net population in three of the last five years, the lack of ‘magnet’ c i t i e s a t t r a c t i ve t o yo u n g e r workers, and a feeble economic recovery since the end of the
over the character of our town and how we are perceived by others. To get right to the point, the election for First Selectman on November 5th is vitally important when it comes to preserving and enhancing the character of Greenwich, which has traditionally been def ined by honesty, decency, and above all, devotion to others for selfless
reasons. Fred Camillo, who is genuine, humble, hardworking, approachable and honest will keep us the envy of the rest of the State of Connecticut. He is precisely the kind of person that the First Selectman’s Office calls for, and Fred’s over 35 years of public service benef itting Greenwich puts him in the best position by far
to serve in that capacity. Having served directly with Fred for over a decade in the State Capitol, I can promise that you will not find a more devoted, straightforward, hardworking and approachable person than Fred Camillo. L. Scott Frantz, Former State Senator, 36th District
A Leader for Our Time
In an era marked by coarse expressions of rage and i nto l e r a n c e , w h e n r e a s o n e d discourse is almost obsolete, when “talking” has become an exercise in manual dexterity, when critical thinking is mistakenly confused with “googling”, when thoughtful consideration of complex issues has become a casualty of soundbites, divisiveness and pejorative labels, it is indeed refreshing for us to identify and support the candidacy of Fred Camillo for First Selectman of Greenwich. He is politically experienced, rejects the politics of divisiveness whether it be on the basis of gender, race, wealth or other parameters that serve to divide us rather than unite us. Although the writers of this letter often hold widely disparate views of many of
the issues that confront us both in Greenwich and in our country as a whole, we are both impressed with Fred’s vast experience in local government and in particular his support of healthcare related initiatives that benefit our entire community. These include his cosponsoring of the recent 2019 bill to replace the dual arrest standard for domestic violence calls in favor of a primary aggressor standard so that women would not be unduly penalized and dissuaded from seeking help. He also voted to pass a 2018 bill expanding essential health benefits to include vital care for women and children. He cosponsored a 2019 law that enabled additional education for preventative h e a lt h c a r e i n c lu d i n g b r e a s t cancer screening. His awareness and support of initiatives that
impact mental health of mothers and children extends yet further to include work ing with local authority to provide housing to victims of domestic violence. He was a key early supporter of Connecticut Protective Moms which has the purpose of trying to provide support for mothers and children who are in the midst of acrimonious divorce proceedings. Fred is also the man who was a tireless umpire when my children played baseball, who personified fairness, discipline, responsible expressions of different opinions by children and parents alike because that is the essence of the Greenwich we would like to be; a place where good people live and work and commute and play and interact. Follow ing extensive conversations with him as well
as a careful examination of his public record, we believe that Fred Camillo would continue to work on a bipartisan basis for the good of all the people of Greenwich. He is clearly a man of honor and merits our trust. History shows that he is committed to all of the people and knows how to be effective in the political arena. . We are proud to support his candidacy and expect that his personal qualities and political abilities will well serve the entire Greenwich community. We celebrate our differences but embrace our commonality. He indeed is one of us and all of us. Integrity, decency, and humanity and public service- who better to be elected First Selectman than Fred Camillo. Elyse R. Brodie & Jonathan D. Brodie, PhD, MD
Submissions St. Paul Lutheran Holds ‘Octoberfest Supper’ Join members and friends of St. Paul Lutheran Church on Saturday, Oct. 19 from 4 to 7 p.m. for an “Octoberfest Supper.” The dinner includes salad, roast pork, parsley potatoes, red cabbage, apple crisp, iced tea and coffee. Tickets cost $20 for adults, $6 for children. Seniors are entered into a "seniors only" door prize raffle. A limited number of “to-go” orders are available by reservation by calling 203-253-2327. St. Paul Lutheran is located at 286 Delavan Ave.
Walk/Run for Abilis is October 20 Abilis will host its 14th annual Walk/Run for Abilis on Sunday, Oct. 20 at Greenwich Point Park (Tod’s Point). This family-friendly event includes children’s activities, a 1-mile wheelchair and stroller accessible walk, and a 5K run. There is a $40 registration fee for the Run for adults and $20 for children ages 11-to-17; the Walk is free to participate, but a donation to Abilis is appreciated. Register for both the Walk and the Run at abilis.us/walkrun. Onsite registration is available on Sunday, Oct. 20, beginning at 7:30 a.m. The run kicks off at 9 a.m. and the Walk at 11 a.m. Kids activities, food and fun are provided. Prizes will be awarded for the top three Run finishers for men and women. For children (under the age of 11,
and ages 11-17) prizes will be awarded to top girl and boy in each age category. Team awards are also given to those with the most team members and those who raise the most. Creativity awards are always a crowd-pleaser with prizes given to the most unique Run and Walk outfits. The Walk/Run for Abilis offers fun for everyone around beautiful Tod’s Point. Face painting, crafts, carnival games, a bouncy house, a “bubble bus,” and other popular activities will be available for children. Music will inspire the group and free food and beverages will be available throughout the event.
Round Hill Fire to Host Open House The Round Hill Volunteer Fire Company will host its annual Open House on Sunday, Oct. 27 from 12 to 4 p.m. at the Round Hill Community Firehouse, 166 W. Old Mill Rd. T he r e w i l l b e a b ou nc y c a s t le , r ide s on t he f i r e t r uck , demonstrations of how to extinguish a fire and food for sale. This event offers a real opportunity to mingle with friends and meet new neighbors. All are welcome. The Round Hill Volunteer Fire Company continues to search for volunteer firefighters.
PUBLISHER Beth@GreenwichSentinel.com Elizabeth Barhydt EDITORS & COPY EDITORS Editor@GreenwichSentinel.com Caroll Melgar, Stapley Russell, Anne W. Semmes, Emma Barhydt
What Is Going on With The BET? This past week brought with it the announcement that Board of Estimate and Taxation (BET) Chair Jill Oberlander has formed a “Special Projects Team” to investigate the 2017 BET elections. It has been widely reported that the campaigns of the democrats running that year were fraught with campaign finance illegalities. As a result, all six democratic BET members have been fined by the state for their actions. A final step in the adjudication with the State Election Enforcement Commission (SEEC) was a carefully negotiated consent agreement signed by five members of the BET. Tony Turner, whose campaign activity caused the initial complaint, signed a separate agreement. The f inal document was signed by David Weisbroad, Jeff Ramer, Beth Krumeich, Leslie Moriarty, and Jill Oberlander. The outcome raised more questions than it answered. Shortly after the agreements and f ines were announced, democrats inside and outside the BET began accusing each other of violations that had not been addressed by the SEEC. At last month’s regular BET meeting, Mike Mason put forward a motion to create a bi-partisan committee of BET members to investigate what transpired in 2017, establish the facts, report back at the October meeting, and move on. The motion passed 7 to 5 in favor and then it was up to Ms. Oberlander, as Chair of the BET, to put together the committee that her board charged her with creating. We applauded this motion and were encouraged by its swift passage. Five of the democratic members of the BET felt otherwise, cried foul, and said it was party politics at work. It is difficult to call this party politics when it seems to be a struggle inside the democratic caucus. If, as they claim, they did nothing wrong and were truly not informed of the 2017 illegalities, why would they not want to clear their names and restore transparency and faith in the operations of the BET as quickly as possible? In fact, if they have nothing to hide and their violations were unintended, why did the five democratic BET members ask the SEEC for continuations of the proceedings? It is our understanding that they actually could have settled with the SEEC soon after the complaint was originally filed as far back as mid 2018. That would have left plenty of time to clear their names and restore faith in the BET. Once the motions passed at last month’s BET meeting, Ms. Oberlander, currently running for First Selectman against Fred Camillo, again had the opportunity to move the process to a swift conclusion and clear her name and the names of the others. Has she done that? No. She has chosen to drag the process out further. Ms. Oberlander was tasked with establishing a committee and formed a “Special Projects Team.” The BET’s own reference book which is their operating and procedures manual (a public document) and approved by the board every year clearly states that team members must be BET members. Ms. Oberlander has appointed four non-BET members. Granted, two of the members are well-respected former members of the BET. The BET reference book also states: “Before any appointments are made the Chair shall consult with the Minority Caucus Leader…” Mike Mason is the minority leader. Perhaps it is because Mr. Mason made the motion calling for establishing the Special Project Team that she chose not to consult him. It was not her choice to make. The campaign finance regulations are not optional, the BET guidelines are not optional either. The original motion that was passed 7 to 5 called for the bi-partisan BET committee to conclude its work and report back to the full committee at their October 24th meeting. It is not ideal timing but would certainly give Ms. Oberlander the opportunity to have her name cleared before election day. Unfortunately, now Ms. Oberlander has formed a committee that is not legitimate by the BET’s own policies and procedures and we anticipate the meeting next week will again be filled with rancor and political mudslinging, and for the process to be pushed out even further, past the election. Ms. Oberlander’s actions are beginning to constitute a pattern of behavior that is most troubling. We hope she will see the light and put this process back on track for a speedy and transparent resolution, by the book.
