Proposal To Eliminate the Motor Vehicle Tax
Governor Rell has made a proposal to eliminate the Motor Vehicle property tax. As a conservative, my instant reaction was “Fantastic!” Any time the citizens are left with more of the money they earned, and any time a government as chock full of social engineers as our state government is has less money to experiment with, the better off we all are. The fact that it’s being offset by the elimination of the property tax credit for our income tax is a bit of a disappointment, but any time a government official even contemplates a tax reduction in a true blue state like ours, it is cause for optimism.

The other part of the proposal is to make up for the loss in revenue to the towns by increasing the amount of money to be received from the ever-increasing pile of bucks being sent annually to Hartford from the state’s two casinos. As soon as I read that, my heart sank because, as will be illustrated below, the state legislature has a deplorable record of shortchanging municipalities when it comes to divvying up the slot machine money.

Let me digress for a second and mention that I received a letter from a constituent who made the same point I am going to make. I kept the letter for a long time, and, actually, I thought I still had it but, apparently, in an effort to reduce my office from a state of chaos down to mere disorder, this letter got misplaced. If that person were to read this, I would appreciate hearing from him again so that I might give him the recognition he is due.

I believe that Ted Moynihan also alluded to this point in one of his weekly columns in the R-J. The fact that he and I share the same opinion is a rare occurrence indeed, and I hope that fact lends some credence to my remarks to at least a few that would otherwise dimiss them as coming from some crank.

Okay, let me continue by showing you, in cold hard numbers, just what I mean. All of these figures were taken from the Annual Budgets of the Town of Wallingford.

In the fiscal year ending June 30, 1995, we received $415,159 as our share of the Pequot Funds (as it is entitled in the Annual Budget). This represented .51% (i.e., one half of one percent) of the $81,601,270 in total revenue received that year. Five years later, this share had increased to $602,542, which represented .60% of the total $99,847,036 in revenue. This was the high point of the revenue sharing. Ever since then, it has raced downward, so that in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2005, the town's share was only $320,136, which was .27% of the $120,287,340 revenue for that year. Or put another way, the money that the state so generously allots the Town of Wallingford has been cut in half in the last five years, and its impact on our budget has been reduced by even more than that. And we are reduced to begging to keep even this share. And you and I both know that this slide is not been because the state receives less from those two gigantic cash registers in eastern Connecticut.

Now, I really believe that, as of this moment, as proposed, lawmakers in Hartford that support this proposal really and truly do mean to stick to the agreement to make up all the lost revenue. Unfortunately, they are almost all Republicans and, at this point in time, they have little control over the outcome.

But the history is right there, and it ain’t pretty. [Note to Ted Moynihan: this is a colloquialism, okay?] The towns start out getting their promised share, but, over time, that share gets smaller and smaller and smaller – because our benevolent state legislature finds more and more and more ways to spend it in Hartford rather than pass it on through to the cities and towns.

So watch where this goes. If our representatives are really serious about this proposal, they will craft legislation that locks in – locks in – full reimbursement to the towns of an amount equivalent to that of the motor vehicle property tax plus the present level of casino revenue sharing.

If the bill that is finally passed does not contain these ironclad obligations, then you can look at this as nothing more than yet another transfer of power from the local level to the state level. And you and I, the poor zshlubs that pay all these taxes, will have been bamboozled once again, and will have lost just that much more control over how our government spends our money.
- posted by Steve Knight @ Saturday, April 22, 2006 0 comments  

 
Wooding-Caplan Decision
This is a transcript of my remarks made in the Town Council meeting of April 11th concerning the choice of a developer for the Wooding-Caplan property owned by the Town of Wallingford. It was lengthy for a reason - to demonstrate that the Councilors who chose the Wallingford Town Center proposal did so after a thorough analysis of all four proposals.

Other Councilors' remarks, especially those given by Lois Doherty and Rosemary Rascati, were shorter and, frankly, more eloquent than mine because of that brevity. Vincent Testa's analysis came from what must have been a whole lot of hours of work and lent a unique and valuable historical perspective of the years and years of thought that have gone into this subject.

But it was Bob Parisi who distilled my five single-spaced typewritten pages into one concise sentence when he said (and I am paraphrasing): we voted for the only proposal that was a redevelopment of the whole area; the other three were merely proposed subdivisions dropped into the available space.

So what you see below is an elaboration of that sentence. Here goes:

Tonight we have a real and rare opportunity to move our town in a very positive, optimistic direction. We have an opportunity, if we have the vision and the confidence to reach out and grab it, to put our downtown economy on a viable and sustainable footing for decades into the future. To do so, I am voting for the Town Center LLC proposal.

In outlining my reasoning for that statement, I will refer to the eight “criteria used by the Wooding-Caplan Committee when ranking each developer” as outlined in their recommendation to us on March 28th.

Adherence to the RFP and comprehensiveness of each response. I will concede that the four proposals varied in their amount of detail, but the wording in the RFP was written in an intentionally general manner in order to elicit as large a variety of responses as possible. I did not look at the proposals as “term papers” where a percentage of the author’s “grade” would be determined by this criterion. I was looking for a proposal that demonstrated a thorough understanding of what type of project the Town was seeking. All four proposals, regardless of their length or complexity, met that standard.
Stimulus of each development to the economy of the downtown. There are two factors – commercial and residential - to consider when discussing this criterion. Let’s take them one at a time:
Commercial/Retail: Town Center LLC is the only proposal that has a significant commitment to this type of development. I understand that there are those who believe that the days of downtown Wallingford being a viable retail destination are over, but I am going to defer to the principal of Town Center LLC, who has had decades of building successful retail and commercial developments. His optimism is contagious, and it is shared by real estate developers all over this country, as we are witnessing a much publicized remigration of many suburban dwellers back to downtown areas. Long forgotten downtowns in large cities and towns our size are becoming destinations once again. When the commercial and retail spaces in this plan have been leased out, downtown Wallingford will have achieved the number and density and variety of retail establishments to capitalize on this trend and it will give this area a much better chance of being a positive retail destination for many more residents. In other words, more establishments bring more people downtown which in turn may bring more establishments, etc etc. But you need that number and density in order to begin that process of reinvigoration, and only the Wallingford Town Center proposal addresses that possibility.
Residential: the Wallingford Town Center proposal strikes a balance between maintaining the integrity of the neighborhood and fostering economic viability, especially when you consider that more than an additional half acre of property is to be purchased. 44 units, each occupied by 2 people, will house a significant number of people who will be looking to stores in the downtown area as primary destinations.
Accessibility of “open space” to residents of Wallingford: as several of the developers said, “open space” does not necessarily mean “green space.” All the proposals do address this aspect to a greater or lesser degree, but there are three reasons that Town Center LLC does it the best.
Accessibility: open space in the middle of town is only useful if 1) people know that it’s available and 2) it’s inviting to the public. Because Wallingford Town Center is accessed via a 50-foot wide roadway leading from Center Street, anyone walking or driving on Center Street will easily see and feel invited by the large open courtyard which is at the center of the development. No other proposal comes close to providing such visual or physical accessibility to the open space area.
Maintaining the condition of the open space: as traditional as a town green is, it is a difficult space to maintain in prime condition if it receives heavy pedestrian usage, and all of the proposals except that of Town Center LLC have a public lawn as open space. Town Center’s is more of a piazza than a green, and I think it is a more realistic approach. This is especially true when you consider that the maintenance expense of this publicly used property is to be borne by a private party.
On site supervision: as mentioned above, the general public is expected to have full access to and utilization of the areas of each proposal designated as open space, yet private parties are to bear the maintenance expense. Only one proposal commits to locating a principal of the owner on site, Town Center LLC. Joseph DiNatale has committed to locating his firm’s offices in the development complex, and that ownership supervision can only improve relations between the development and the town and insure proper upkeep of the public areas.
Attractiveness of design in relation to the surrounding buildings: the surrounding buildings not only include the 2-3 story residences on Academy and North Elm Streets and the larger structures on North Main Street. It is important to remember that there are also two other structures abutting the Wooding-Caplan property, and Wallingford Town Center is the only proposal that razes the two light blue steel buildings on the Woods property and the one-story nondescript brick building on the Wallace Realty property. Those are the last industrial structures left on the entire block. The Town Center LLC plan eliminates these out-of-character structures; every other plan leaves these in place for someone else to deal with in the future.
Appropriate density for the area: because the Wallingford Town Center plan includes the acquisition of over ½ acre of additional property, making the overall developed footprint more than 3.5 acres, the density of the total development is in keeping with the in-town character of the neighborhood. The proposal recommended by the Wooding-Caplan Committee contains far more units of residential housing.
Track record of the developer for similar endeavors: all four developers have excellent reputations. And all have chosen to team with other firms of equal repute. Having said that, I will admit partiality to Lazarus and Sargeant, Town Center LLC’s architects. A few years back, I was part of the committee involved in the planning and construction of the new Senior Center building. All through the process, this firm exhibited wonderful creativity in their design, responsiveness to suggestions from all parties, and pride in their work. In other projects, they have shown great sensitivity to the historical and environmental context in which their buildings reside. Their presentation to the Town Council was thorough and enthusiastic, and their expertise developing answers to the dozen of questions put to them gave me a glimpse of how much they will put into the design of this project.
Compatibility of development with surrounding area: here are four reasons that Town Center LLC has a superior project:
They plan to purchase the two incompatible structures sitting adjacent to the development property, raze the buildings and build on that property.
They plan to rehabilitate and improve the parking lot behind the Caplan building in order for that area to blend aesthetically with their project.
Their residential buildings are designed to have their highest points toward the tall structures to the west and south and their lowest points toward the residential dwellings to the east and north.
Theirs is the only plan to take account of the Police Department parking lot and create a barrier between that lot and the Wooding-Caplan development area using a row of garages along the border. By its nature, this lot will be busy 24/7, with vehicle lights and sirens being tested prior to the officers leaving on patrol. Only Town Center LLC has planned for that.
Access and visibility: no other proposal comes close to solving the access and visibility problems that exist on Wallace Avenue. Moving the 390 Center Street building to the interior of the project footprint is inspired, and accomplishes three major improvements:
It vastly improves the sight line eastward for oncoming traffic for cars exiting the project area.
It enables the developer to install a standard sized roadway with sidewalk. As I mentioned a minute ago, this gives excellent visual access to the development, making it a much more inviting destination for the public.
It makes it possible to create a standard four-way intersection with Center and Fair Streets, which will improve access because of the resulting conventional traffic pattern, rather than the offset intersection that exists now and would continue to exist under other proposals.
Money offered for the property: this property was not purchased in 1991 for the purpose of making money. It was done to 1) provide parking for the police department, 2) perhaps provide a site for an expanded fire house and 3) protect and guide the development of the property itself. The extra properties purchased, the razing of the structures on those properties, and the improvements to the adjacent Caplan property are going to cost Town Center LLC approximately $947,000. These are improvements that no other developer even considered, and I count this investment as part of the remuneration to the town because of that. Add to that the $409,000 cash payment to the Town and the fact that the Town is not being asked to provide any direct assistance other than the routine environmental assessment, and you have a very substantial payback.

So, put another way, here are the features that have led me to vote for the Wallngford Town Center proposal:
· The acquisition of two additional pieces of property, and the razing of what will be nonconforming industrial buildings.
· Moving 390 Center Street to the interior of the parcel, enabling 50-ft wide access to the property, along with other traffic advantages.
· Rehabilitation and improvement of the parking areas behind the Caplan building.
· Developer offices to be moved to the premises, providing on-site management.
· Garages to be built as an effective barrier between the development buildings and the new Police Department parking lot.
· Significant addition retail/office space which will highlight downtown Wallingford as a retail destination.
· The best visibility and access to the interior of the development of any of the proposals.

As I said in the beginning of these remarks, the Town of Wallingford is standing at a crossroads with regard to its downtown. We are being offered a remarkable opportunity from someone with a lifelong record of accomplishment in the development field. We can “reach for the brass ring” by following his vision, or we can settle for less. My choice is to use this opportunity to move this town forward and secure the economic future for its important downtown area.
- posted by Steve Knight @ Saturday, April 15, 2006 1 comments  

 
Military Recruiters in Our High Schools

- posted by Steve Knight @ Saturday, April 15, 2006 0 comments