As the state legislature races to finish its work before the deadline of midnight tonight, lawmakers are already debating the session’s accomplishments and failures.

The tradition of the state legislature during election years has been to postpone controversial issues. In the so-called “short session,” lawmakers often put off issues that could become prominent in the minds of voters during the fall elections.

But this year was different as the legislature tackled and approved a variety of issues: repealing the death penalty, legalizing medical marijuana, permitting Sunday retail sales of alcohol for the first time in 80 years, closing the budget deficit, and passing public education reform.

The Democratic-controlled legislature has been chomping at the bit to pass three progressive bills that were vetoed by Republican governors over the past nine years. Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell vetoed the death penalty repeal and medical marijuana, while Republican John G. Rowland vetoed same-day voter registration.

As the first Democratic governor in the past 20 years, Dannel Malloy capitalized on the pent-up demand of Democrats who had repeatedly tried to push those issues – and finally found a supporter this year in the governor’s office. The political leanings of the legislature did not change much during those years as Democrats have controlled both chambers for the past 15 years, but the big difference this session was the switch in the governor. Nationally, Connecticut looks more blue than ever, but the shift on those three issues has been lying just underneath the surface in recent years.

Malloy stepped forward to say 2012 would be the “education session,’’ but the legislature became distracted with numerous other headline-grabbing bills that included Sunday sales and lacked a laser-like focus on education.

As Republicans and Democrats have clashed through the year, they also have different views about the success of the session. House Majority Leader J. Brendan Sharkey says it has been a “very productive” year, while House Republican leader Larry Cafero strongly disagrees.

Two of the biggest mistakes this year, Cafero said, were repealing the death penalty and legalizing medical marijuana.

“I thought it was a shameful moment for us,” Cafero said of the death penalty repeal. “It has to do with this preposterous notion of banning it prospectively.”

The medical marijuana legalization was also a bad move, he said.

“A year ago, under this governor, at his insistence, we decriminalized marijuana,” Cafero said.

“The combination of those two things are a monumental step backwards with regard to our drug policies for the state and more importantly, the message we’re sending to our kids. Principal after principal, housemasters, are coming into me unsolicited – and not in my capacity as a legislator but in my capacity as an expulsion hearing officer [in the Norwalk public schools] – saying, ‘Marijuana has become epidemic. The kids now believe it is legal.’ With the legalization for medicinal purposes, in the eyes of any 16-year-old kid, society is saying it is OK to smoke. I’m talking about kids getting high at the bus stop at 12 years old – lunchtime, after school, every day.”

But Roy Occhiogrosso, Malloy’s chief spokesman, said that medical marijuana will help people in pain with major illnesses.

“Larry’s a good politician. He’s a nice guy,” Occhiogrosso said of Cafero. “It’s a good thing he’s not in charge here. … Trying to satisfy Representative Cafero is not what this administration is trying to do. If Governor Malloy agreed with everything Representative Cafero says, he’d be a Republican.”

Overall, Occhiogrosso said, “More meaningful change has been pushed in these last 16 months than in the last 16 years. By every measure, the state is so much better off than it was 16 months ago. Politics prevents Representative Cafero from admitting that.”

Occhiogrosso added that Malloy has helped create jobs during the past 16 months and closed a budget deficit that was projected at more than $3 billion when he took office.

Cafero, though, said the state’s fiscal standing is quite shaky because of Malloy’s policies that include the largest tax increase in state history and fewer budget cuts than Republicans had wanted.

“His budget, on every single level, has failed. Every level,” Cafero said. “We have deficits going out into the future and growing. We have a cash reserve problem. We are borrowing for operating expenses. His vision of GAAP has totally disappeared. Every promise he made in the first year of his term has been broken in the second. … The economy is in no better place. Connecticut is still business unfriendly and rated as such and seen as such. So, how did the session go? … It’s a failure.”

He added, “Increased spending. Increased taxation. No savings. Budgetary gimmicks. You end up right where you started. And that’s where we are.”

Rep. Steven Mikutel, a conservative Democrat who is one of the longest-serving House members with 20 years at the Capitol, said the session had “very mixed” results for him.

“I was terribly disappointed about the repeal of the death penalty,” Mikutel told Capitol Watch on the final day of the 2012 session. “It’s an indication that we’re out of step with the majority of the people of the state of Connecticut. As a legislator, I was embarrassed that we repealed the death penalty in the face of the Cheshire murders. We then imposed our verdict over them.”

Concerning the legalization of medical marijuana, he said, “It sends the wrong message to young people. We put ourselves in a position to say we know more than what the doctors are saying. It’s certainly going to encourage greater drug abuse. Marijuana is a gateway drug. I don’t care what they say. It’s the beginning of the legitimizing and legalizing of marijuana.”

At the same time, Mikutel gave Malloy high marks for public education reform as “the most significant thing” that was accomplished this year. The measure passed by 149 to 0 in the House.

“It’s not as bold as the governor’s initiative, but it moves us in the right direction,” Mikutel said. “I think we’ll end up with better teachers in the classroom. It’s not going to be drive-by evaluations any more.”

Even though education reform was dialed back after huge opposition from the public school teachers’ unions, Mikutel added, “A starving man welcomes a half a loaf of bread as opposed to no bread. Small steps in the right direction are better than going nowhere. Major issues in a democracy always end in a compromise.”

The main goal in election years, traditionally, is to pass adjustments to the two-year state budget, and that was done this year. Both the House of Representatives and the state Senate approved a $20.5 billion budget deal that hikes Metro-North Commuter Railroad fares by 4 percent, avoids bus fare hikes, and sends more than $2 billion to cities and towns to hold down property taxes.

Some of the controversial bills were watered down from their earlier, bolder versions, but the headline issues were approved.

After a fight by the teachers’ unions against Malloy over tenure, an overall compromise was reached on education reform that was passed by the state House of Representatives by 149 to 0. The most contentious issues had been removed, and legislators rallied around the plan.

Rep. Douglas McCrory, a longtime educator, described the bill as “novocaine legislation” in which people feel good for a short time before the medicine wears away and the pain returns.

The repeal of the death penalty was prominent in the minds of legislators and the general public following the murders of three members of the Petit family in July 2007 in their Cheshire home. Malloy and others said that the repeal of the death penalty would apply only for future crimes – meaning that the two convicted murderers of the Petit family would remain on death row. The repeal was done despite polls showing that Connecticut residents support maintaining the death penalty.

“We have achieved meaningful education reform and our children will benefit,” said Rep. Mikutel. “While it does not resolve all the problems in our public schools, it moves us in the right direction.”

The bill also allocates additional funding to all 45th House District towns based on the existing Educational Cost Sharing (ECS) formula, which includes population and wealth criteria:

• Griswold - $143,793
• Lisbon - $27,955
• Plainfield - $207,080
• Voluntown - $13,989

“I’m pleased with the additional ECS funding, especially in these tough economic times,” said Rep. Mikutel.  “This initiative invests in education by putting our children first.”

The bill now goes to Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, who is expected to sign it.

“This bill allows for immediate savings for Griswold and in the long term as well,” said Rep. Mikutel. “Costs for the green technology installed will be paid for in 13 years. Everything after that is pure profit.”

The Griswold Board of Education and School Building Committee decided to incorporate photovoltaic and geothermal systems into the new school’s design, a significant upfront green investment, but reduced energy costs to the town in the long term. The addition of the geothermal system pushed the square footage of the project outside the maximum allowable footprint allowed by the state. This exemption from the standard specifications encourages future green building designs.

“Considering our tough economic times, I’m pleased to be able to reduce Griswold’s bond indebtedness and reduce the town’s tax burden,” said Rep. Mikutel. “This equals tax relief since residents will contribute less to pay off their local bonds.”

“Rep. Mikutel deserves a lot of credit for spearheading this legislative initiative as a member of the legislature’s Education Committee,” said Frank Everett, Griswold School Building Committee Chairman. “He was the go-to person for us.”

The bill (HB 5512), known as ‘Caylee’s Law’, is in reaction to the death of toddler Caylee Anthony in Florida whose mother did not report her missing for over 30 days.

The legislation makes it a Class A misdemeanor to knowingly not report a missing child under age 12 within 24 hours. This applies to any parent, guardian or person who has custody or supervision of the child. The crime is punishable by up to one year in jail and/or a fine up to $2,000.

“When it comes to the safety of child, adults have to be held accountable and the state is responsible for doing that,” said Rep. Mikutel. “It is unfortunate that we sometimes end up enacting these types of laws because of a tragedy.”

Under current law, it is a misdemeanor to leave a child under age 12 unsupervised in a motor vehicle or public place. The crime rises to a felony between 8:00 p.m. – 6:00 a.m., or if the public place serves alcohol.

“This caucus focuses on good paying jobs so Connecticut diversifies from strictly a service based economy,” said Rep. Mikutel. “We can rebuild our middle class while providing the opportunity for residents to better support their families.”

Rep. Mikutel explained the new group will host briefings and roundtable discussions with industry experts, disseminating information and providing resources so that members and their staff can learn about opportunities and challenges facing Connecticut’s manufacturing sectors.

“This comes at a critical time because job creation must be our top priority,” Rep. Mikutel said. “The caucus will examine and promote policies to help our manufacturers find trained and educated workers to operate on a level playing field with their competitors and help them obtain the capital to grow and expand.”

Economic indicators suggest a window of opportunity to bring manufacturing jobs back to the state. Studies show rising costs of manufacturing overseas could equal related jobs returning to Connecticut.

The legislators announced the details concerning the new caucus in Room 1B of the Legislative Office Building. A caucus meeting will be scheduled after the session concludes.

Griswold, Conn. — Grant funding approved by the state Friday will allow the Griswold Senior Center to double in size.

The State Bond Commission on Friday approved a $343,500 request to build a 3,000-square-foot addition to the senior center on Soule Street.

The addition will house rooms for exercise and academic classes as well as space for medical clinics. The grant also will pay for renovations to the kitchen. The work is expected to take nine months.

Griswold Senior Center Director Tina Falck said she was still in a happy state of shock about the news Friday night. She’s been advocating for the expansion for months.

“It doesn’t feel real yet,” she said. “We’ve been working toward this for so long. Now we’re looking forward to what happens next.”

The addition would nearly double the center’s size. Because it has a small parking area and there isn’t much available land nearby, Falck said the center will look to add a second floor, expanding upward rather than outward.

Falck said the addition is much-needed as the senior population grows in town and the programming demands become more intense.

“The most exciting thing is that we won’t have to worry about overlapping programs,” she said. “We’ve had to delay or cancel so many programs because we only have three rooms. This will help us better serve the senior community. I’m extremely thankful and I know all the seniors will be, too.”

The center is overcrowded and outdated, so the award is needed, First Selectman Philip Anthony said.

“This was a campaign promise I worked hard to keep,” he said.

Anthony said he had sought $250,000 for the expansion and credited the advocacy of the town’s legislators, state Rep. Steven Mikutel, D-Griswold, and state Sen. Andy Maynard, D-Stonington, with helping the project secure extra funding. Both men have visited the center on many occasions and have seen the cramped quarters firsthand.

Falck said the award will be formally announced to the senior center’s membership at a meeting Wednesday.

Rosemarie Fellows heard about it while at the center Friday afternoon. The 74-year-old said she comes to the center every day and was excited to hear about the funding.

“It’s wonderful,” she said. “It will give us more room for programming.”

“Griswold and Jewett City have a large population of senior citizens. With limited resources, Senior Center Director Tina Falk and her dedicated staff have done a tremendous job of providing essential services, medical clinics and hot meals to the Center’s members, in addition to exercise classes and other activities. Seniors’ needs have simply outgrown the current facility. I am grateful to First Selectman Anthony for raising this issue, and to Rep. Mikutel for his help in securing this grant,” said Senator Maynard.

“There is a longstanding need in Griswold to expand the overgrown and outdated Senior Center, which has been forced to stop accepting new members due to demand on its limited facilities. I identified this issue as a top concern for our town, and reached out to Sen. Maynard for his assistance. I am grateful for his due diligence in securing this grant that is so desperately needed,” said First Selectman Anthony.

“I want to thank Senator Maynard for supporting the state funding for this project," said Rep. Mikutel. "I was my pleasure to assist this project from the local level.”

On Friday, the State Bond Commission approved a $343,500 grant to the Town of Griswold to finance a 3,000 square foot addition to the town’s Senior Center. The project is expected to create twelve construction jobs.

The addition will double the size of the current Senior Center by adding a second floor to the antiquated existing structure. The new space will add multiple rooms for studies, medical clinics and other activities such as Zumba dancing and crafts. Kitchen renovations and other improvements to some of the Center’s existing rooms will also be carried out.

In addition to serving the senior citizens of Griswold, the Center’s expansion will also benefit other residents of the town. In the past, the Senior Center has occasionally been used to hold meetings of the Board of Selectmen and other community organizations.

The next step in expanding the Senior Center will be for the Town of Griswold to issue a request for proposals to construct the addition, followed by construction itself. Pending possible delays, First Selectman Anthony will oversee the new construction project from beginning to completion, hoping the addition will be ready to use within nine months from the start date.

Hartford — A bill that would allow doctors to prescribe medical marijuana for patients suffering from certain conditions passed the House of Representatives late Wednesday night and now heads to the Senate.

The legislation would create a regulatory framework under the state Department of Consumer Protection for the dispensing, growing and smoking of medical marijuana.

Only pharmacists could dispense the marijuana and only licensed, in-state producers could grow it. Patients could possess no more than a one-month marijuana supply, and would have to get their prescriptions renewed each year.

The 11:15 p.m. vote tally was 96 in favor of the bill and 51 against it.

Southeastern Connecticut lawmakers voting "yea" were Democratic Reps. Ernest Hewett of New London, Ed Jutila of East Lyme, Melissa Riley of Norwich, Betsy Ritter of Waterford, Tom Reynolds of Ledyard, Diana Urban of Stonington, Elissa Wright of Groton and Kevin Ryan of Montville.

The "no" votes from the area were Democratic Reps. Ted Moukawsher of Groton and Steve Mikutel of Griswold.

Republican Rep. Chris Coutu of Norwich was absent. Coutu returned last Tuesday night from out-of-state military training but did not visit the Capitol for Wednesday's House session, preferring to spend time with family, he said.

The General Assembly approved a medical marijuana bill in 2007 that eventually was vetoed by then-Gov. M. Jodi Rell. That bill allowed patients to grow their marijuana at home.

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has indicated that he would sign this year's bill. The law would take effect Oct. 1.

Sixteen states, including Rhode Island and the District of Columbia, have passed medical marijuana laws.

The House took up the bill shortly after 4 p.m., and opponents monopolized most of the afternoon and evening debate.

"I don't want Connecticut to end up like California, where there's a dispensary on every corner and people are getting marijuana for a hang nail," declared Rep. Brenda Kupchick, R-Fairfield.

To be eligible for medical marijuana, a patient would have to have one of the following conditions: cancer; glaucoma, HIV or AIDS; Parkinson's disease; multiple sclerosis; epilepsy; post traumatic stress disorder; Crohn's disease; cachexia wasting syndrome; or damage to the nervous tissue of the spinal cord. All minors, non-state residents and prison inmates would be forbidden from using it.

Opponents also voiced concerns that Connecticut, in passing a medical marijuana bill, would be condoning activities that are illegal under federal laws — the use, distribution and production of marijuana.

"Today, use of marijuana is a federal crime," said Rep. Brian Becker, D-West Hartford.

"Nothing we do as a state legislature can change that."

He and other opponents cited a letter of opinion this week from Connecticut U.S. Attorney David Fein asserting that federal law enforcement officials could swoop in and prosecute marijuana dispensaries and growers, even if they are legal under state law.

Property owners, landlords and financiers who "facilitate the actions of the [marijuana] licensees" could also be found in violation of federal laws, according to Fein.

"This is a big deal because the constitution of the United States says the federal law is the supreme," said John Hetherington, R-New Canaan, who voted no. "I took an oath as you did as a state legislator to support the state constitution … and I can't renounce that.'

He recalled the times when states have defied federal laws, such as on civil rights. Connecticut shouldn't join that club, he said. "Nullification is not unknown in this country, but it's rarely seen outside the Deep South," Hetherington said.

However, state Rep. Gerald Fox, D-Stamford, an attorney, referenced past Justice Department memoranda that declared how federal authorities should not waste resources by going after cancer patients and those with other serious illnesses who are compliant with their state's medical-marijuana laws.

One legislator who works as a doctor, Rep. Prasad Srinivasan, R-Glastonbury, said that he feels torn on the question of legalizing medical marijuana.

On one hand, Srinivasan said he wants to alleviate the suffering of patients who can't find relief with conventional medicines. But he doesn't believe the state should pass legislation condoning behaviors that violate federal law.

"A physician needs to be aware of what is going to happen to him or her at a federal level, what is going to happen to his or her licensing when he prescribes this. And that to me is the dilemma," Srinivasan said.

Mikutel said he was voting no over fears that medical marijuana would lead to more drug abuse overall, particularly among young people. He also is unconvinced about marijuana's purported medical and palliative benefits. In addition, there is the federal supremacy issue.

"The violation of a federal law for me is a big stop sign and I just can't bring myself to go through it," Mikutel said.

The bill would prohibit medical marijuana from being used at work or in any moving vehicle, including a city bus or school bus. It also bans use on the grounds of any school or college, and within the direct line of sight of anyone under age 18.

Qualified patients would be required to pay $25 and register with the Department of Consumer Protection. The department would determine the number of dispensary pharmacists and marijuana producers. Producers must be in-state and pay a licensing fee of at least $25,000.

The bill establishes an eight-member Board of Physicians to set protocols for determining how much marijuana is reasonable for a one-month supply.

The board also could recommend additional illnesses for the list of approved conditions.

Employers, schools and landlords would be prohibited from taking actions against medical marijuana users, such as firing or evicting them for using the drug.

The bill would make it a Class C or Class A misdemeanor to lie to a law enforcement officer about using or distributing marijuana for medical use.

The nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Analysis estimates a revenue gain of about $270,000 next fiscal year from medical-marijuana fees, largely offset by costs of about $210,000 for new drug control agents and equipment.

House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero, a volunteer expulsion officer for Norwalk schools, said he was opposed to another marijuana bill in Connecticut after the legislature voted just last year to decriminalize small amounts of recreational marijuana.

"Ever since the law decriminalizing marijuana took effect … the amount of [school disciplinary] cases involving the possession and use of marijuana has gone through the roof," Cafero said. "I've talked to teachers and principals and administrators, and they actually have called it an epidemic."

"Now we're going to open up a whole other area of the use of marijuana," he said.

The state House of Representatives debated for more than seven hours Wednesday before approving a controversial plan to legalize the use of marijuana for medical purposes for adults – despite a letter from the state’s top federal prosecutor that those growing marijuana would be violating federal law.

“The dam repairs make sense financially and environmentally,” said Rep. Mikutel. “Waiting to repair the dams will cost taxpayers even more money and this properly maintained resource protects local residents and property from potential damage.”

The work at Slater Mill Dam and City Pond Dam will include investigation and design of needed repairs. In 2008, a consultant was hired to inspect all 260 state owned dams and prioritize the order of repairs. This pair of dams is next on the list to be repaired. It is possible the dams could be removed instead of repaired depending on the further investigation.

The repairs for both dams are anticipated to begin following Memorial Day.

Griswold, Conn. — The town finally has the grant it needs to start readying the former Triangle Wire and Cable Co. site on East Main Street for a $15 million development.

Town officials were notified this weekend the town was awarded a $250,000 brownfields development grant from the state Department of Economic and Community Development for demolition work and a report of hazardous material on the site.

The grant will pay for the first steps of the project and must be spent before the town can use a three-year, $200,000 grant from the federal government for decontamination at the 2.4-acre former factory. Less than two years remain before the federal grant expires.

The town sought demolition financing before, soon after acquiring the property in a 2009 tax foreclosure, but was turned down “at least twice,” said First Selectman Philip Anthony. Anthony lauded Town Planner Carl Fontneau’s persistence in seeking the funding.

“This was the one stumbling block to getting the project off the ground and hopefully getting a large Alzheimer’s facility in this town,” Anthony said.

Developer

Fontneau attributed the success this time around to the recent commitment of a Farmington-area developer, David Kagan. Kagan announced plans earlier this year for a $15 million assisted living facility on the property, with some of the 82 units set aside for Alzheimer’s patients.

“This time we had a project. A year prior, we didn't, so I think that made a big difference,” Fontneau said.

Kagan estimated it would be at least four to five months before the site is ready for redevelopment.

The $7.5 million in brownfields grants the state announced Friday, including Griswold’s, is contingent on securing State Bond Commission approval March 30.

Both DECD Commissioner Catherine Smith and State Rep. Steven Mikutel, D-Griswold, said in releases that “there is a renewed commitment for brownfields redevelopment across the state.”

Joe Lussier, a 24-year member of the town’s senior center, said the development is much needed in town, but worried about its impact on the senior center. Membership would likely grow with so many new seniors in town, he said, and the Soule Street center can’t handle that.

“There’s a lot of concern about trying to get a new senior center near there because what we have now is much too small,” he said. “And there’s no parking and not enough space for all the activities.”

“I'm grateful to Governor Malloy for approving this $250,000 grant," said Rep. Mikutel. “There is a renewed commitment for brownfields redevelopment across the state.”

The plan for the property is conversion to 82 units of assisted living, a $15 million project creating both construction and permanent jobs.

“I’m anxious to begin the project,” said Griswold Town Planner Carl Fontneau. “We now have the funds for demolition, clean-up and an end-user in place.”

Brownfields are contaminated former industrial sites that can be remediated for public use or redevelopment.

http://www.governor.ct.gov/malloy/cwp/view.asp?A=4010&Q=501370

HARTFORD, Conn. — State lawmakers are debating a bill repealing the state's death penalty. The proposal would replace the death penalty with life without possibility of parole.

Lawmakers on the Judiciary Committee were poised to move forward on the death penalty repeal bill on the same day that a new Quinnipiac University Poll concluded that 62 percent of Connecticut citizens believe repeal is a bad idea, just 31 percent say it's a good idea: a two-to-one margin against repeal.

"The only groups that favor abolishing the death penalty are Democrats and liberals," said Doug Schwartz, Quinnipiac Poll, "and only by small margins."

The Governor says lawmakers should ignore the results.

"When issues such as this are polled they sometimes have disparate results," Malloy said, "and I think that everyone should be guided by their own conscience on matters such as this."

Not everyone in the legislature sees it that way.

"I think as legislators, especially when these polls come out, showing that they are not in favor of abolishing the death penalty...it's up to a legislator not to vote his own conscience," Rep. Al Adinolfi said, "but to vote the conscience of his constituents."

"I do believe that we should follow the will of the majority of the people who still strongly support it," Sen. John Kissel said, "used in rare circumstances."

"Been saying for a long time that certain people up here are not listening to what the people want," said Rep. Steven Mikutel.

The main advocate for repeal says the poll makes no difference to most lawmakers.

"I think people who have been looking at the poll to say this is not what the people of the state want...will make that point again," said Rep. Gary Holder-Winfield, "but I don't think it changes anybody here."

Hartford - A legislative committee approved a bill Tuesday that would scrap the 1,248-minimum staffing requirement for state troopers.

In place of the minimum, the legislation would compel the state's commissioner of Emergency Services and Public Protection, Reuben Bradford, to maintain a "sufficient number" of troopers.

Sufficiency would be determined by a new set of standards to be developed next year by the legislature's nonpartisan Program Review and Investigations Committee. The standards would take into account statistical crime data, technological improvements, government mandates and other factors.

There are currently 1,080 sworn troopers, 168 below the statutory minimum.

Members of the Public Safety and Security Committee on Tuesday voted 13 to 10, along party lines, in favor of the bill, with two abstentions. State Reps. Ed Jutila of East Lyme and Steve Mikutel of Griswold were among the Democrats who voted for the bill.

" We shouldn't be locked into a specific number," Mikutel, who strongly favors a trooper staffing assessment, said. "That just ends up tying the hands of the legislature and the governor."

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy proposed the legislation to end the staffing mandate. The governor has called the statutory mandate "arbitrary" and unconnected to public safety.

Roy Occhiogrosso, the Democratic governor's senior adviser, told reporters Malloy was pleased with the bill's compromise provision that emerged Tuesday, calling for the staffing analysis and guidelines.

"The number was an arbitrary figure that was put on the table years ago, and during the time that we haven't been at that figure, the crime rate has continued to fall," Occhiogrosso said. "It's at a 44-year low, so it would appear that there's not much connection between that figure and the crime rate."

The staffing mandate was established by the legislature and then-Gov. John G. Rowland in 1998, when there were 968 sworn officers in state police ranks.

The minimum was spurred by the killing that year of Heather Messenger. Messenger, pregnant with twins, barricaded herself and 5-year-old son in a bedroom of her Chaplin home, trying to escape her rampaging husband. She called 911, but the nearest trooper was 18 minutes away. Messenger was bludgeoned to death as her son watched. Her husband, David Messenger, was found not guilty by reason of insanity and was committed to a state psychiatric hospital.

Mikutel said he considers the 1998 law to have been an emotional reaction to the ghastly killing, which he said happened too fast for law enforcement intervention - even if 1,248 troopers had been on duty.

Police union suing

The Connecticut State Police Union is suing the governor and Commissioner Bradford for failing to meet the minimum. Earlier this year Hartford Superior Court Judge James T. Graham ruled in the union's favor, although the Malloy administration is appealing.

Union President Andrew Matthews said Tuesday he is confident that the momentum behind the bill will sputter out once more lawmakers learn of the consequences lower trooper levels would have on public safety.

He said he is puzzled by the decision to remove the mandate before the staffing study and guidelines are complete.

"It seems like it's a rush," Matthews said.

An initial roll call Tuesday showed the bill passing 19 to 3. However, six Republicans switched their votes from yea to nay during a period after the meeting when the voting was still open.

Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield, said his office informed those Republicans of an unexpected change to the bill. The six Republicans changed their votes because the bill doesn't retain the 1,248 mandate before the new standards take effect.

"We need to have a minimum staffing level so that in difficult budget times, we're not cutting public safety," McKinney said, adding that he considers lower crime a result of added troopers - not a reason to thin the ranks.

A bill that would legalize and regulate mix martial arts matches in the state cleared a key legislative committee this afternoon on a vote of 21 to 2.

Connecticut is one of four states that does not permit the fast-growing sport, which blends judo, karate, boxing and other forms of fighting. A similar bill came up during the 2011 legislative session but failed to win approval.

Supporters say mixed martial arts matches could generate significant revenue for the cash-strapped state.

“It goes on here in an unregulated environment,” said Sen. Joan Hartley, D-Waterbury and co-chair of the committee. “This will serve to include those regulations and bring it under control, if you will.”

But Rep. Steven Mikutel, D-Griswold, said he has concerns about the safety of the sport. “Would it allow one to use one’s foot and elbows to strike another person in the head and to kick somebody when they’re on the ground?” he asked.

“It seems too brutal for me, too uncivilized. I’m…concerned with the message it send to young people. I’ve seen these cage fights and [they're] pretty brutal.”

The state House of Representatives fixed a glitch in the law Thursday that will prevent about 4,500 low-income senior citizens from losing their Medicare benefits next month.

The House also approved a change in the state's freedom of information laws to clarify a ruling last summer by the state Supreme Court on the release of home addresses of prison guards, police officers and other members of a "protected" class who are subject to threats because they deal with criminals on a daily basis.

Some town officials had believed that the addresses of those in the protected class would need to be erased in all instances. But the bill, which passed 120-11, ensures that the addresses will remain on land records, grand lists, and voters' lists that are open to the public.

The two bills were passed on an emergency basis — meaning they were deemed urgent enough to be acted on without public hearings. The timing of the Medicare bill was important because the law will change March 1. The bills still need the approval of the state Senate, which is scheduled to vote on them on Feb. 29.

In the highly complicated world of eligibility for Medicare Savings Programs, new guidelines for the federal poverty level are being enacted on March 1 in Connecticut. The numbers are changing because Social Security recipients received a 3.6 percent cost-of-living adjustment on Jan. 1, after receiving no automatic increases in the previous two years. As a result, the House action Thursday ensured that no residents would lose their Medicare benefits due to an increase in income from the Social Security adjustment.

The switch was viewed as a technical change. The bill passed 137-0, with 14 House members absent.

In the debate over freedom of information, the House passed an emergency bill to change the state's FOI laws in reaction to the ruling by the state Supreme Court. It was designed to protect the home addresses of public employees who are subject to threats, such as prison guards, police officers, parole officers and judges.

The Supreme Court ruling was interpreted by some to mean that any public official who releases the name of someone on the list is violating the law, said House Republican leader Larry Cafero of Norwalk. As such, town clerks, tax collectors, registrars of voters and others were afraid about releasing certain types of information that might inadvertently include the addresses of the "protected" individuals outlined in the law.

The ruling "sent shock waves throughout those public officials," Cafero said. "They thought they would be forced to scour every record they have to see if that individual was listed and then redact it. That's what they thought. [But] that is not the case. The only time they have to redact is when there is an affirmative request about an individual who is on the list."

The bill that passed Thursday was crafted by House Speaker Christopher Donovan. It exempts land records, the grand list, and voters' lists from the court's ruling, meaning that towns could release records of all the Republicans or Democrats in a particular town and would not have to search for which voters might be police officers or prison guards.

If a person who speaks at a school board meeting happens to be a prison guard or another member of the protected class, the guard's name or address would not be redacted from the official written minutes of the meeting, legislators said. If someone went to the town library and asked for a list of everyone in town who has a library card, the librarian would not be forced to erase the home addresses of everyone in the protected class, lawmakers said during the debate. But if an individual prison guard's library information is sought, then the address should be removed, they said.

State Rep. Al Adinolfi, a Cheshire Republican, said he has been asked by town clerks whether a certain individual could be taken off all town records.

"The first thing you do at a public hearing is state your name and address," said Adinolfi, who opposed the bill. "I think this is nothing but an unfunded mandate into a long list of unfunded mandates and putting more work on the towns. Any one of us, within minutes, can find the name and address of anyone."

The issue started when prison inmates began making FOI requests to find out where certain prison guards lived. But with the speed and ease of Internet searches, some legislators, including those who voted for the bill, said it is easy in 2012 to find the
information.

"A good detective in 48 hours can find out where anyone lives," said Rep. Steven Mikutel, one of the longest-serving House Democrats. "How much we're accomplishing with this law is debatable. ... I would caution us not to expand this protected class any more."

Hartford - A bill that would repeal the death penalty is moving forward in the legislature.

The General Assembly's Judiciary Committee voted 23 to 15 Wednesday to raise the repeal bill for this year's short session.

The wording is expected to be similar to that which passed the committee last year, replacing execution with life imprisonment without parole. It would also be a "prospective" measure and not apply to the 11 convicts currently on Connecticut's death row, only to future crimes.

State Rep. Ernest Hewett, D-New London, voted against raising the bill Wednesday, while state Rep. Elissa Wright, D-Groton, voted for it.

Hewett said afterward that he believes the death penalty is warranted for the most heinous crimes.

He also pointed out that legal experts predict that any "prospective" repeal would result in appeals by death row inmates that overturn their sentences.

"As soon as we pass it, there will be lawsuits filed and they [death row inmates] will never, ever see the death penalty," Hewett said.

Wright believes life imprisonment without parole is a more appropriate punishment than execution. "I hope this will be the year the bill passes in both chambers," she said.

Last year's bill never came to a formal vote after state Sens. Edith Prague, D-Columbia, and Andrew Maynard, D-Stonington, changed their minds about repealing the death penalty after meetings with Dr. William Petit, the sole survivor of the 2007 Cheshire home-invasion murders.

Maynard has said he intends to vote for repeal bill this year because both home invasion trials are over and the killers, Steven Hayes and Joshua Komisarjevsky, have been sentenced to death.

Prague said Wednesday that she remains undecided. However, if she were to support a death penalty repeal measure, Prague said, she would want that bill to contain restrictions.

"I don't think somebody sitting in prison for life for having committed a heinous crime should have a good time," Prague said. "I think there should be severe restrictions on their activity because I think if you take someone else's life, there needs to be a severe penalty."

A 2011 Quinnipiac University poll found 67 percent of registered Connecticut voters in favor the death penalty.

State Rep. Steven Mikutel, a proponent of keeping the death penalty, said that legislators should adhere to the wishes of state residents - not well-organized interest groups that stack public hearings and flood their inboxes with pro-repeal messages.

"The people are up against a small group of dedicated fanatics who have made their mission in life to abolish the death penalty," Mikutel said. "The life of a cold-blooded killer seems to be more valued by these advocates than the innocent murdered, and that is morally wrong."

Ben Jones, executive director of the Connecticut Network to Abolish the Death Penalty, said that institutions including the Catholic and Episcopal churches as well as the NAACP strongly support repeal.

"Those are not fanatical groups in my mind," Jones said.

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has said he will sign legislation ending capital punishment if it can pass the legislature and reach his desk. Former Gov. M. Jodi Rell vetoed a repeal bill in 2009.

The legislature's Judiciary Committee on Wednesday voted 23 to 15 to raise the bill for discussion.

Rep. Gary Holder-Winfield, a New Haven Democrat, said he's been working to gain the support of state legislators who previously opposed repeal.

A full public hearing will be held within the next few weeks to discuss the issue.

"In my opinion, doing away with the death penalty, the way they want to do it, and put them in with the general population is actually rewarding them for their crimes," said Rep. Al Adinolfi.

Representative Adinolfi lives a few doors down from where the Cheshire home invasion crime occurred. The two men convicted in the deaths of a woman and her two daughters are now on death row.

Three young women were murdered in State Representative Steve Mikutel's district in Griswold in the 1980's by serial killer Michael Ross.

"Those kind of callous killers deserve the death penalty and the courts have upheld the death penalty," Rep. Mikutel said.

With the Cheshire killers trials now concluded votes at the capitol are expected to change.

With the Governor on board, advocates of repeal feel the timing for repeal is better than it has been the last two times it was attempted.

"Dan Malloy ran on this issue as one of the issues that he supports, that being the abolishing of the death penalty," said Rep. Holder-Winfield.

Three years ago a repeal bill passed the Assembly but less than 24 hours after the bill arrived on her desk then Governor Jodi Rell vetoed the bill saying the death penalty sends a clear message to those who would contemplate cold calculated crimes, like the Cheshire home invasion two years earlier.

Dr. William Petit, who had pleaded with lawmakers not to pass the bill, thanked the Governor for what he called her moral courage in clearly standing up for what's right.

Last year the repeal bill passed the Judiciary Committee but never came to a full vote in the House or Senate because State Senator Edith Prague announced she had changed her vote after a personal appeal from Dr. Petit.

She returned to the Capitol late in January after recovering from a mild stroke and in an exclusive News 8 interview said that she could change her vote again.

Another State Senator, Democrat Andrew Maynard of Stonington who said he would vote against repeal last year now says he will support it.

See the video.

With both killers in the Cheshire home invasion facing death row, legislation may now come forward that would abolish the death penalty in Connecticut for future crimes.

State Sens. Edith Prague of Columbia and Andrew Maynard of Stonington were the two Democratic legislators who abruptly changed their minds last year about voting to end capital punishment after emotional meetings with Dr. William Petit, the lone survivor of the 2007 triple slaying.

At that time, only one of the murderers, Steven Hayes, had been tried and convicted. The trial and sentencing of Joshua Komisarjevsky would not finish until after the General Assembly session, and the state senators said they didn't want to affect the outcome of the proceedings out of respect for the Petit family. "I just feel that if there is anything I could do to help this man at all, I've got to do it," Prague said when explaining her decision.

So a bill that would have "prospectively" ended the death penalty for future crimes didn't come up for a vote in either legislative chamber - despite strong support in the House - as Prague and Maynard's switches made the Senate tally 19 to 17 against it.

With the new legislative session under way, Maynard says his vote is back in the repeal column because the last home invasion trial is over. "If the vote comes forward today, I will vote for repeal," said Maynard. Last year, with the trials unfinished, "I just didn't think we could have had a dispassionate debate," he said.

Sources say that Prague has expressed interest in possibly rejoining the repeal camp if certain caveats are added to the bill.

But when asked by The Day how she stands on the issue, Prague said last week that she was still deciding whether to keep the death penalty or end it.

"I'm doing a lot of soul-searching here," said Prague, who returned for the short session after experiencing a minor stroke in December. "It's not an easy decision."

The veteran lawmaker was a reliable supporter of capital punishment in the 1990s until changing her views several years ago over the case of James Tillman, a black man who served 18 years for rape and assault convictions before his exoneration by DNA evidence.

Opponents of the death penalty say there are too many wrongful convictions, especially of racial minorities.

Crucial 18th vote

Yet if repeal advocates are determined to force a bill through the legislature this year, they may not need Prague's vote.

Maynard's flip would add an 18th vote against the death penalty, provided that no other senator has changed his or her intent. So if Prague were to vote to keep the death penalty, Lt. Gov. Nancy Wyman would then be called to break the chamber's 18-18 tie.

Wyman said Friday that she would vote for repeal, provided that the bill is prospective and keeps the death penalty for the 11 convicts on Connecticut's death row.

"I have always been against the death penalty," Wyman said. "I would prefer that these people be put in jail and stay there forever."

The shifting votes are stirring nervousness among capitol punishment proponents. State Rep. Steve Mikutel, D-Griswold, recently said he is skeptical that another round of appeals from Petit would have the same effect on legislators as it did before the Komisarjevsky trial.

Mikutel pointed out that public opinion polls consistently show a majority of state residents supporting the death penalty, and he said it would be wrong for the General Assembly to take action that "misrepresents the will of the people."

"It would be a slap in the face to all victims of murder to abolish the death penalty," Mikutel said.

"The people of Connecticut want the death penalty for serious, outrageous crimes, and legislators should stop interfering and just accept what the courts have said and what the people of Connecticut want."

Repeal activists once thought 2011 would be their year.

There was a new Democratic governor in office who pledged to sign legislation to end the death penalty if it reached his desk. Former Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell had vetoed such a bill in 2009, a bill that had easily cleared the House but barely passed the Senate with a 19-17 vote at 4 a.m. after almost 11 hours of debate.

Bill's prospects grow

The bill that emerged last year from the legislature's judiciary committee, sponsored by state Rep. Gary Holder-Winfield, D-New Haven, would have replaced the death penalty with life imprisonment without parole. To gain votes, it was crafted to apply to only future crimes, so current death row inmates would still face execution.

Holder-Winfield never doubted the bill's chances in the House, but knew the Senate vote tally would be close.

In an interview last week, he said he anticipates the judiciary committee raising the bill again this year. He acknowledged the possibility of using the lieutenant governor's vote to push it through the Senate, but said he doesn't want to rely on a tie-breaker to pass such key legislation.

Although Holder-Winfield wishes that his bill ended the death penalty completely, he said there is not enough support for legislation that would spare those already on death row.

During a committee hearing last year on Holder-Winfield's bill, both Chief State's Attorney Kevin Kane and Chief Public Defender Susan O. Storey said that any "prospective" law that ended the death penalty for future crimes would likely result in appeals by death row inmates that would overturn their sentences.

If such a scenario plays out, both Prague and Maynard could end up voting for a bill that inadvertently spares the lives of Hayes and Komisarjevsky.

State Rep. Gerald Fox III, D-Stamford, judiciary committee co-chairman, said that members will do additional research into that question once the repeal bill comes up again.

Internet gambling is pervasive yet illegal in Connecticut, and it could remain so for at least another year.

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy said Thursday that he now believes it "highly unlikely" that legislation to legalize and regulate online gambling will emerge from the forthcoming legislative session. "Clearly there's not a lot of excitement around the issue," he said.

Earlier in the day, state Rep. Steve Dargan, D-West Hartford, co-chairman of the General Assembly's Public Safety and Security Committee, which handles gambling issues in the state, said his committee wasn't interested in introducing such a bill this year.

The statements were enough for the legislature's leading online gambling opponent to declare a victory.

"The Malloy administration has reversed itself," state Sen. John McKinney, R-Fairfield, said in a statement. "I don't believe that putting a 24/7 electronic casino in every house in Connecticut so the government can profit from it is the way to solve our budget crisis." McKinney also has called for stepped-up enforcement and prosecution of illegal gambling sites.

But administration officials strongly dispute the notion that the governor was pushing for a gambling bill, as well as any claim that the state budget is in "crisis."

"There was no reversal because there was no proposal," Roy Occhiogrosso, the governor's senior adviser, said Thursday night. "What the governor said was we need to have this discussion and protect an industry with tens of thousands of Connecticut jobs."

Malloy began speaking publicly about Internet gambling in the wake of a U.S. Department of Justice decision made in December that has been widely interpreted to have opened the door for states to begin offering Internet gambling within their own borders. And some officials speculate that it may place pressure on Congress to allow such gambling at an interstate level.

"The Internet gambling genie may be out of the bottle," state Rep. Steve Mikutel, D-Griswold, said Thursday. "If it is, the question becomes, 'How do we regulate it?'"

It is currently illegal in Connecticut to gamble over the Internet. But state officials acknowledge that many people - including adolescents - are already doing it via websites operated offshore. Knowingly or not, these individuals are committing class B misdemeanors.

The public safety panel held a forum Thursday morning to gather information about the legal, economic and social issues related to Internet gambling.

Tribal officials representing both of the state's casinos told lawmakers they support some form of legalized online gambling in Connecticut - but only if the two tribes are the sole operators.

Chuck Bunnell, chief of staff for external affairs for the Mohegan Tribe, said the tribe would view any attempt by the state to let non-tribe entities run gambling websites as a violation of the tribal compacts.

Under the compacts, Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods contribute 25 percent of their slot machine earnings to the state. Bringing in third-party operators would void that agreement, the tribal representatives said.

Bunnell said the Mohegan Tribe is only interested in offering Internet poker so as not to erode its casino business. If more game options went online, "we think it would affect the jobs at Mohegan Sun," he said. The casino employs roughly 9,000 workers.

However, Foxwoods Development Co. officials said they want to put a full suite of gambling options online to bolster their casino's brand as it faces growing competition from bricks-and-mortar gambling sites in nearby states such as Massachusetts and New York. Foxwoods employs just under 10,000 workers.

"We believe that the online player is a different animal; they're not necessarily the same people who come to the casino," said Joseph Colebut, the development company's chairman.

Making a case for legalization, Foxwoods officials said that hundreds of foreign-based websites are targeting state residents to gamble online. The state has an opportunity to capture this lost revenue through legalization and regulation, they said.

"The profits and jobs are all currently going offshore with no benefit to the state of Connecticut," said Anshu Kalhan, Foxwoods' director of development. If Connecticut were to legalize only Internet poker, a great deal of online gambling money would continue flowing elsewhere, he said.

The Connecticut Council on Problem Gambling has raised concerns that easy access to online gambling could exacerbate addiction problems in the state.

Mohegan and Foxwoods representatives said they expect it to be easier to spot and address problem gambling among online users because websites can track and control the amount a person loses.

Hartford - A bill to allow red-light enforcement cameras in large and medium-sized cities is ready to cycle through the state legislature again this year.

Senate Majority Leader Martin M. Looney, D-New Haven, announced last week that he will reintroduce the legislation in the General Assembly session beginning Feb. 8.

The measure would enable cities with 60,000 or more residents to install automated cameras at intersections and mail fines of at least $124 to traffic violators caught on camera. Two dozen states and the District of Columbia already allow them. Yet 15 states have reportedly banned red-light cameras.

The controversial legislation made it through two committees last year before fizzling out in the judiciary committee without a vote. Looney and many New Haven civic leaders are hoping for a different outcome in 2012.

Camera proponents say the devices improve motorist behavior and reduce the number of traffic accidents caused by drivers running red lights. They also would produce a new stream of government revenue in the form of additional traffic fines.

Opponents cite concerns about privacy, fairness and the possibility of cities relinquishing control over public policy decisions to companies that install and operate the cameras.

The population requirement would rule out introducing cameras to any southeastern Connecticut communities, but local residents could still find themselves driving through one of the 13 cities that would become eligible to install them if the bill passes.

Lawmakers might also decide to someday lower the 60,000-resident minimum or authorize the cameras at any intersection.

"Do red-light cameras really enhance public safety, or is this just another way to pick people's pockets?" said state Rep. Ed Jutila, D-East Lyme, who voted against the bill last year in the transportation committee.

The Office of Fiscal Analysis estimated that a single camera could collect anywhere from $316,000 to $1.6 million a year for state and local governments, depending on the number of violations issued and the percentage of each fine that governments get to keep.

The company that operates the cameras would be entitled to a percentage of the fines.

State Sen. Andrew Maynard, D-Stonington, co-chairman of the transportation committee, said he plans to raise the red-light cameras bill again this year at Looney's request.

Maynard said he personally supports the legislation and hopes that a camera program can help New Haven address "an almost chronic disregard for red lights" that endangers pedestrians and bicyclists as well as motorists.

"This is only enabling legislation," Maynard said. "We're not requiring anyone to use them. We're simply saying that if you, as city fathers, feel this problem is bad enough ... go right ahead."

Jutila said he is still unconvinced that red-light cameras bring significant improvements to public safety. He noted how multiple traffic studies have found a decrease in right-angle or "T-bone" crashes at intersections with cameras, yet an increase in rear-end crashes due to motorists slamming on the brakes to avoid tickets.

In addition, Jutila said he has heard from a number of constituents opposed to the cameras. State Sen. Andrea Stillman, D-Waterford, also voted against the bill last year in the transportation committee. Stillman did not return a call seeking comment.

State Rep. Steve Mikutel, D-Griswold, voted for it at the transportation committee.

He said the population minimum is key, as red-light cameras are best suited for heavily trafficked urban intersections, particularly those where motorists haven't been obeying the light.

"I'm not a proponent of putting red-light cameras in every community," Mikutel said. "The data doesn't warrant it."

Looney said the population minimum was added to the bill because only larger communities have shown interest in the cameras. "Obviously, if there was a groundswell of interest from smaller communities, the bill could be adjusted to reflect that."

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy recently spoke in favor of permitting red-light cameras in Connecticut and suggested setting a lower fine for traffic violators caught by cameras than by police officers.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut has opposed every red-light camera bill in the legislature in recent years. Executive Director Andrew Schneider said it is unfair that a ticketed driver doesn't get an opportunity to explain to an officer any extenuating circumstance, such as a need to move out of the way for an ambulance.

He also referenced how two Tennessee municipalities were sued last year by red-light camera companies after the state legislature outlawed automatic ticketing for improper turns on red. The companies claim the law violates revenue agreements they had with the municipalities and want to see it reversed.

"These camera companies are trying to control public policy," Schneider said.

The latest red-light cameras take video footage of vehicles running red lights or speeding through an intersection. The registered owner of such a vehicle receives a ticket in the mail, along with photos of his or her vehicle running the light and an Internet link to the video clip.

Under last year's bill, owners would have 30 days to contest or pay the ticket.

Looney emphasized that his legislation requires posting signs in front of every intersection that would get a camera.

"So it isn't as if we're trying to play gotcha here," Looney said. "If everybody pays attention to the sign, very few will then be caught by the camera."

“STEAP grants are a critical part of helping Connecticut’s small towns work to improve infrastructure, encourage economic development and create jobs,” said Governor Malloy. “These grants allow us to make investments that will improve the overall quality of life for our residents.”

East Haddam: $100,000 for East Haddam Water Pollution Control Authority renovations

The Town of East Haddam will receive $100,000 for the design and construction of renovations to the sewer treatment plan owned and operated by the East Haddam Water Pollution Control Authority. The redesign, rehabilitation and repair will extend the life and service capacity of the facility, which was built in 1996. Improvements will increase efficiency, enhance worker safety and improve environmental protections.

“This upgrade to the Water Pollution Control Authority is of critical importance to the town of East Haddam,” Rep. Linda Orange (D-Colchester, East Haddam) said. “The project is desperately needed and I am very pleased to see it get funding to move forward.”

East Lyme: $400,000 for Main Street Revitalization Project

The Town of East Lyme will receive $400,000 for Phase IIIC of their Main Street revitalization project. The project includes LED street lights and lighted bollards, parking lot trees and landscaping, connection to Main Street, and a new streetscape north along Pennsylvania Avenue. This project builds on Phases I and II that have stimulated reinvestment in privately-owned downtown properties and have lead to the establishment of ten new businesses along and within three blocks of Main Street.

“I want to thank Governor Malloy for understanding the important role this grant will play in beautifying East Lyme’s downtown and boosting economic activity that grows jobs and supports our local merchants,” said Sen. Andrea Stillman (D-East Lyme, Montville, New London, Old Lyme, Old Saybrook, Salem & Waterford). “This is the type of smart investment the state can make to help build stronger communities.”

“I am very pleased these funds have been approved to continue this important business-friendly project in East Lyme and thank Governor Malloy for his commitment to making sure it continues to be funded,” said Rep. Ed Jutila (D-East Lyme, Salem). “The improvement work thus far has provided an economic boost to the area and has enhanced the quality of life for residents and visitors alike.”

Preston: $500,000 for Norwich State Hospital Property Development

The Town of Preston will receive $500,000 for the abatement and demolition of the theater and chapel located on the former Norwich State Hospital property, now known as the Preston Riverwalk. The designated buildings are beyond repair and will be removed in order to complete a redevelopment of the site. The town plans to create a business park to encourage development and sustainable growth. The project will immediately employ 50-100 workers towards that end.

"We deeply appreciate the Governor's support for this important regional asset,” said Sen. Andrew Maynard (D Griswold, Groton, North Stonington, Plainfield, Preston, Sterling, Stonington & Voluntown). “The funds will be put to good use addressing the environmental cleanup of one of the area’s most promising economic development opportunities."

“This STEAP grant is one more major step forward in a renewed state and local partnership on behalf of eastern Connecticut’s economic growth. It is clear that Gov. Malloy is committed to our region in a very real way,” said Rep. Tom Reynolds (D-Ledyard, Preston, Montville).

Voluntown: $180,000 for Church Street and Route 165 Intersection

The Town of Voluntown will receive $180,000 for the reconfiguration of the highway intersection and sidewalks at Route 165 and Church Street. The project will address a number of safety concerns, such as obstructed sight lines and a lack of sidewalk space, in addition to improving the overall aesthetics of the area.

"This funding will go a long way toward helping Voluntown address road and streetscape improvements that have been part of their municipal planning for years. We thank the Governor for his support,” said Sen. Maynard (D Griswold, Groton, North Stonington, Plainfield, Preston, Sterling, Stonington & Voluntown).

“This is an important safety project Voluntown has been planning for some time,” said State Representative Steven Mikutel (D-Griswold, Lisbon, Plainfield, Voluntown). “This infrastructure upgrade will improve the flow of traffic. Governor Malloy should be commended for this decision.”

The State Bond Commission, under Governor Malloy’s leadership, allocated $20 million for STEAP grants on September 23, 2011. The awards, which will be awarded to small towns from throughout the state, were granted in part due to project readiness and their impact on overall regional economic development.

“These grants are a critical component of municipal budgets, allowing for capital improvement projects that might not otherwise get done,” said Governor Malloy. “I am pleased to join the local officials who have worked so hard to strengthen our communities and improve our public spaces and business districts. This is part of reinventing Connecticut—town by town, project by project. I know that Connecticut’s best days are ahead of us.”

Montville was awarded $500,000 for the design of a culvert on Montville Road at Trading Cove Brook.

“This project addresses two critical needs in Montville: first, the public safety needs of all those who use Montville Road alongside Trading Cove Brook, and also the environmental and erosion control need to contain the brook itself,” Senator Edith G. Prague (D-Columbia) said. “This STEAP grant will help Montville underwrite the cost of this important project that might otherwise go unfunded in the town’s otherwise modest budget.”

“The timing of this half-million dollar grant for Montville couldn’t be better, given recent news about the power plant closing, the diminished Grand List as a result, and an estimated loss of $1.2 million in annual property taxes,” Senator Andrea L. Stillman (D-Waterford) said. “As Montville officials continue working to fund the town’s infrastructure needs I will continue working with them, Governor Malloy, and appropriate state agencies to determine how and to what extent the state can provide assistance.”

The original Montville Road culvert was deemed too small by FEMA and sustained damage by heavy flooding in 2007, 2009, and 2010.

“These improvements will have a daily positive impact on residents of the area,” said State Representative Kevin Ryan (D-Montville, Bozrah, Franklin, Lebanon)  “Restoring this bridge to service means an increase in economic development and job opportunities in the region.”

“I thank the governor for allocating this funding for the design of road culverts on Montville Road,” Rep. Betsy Ritter stated. “The town of Montville has been waiting a long time for these improvements and these funds will go a long way in helping our town with this much needed project we would otherwise not be able to afford at this time.”

"This project will make necessary infrastructure repairs that will benefit residents of Montville and surrounding communities," said Rep. Tom Reynolds. "These grants help stimulate the local economy bringing good paying construction jobs to our area."

The Town of Griswold was also awarded $500,000 for drainage and resurfacing projects on Geer and Lily Pond Roads.

“The STEAP program was designed to help small towns improve their infrastructure while putting local contractors to work in the process. This grant will substantially improve Geer Road and Lily Pond Road in Griswold, making them safer and more reliable for local drivers,” said Senator Andy Maynard.

"I want to thank Governor Malloy for this infrastructure improvement for Griswold," said State Representative Steven Mikutel (D-Griswold, Plainfield, Lisbon, Voluntown). "Without this funding, this much needed repair to Geer Road just wouldn't have happened. This is a godsend for the town."

A $400,000 STEAP grant to Clinton will go to downtown streetscape revitalization efforts.

“The new streetscape envisioned for downtown Clinton is a key ingredient in the town’s economic revitalization efforts already underway, and this $400,000 state grant is essential for that new streetscape to go forward,” Senator Eileen M. Daily (D-Westbrook) said. “Clinton has become well-known for its retail corridor right along I-95; I expect this investment will boost the profile of the original business district along Route 1 as well.”

"This grant is a further endorsement by the state of the vision the Clinton Board of Selectmen has set forth for this community", said Rep. Jim Crawford. "Each new project further enhances the quality of life for all the residents. The steady pace of improvements is a positive reflection of the vitality that energizes Clinton."

Deep River was awarded $200,000 for phase V of a Main Street improvement initiative. The funding will be used to replace blacktop and install lighting and benches.

“In Deep River this $200,000 grant will put the finishing touches on an overhaul of Main Street First Selectman Dick Smith has been working on for a number of years, to include new street surfacing, the installation of new benches, and new lighting as well,” Senator Eileen M. Daily (D-Westbrook) said. “I’m delighted these state funds will help Deep River put its best foot forward in a village district known to attract shoppers and visitors from New York and across New England.

“This grant will continue the revitalization of Deep River’s downtown,” said State Representative Phil Miller. “It will make Deep River an even more attractive place for residents, small businesses and visitors. I thank Governor Malloy for his strong support for our small towns and local businesses.”

Two awards were granted to Branford. The first award of $150,000 will aid the town in completing a pedestrian walkway and adding lighting to the town green. Branford also received a $30,000 grant for a housing feasibility study and for a consultant to work with the Branford Housing Authority and planning body to assess the town’s future housing needs.

"The governor is to be congratulated for his recognition of making Branford a more attractive place for its residents and businesses," said state Senator Ed Meyer (D-Guilford). "This grant could actually bring new jobs to the town."

"These STEAP grants enhance our quality of life in Branford and I thank the Governor for his support and for delivering the good news in person," said State Representative Lonnie Reed (D-Branford). "Branford’s town center is a vibrant hub of activity and this grant will ensure the pedestrian walkway extends around our town green and that it is well lit, safe and in excellent repair. Shoppers, restaurant-goers, families pushing strollers and exercisers of all ages—everyone benefits from these walkway improvements."

“I’m delighted that we could bring financial assistance to Branford to improve the beautiful downtown area,” said Rep. Pat Widlitz (D-Guilford, Branford). “The town green is the pride of Branford and the hub of activity for all ages.”

Under Governor Malloy’s leadership, the State Bond Commission allocated $20 million for STEAP grants on September 23, 2011. The awards were granted in part due to project readiness and their impact on overall regional economic development. Two grants to the towns of Putnam and Thompson were announced at press events yesterday.

Griswold, Conn. — Some may say it was fitting that First Selectman Philip Anthony cut a red tape Friday morning to formally reopen the Bitgood Road bridge.

Griswold First Selectman Philip Anthony, left, cuts a red ribbon across the new Bitgood Road bridge Friday.
At right is Selectman and state Rep. Steve Mikutel, D-Griswold. Alison Shea /NorwichBulletin.com

The refurbishing of the bridge ran into some bureaucratic red tape and took much longer than originally anticipated, according to Anthony and residents of the road.

The state Department of Transportation closed the bridge in 2008, after an inspection showed steel support beams had rusted and damaged concrete bridge supports. Two years went by before bids went out on the project, which frustrated residents and town officials.

The bids originally were set to go out in February 2010, but the process was delayed several months because of bureaucracy and slow receipt of engineering reports, Anthony said. He thanked the residents at the opening for their patience during the “inconvenience.”

Bitgood Road runs between routes 201 and 138 and was a popular cut-through road to get from one state road to the other. Closing the bridge forced drivers, including those who live on the road, to take long detours.

“It’s an extra three miles all the way around down Campbell Road. And it’s like a snake path,” said Stan Stradczuk, a lifelong Bitgood Road resident who described nearby Campbell Road as narrow, winding and dark.

Stradczuk, his sister, Patty, and their mom, Alice, all Bitgood Road residents, were among those who came out to wait in the cold for the bridge to open.

Shorter commute

Patty Stradczuk said she was excited about the reopening.

“I can leave five minutes later for work now,” she said.

Richard Campbell, who lives on Campbell Road, said he’s been waiting for this day “since 2:30 on the Tuesday before Thanksgiving in 2008,” referring to when traffic on his usually quiet road started to get bad.

The frustrating delays proved valuable, however. As the economy tanked in 2008, construction costs dropped dramatically. The original $1.6 million estimate to replace the bridge was cut almost in half by the time bids came in.

The new bridge cost just less than $1 million and was completed on time, said Scott Medeiros, of Putnam, the project’s resident engineer. The 21st-century construction methods and design will outlive all the current residents of the road, Medeiros said.

The reopened bridge is the first of three the town will replace in the next two years. A bridge on Edmond Road and another on Bitgood Road near Route 201 already are fully funded for replacement and set to go out to bid in 2012 and 2013, respectively, Anthony said. As with the Bitgood bridge, the federal government will pick up 80 percent of the tab, Anthony said.

“We’re trying very hard to keep to that schedule so there are no more delays,” Anthony said.

For the first time in many years, veterans buried in Ames Cemetery in Lisbon were recognized with American flags Friday morning.

The ceremony was organized by Matthew Tirocchi, 15, of Lisbon, as part of the culmination of many months of field work and research toward his Eagle Scout award, Boy Scouting’s highest honor. Matthew spent the summer mapping the 600 graves in the cemetery and finding the forgotten veterans among them.

Matthew told the crowd of about 70 people Friday that he had found the graves of veterans from nearly every military conflict in American history, back to the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812. Several Civil War veterans he found will now have their final resting places listed in federal records.

“I talked to a few (veterans) and they said it was an honor to be here, that they like coming to these ceremonies,” Matthew said. “It felt nice to hear that.”

Officials at the town, state and federal level praised Matthew’s project at Friday’s flag-posting ceremony.

U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney, D-2nd district, and state Rep. Steve Mikutel, D-Griswold, said Matthew’s project was inspirational.

“We are a better nation and a better world” for veterans’ efforts, Mikutel said. “Until now, many veterans in this cemetery were known only to God, but thanks to Matt’s efforts, they’re no longer forgotten.”

Courtney said Matthew’s project was an important way to encourage young people to serve — young people will fight for their country based on how they see older vets treated, Courtney said.

“We have to make sure our vets are taken care of when they return home, and Matt understands that,” Courtney said.

First Selectman Tom Sparkman and state Sen. Edith Prague, D-Columbia, said veterans in their families had sacrificed for their country, so seeing veterans recognized meant a lot to them.

“We have so much to thank veterans for,” Prague said. “Our way of life was not just given to us, it was assured by those who came to ensure we lived in peace and freedom.”

Hartford - A package of economic development and jobs-growth initiatives passed both chambers of the General Assembly Wednesday night with nearly unanimous bipartisan support.

The bill authorizes $626 million in bonding over two years to pay for a series of tax credits, investments and other measures aimed at lowering Connecticut's 8.9 percent unemployment rate and improving the quality of the work force.

Also included were plans to streamline the processes for obtaining various state permits.

The bill passed the House 147-1, with state Rep. Chris Coutu, R-Norwich, casting the lone "no" vote. It passed the Senate 34-1, with a nay from Sen. Kevin Witkos, R-Canton.

"These incentives have been sorely overdue for a long time," said state Sen. Edith Prague, D-Columbia.

Many of the package's initiatives resulted from Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's recent listening tour across the state.

Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield, emphasized that the bonding will fit within the existing debt limits set by the Malloy administration.

Rep. Mikutel addresses the House Chamber during the debate on the Governor's jobs initiative.

"We're not adding new debt, we're finding better ways to spend our money," McKinney said.

During the House debate, state Rep. Steve Mikutel, D-Griswold, praised the package and Malloy's effort to meet with scores of business leaders and groups to hear their suggestions and concerns.

"I have not always been a supporter of the governor, but I tell you I'm impressed with his activist approach" to job creation, Mikutel said. "This is a real document, a document that reflects the needs of our employers."

Mikutel called attention to the bill's investments in expanding job training at state community colleges. He said that many manufacturing employers have reported difficulty finding enough skilled workers to fill their job openings.

Sen. Andrea Stillman, D-Waterford, made a similar point during the Senate debate.

"We're proving that we're listening to our manufacturers who are saying, 'Please, help us find new well-trained employees,'" Stillman said.

But this wasn't enough to get Coutu's vote. He said he liked a few items in the package, such as the streamlined permitting process, but couldn't get over the final price tag, which comes in a year in which the state has already raised taxes on residents and businesses.

"My only purpose on this Earth right now is visiting business owners and asking them what's wrong," said Coutu, who is campaigning to replace U.S. Rep. Joe Courtney, D-2nd District, in 2012. "Very few of them say, 'I need the government to raise my taxes and give other people the tax money.' "

House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk, said the package was the result of numerous hours of discussion and compromise between Democrats and Republicans. "I'm proud of this bill, and I'm proud of the process that took place to create this bill," he said.

The package will:

• Require state agencies such as the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection to adopt a streamlined permitting process.
• Create a Small Business Express program to provide small businesses and manufacturers with loans, forgivable loans and matching grants that range from $10,000 to $250,000.
• Create a Subsidized Training and Employment Program to help small businesses and small manufacturers train and employ workers.
• Permit two wine festivals a year in Connecticut instead of just one.
• Authorize up to $50 million in additional funding for the Department of Transportation's Fix-It-First Bridge Program.
• Double to 100 the number of small manufacturing companies that can participate in the Manufacturing Reinvestment Account program.
• Make the Business Entity Tax, currently a $250 annual payment, payable every other year.
• Expand and rebrand the governor's First Five program of economic development incentives. It will now be the First Five Plus program and will provide growth incentives for up to 10 projects this fiscal year.
• Require boards of education to better promote vocational and technical career fields to students and their parents.
• Lower to $25,000 from $100,000 the minimum investment required to qualify for the "angel investor" income-tax credit.
• Expand the precision manufacturing program at Asnuntuck Community College, which is in Enfield, and make investments to establish or expand manufacturing technology programs at regional community-technical colleges.
• Provide $20 million to remediate and market for private development five "geographically diverse" state-owned contaminated properties, known as brownfields.
• Allow the Connecticut Airport Authority to set up new airport development zones.
• Provide $5 million in annual funding for an energy efficiency boiler program for nonprofit organizations and housing authorities.

Through the efforts of Rep. Mikutel over the past several years, historic Slater Library will receive $125,000 for energy efficiency upgrades such as new windows for the first floor and additional carpeting and chimney repair. The brownstone and granite facility at 26 Main Street was a gift to the village of Jewett City from John F. Slater in 1884.

“Tens of thousands of people have benefitted from the use of Slater Library over the past 100 years,” said Rep. Mikutel. “This grant allows for the sufficient upgrading to ensure Slater remains a place of learning for thousands of future area residents.”

Additionally, the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Research Center in Griswold will remain on the cutting edge of bio-research thanks to a grant to fund construction of a new research building. $500,000 will fund the design and construction a 3,000 square foot “clean” building for mosquito, bird and plant research at the facility. Eight construction jobs will be created in association with the new building.

“The research on plant and pest species performed at the Griswold Research Center has benefitted farmers on both the local and national level,” said Rep. Mikutel. “I thank Governor Malloy and the bonding commission for their approval.”

The areas of research at the Agricultural Center in Griswold include:

• EEE virus
• Non-native species eradication
• Developing pest resistant hybrid strains

The issue kept coming up Monday during a day-long hearing that is examining the response by the electric companies that frustrated thousands of Connecticut residents - including some who were without power for more than a week.

Some officials said as many as 90 percent of the outages were caused by falling trees.

Some critics have focused in sharply on the decision by Connecticut Light & Power Company to cut the number of line crews over the years - at a time when the number of customers was growing. As such, they have complained that the company was better prepared for Hurricane Gloria - 26 years ago - than it was this year for Irene.

With a lower amount of linemen, the company was required to call in crews from other states at the prevailing rates. Today, CL&P employs 422 workers in the category of "line mechanics and trouble-shooters," compared to 385 in 2001.

The opening speaker of the day-long proceedings was CL& P president and chief operating officer Jeff Butler, who has been the public face of the company throughout the storm and who strongly defended its performance Monday.

No storm in the company's history, he said, had caused more damage. He defended CL&P's response was "appropriate, effective, strong" in the immediate aftermath of the storm, adding that 2 million customers throughout New England lost power.

One of the problems is that Connecticut has the second highest number of trees, on a percentage basis, in the United States.

All 149 of the towns covered by CL&P were impacted. Across the eastern seaboard, the storm could cost $12 billion.

At the peak, nearly 700,000 customers were out of power simultaneously. But with in-and-out outages, the overall number of customers who were restored was more than 1 million. More than 100 miles of wire was replaced, and more than 1,500 roads were blocked across the state.

During Gloria, 506,000 customers were impacted, and it took 10 days to get them all back to power. The recent storm was also worse than Hurricane Bob.

The company, he said, actually started planning for Irene six days ahead of time.

Every employee at CL&P, Butler said, "did an outstanding job."

In the early part of the hearing, both Democratic and Republican legislators were largely deferential to Butler and did not blast either CL&P or UI officials who were testifying.

From Greenwich to eastern Connecticut, legislators and customers had initially complained loudly about CL&P's response. Four days after the storm, power had not been restored in central Greenwich areas near Route 1 like Northfield Street, as opposed to the more rural "backcountry" neighborhoods north of the Merritt Parkway that are far more difficult to restore because there might be only three homes, for example, in a 50-acre area.

Regarding the future, Butler says it is not only "the trees and the trim zone" because some of the problems came from the "hazard trees" that might be 70 feet tall and are not immediately hanging over the wires. The tree-trimming cycles have basically not changed in the past decade, according to the company. The company spends about $21.5 million per year in the normal maintenance program to trim trees at a cost of about $5,800 per mile.

"People are very covetous of their trees, and I am of mine," said Sen. Joan Hartley, a Waterbury Democrat. "Aging trees need to be tended to. ... It's something that you push off and don't want to deal with."

Sen. John Fonfara, the longtime co-chairman of the legislature's powerful energy committee, said that legislators are seeking results from the hearing.

"This is not a showpiece," Fonfara said, telling Butler later that "the company and your workers did great work."

For the first time, the joint committees that held the hearing Monday accepted testimony from citizens via Facebook and Twitter - two Internet services that were not available years ago. The hearing began shortly after 9:30 a.m. and lasted past 5 p.m. with no lunch break.

One of the biggest problems was a lack of communication between the electric companies, customers, and local leaders. With the Internet and landline telephone service down for many customers, it was even more difficult to communicate.

Canterbury First Selectman Brian H. Sear said, "I was very frustrated. ... I hope we learn from this. ... There were people coming to me with all sorts of information that turned out not to be true."

Sear, who oversees the Windham County town of about 5,000 residents, noted that a reliable, central communication point would have been helpful.

"When everything goes down, you have to use all the tools at your disposal," said Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams.

Sen. Edith Prague asked Sear if he was ever given an explanation about why CL&P trucks came into town and the workers were not sent out to get the lights back on.

"I don't want to go down that road," Sear said. "They don't want to pay overtime. It's a political decision. ... No, there never was an official [explanation]. Maybe it wasn't safe for these crews to proceed. I don't know. They didn't have clearance."

Prague said, "They sat in your town for hours. ... I hope CL&P is listening closely to this."

East Haven Mayor April Capone, representing one of the worst-damaged sections in the entire state, told lawmakers Monday that 25 homes were a total loss and an additional 20 are currently uninhabitable. There was a mandatory evacuation order along Cosey Beach Avenue on the Saturday before the storm hit, and several rescues insured that there was no loss of life. At one point, 90 percent of East Haven was out of power.

Based on the responses by the National Guard and the state police, Capone said, "I could not have asked more from the state."

From house to house and block to block, the damage was far different along Cosey Beach Avenue. Some houses were completely destroyed, while the Sandpiper Restaurant across the street from the FEMA staging area suffered virtually no damage and is currently up and running.

Capone provided a tour on Friday for U.S. House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro, and FEMA officials, among others.

"Only God knows why our little section of Cosey Beach was hit so hard," Capone said. "I don't know why it hit us when it did and where it did. ... We want our shoreline rebuilt. East Haven is one of the last places in the state where an average person can afford a home on the water. Some of these are cottages that are handed down from generation to generation. It's not the Hamptons."

State Rep. James Crawford, a Westbrook Democrat, told Capone that he was stunned when he heard that some state residents would be without power for 7 to 10 days.

"I've seen real storms, and this wasn't a real storm," he said.

Sen. Kevin Witkos, the ranking Senate Republican on the energy committee, thanked Butler for the company's response, saying that some employees worked 16 hours a day.

House Majority Leader J. Brendan Sharkey said to UI officials that "I want to thank you for your responsiveness to me personally during the storm."

But Sharkey added that his view was that "there weren't enough people on the ground, ready to go" on the first day.

"Do you feel you had enough crews on the ground, Monday morning, to address the problems that you had?" Sharkey asked.

"Yes," a company official said, adding that some workers had to be held back because they wanted to go out during the storm and start working.

Rep. Lonnie Reed, a Branford Democrat, said that the crews from Texas and Oklahoma were helpful, but were not particularly coordinated in showing up in the towns on time. The crews came in for a breakfast buffet that was provided by the company and then received a safety briefing on their first day for 90 minutes before heading out to the towns to restore power. Crews from CL&P's parent company also came from western Massachusetts and New Hampshire.

Rep. Steven Mikutel, a Griswold Democrat, said, "I've never seen so many trees fall on the lines. I still can't understand why we had more trees this time than Hurricane Gloria. ... Short of leveling every tree within 70 feet of the lines, what would you do differently? You're changing the character of my town if you want to do real control here."

Gloria, by comparison, was a faster-moving storm than the slow-moving Irene, which hovered long enough to keep pouring rain and winds across Connecticut.

"What does the future hold for underground wires?" Mikutel asked. "Economically, is that ever going to be feasible?"

Placing the lines underground is three to six times more expensive than putting them above ground, according to UI. About 90 percent of the outages were caused by trees, the company said.

Mikutel noted that the power was back on by Monday night in Jewett City because the municipal utility companies had acted quickly. Ken Sullivan, the director of utilities for Jewett City, said there are 2,300 electrical meters in the relatively small service area, and the utility dedicates an entire month in the fall to tree trimming. Irene brought winds of 60 miles per hour, but some officials are questioning what would happen if the winds ever got to 120 miles per hour. Once some of the municipal utility workers finished their work, they helped CL&P to restore power.

There was relatively little storm damage in Norwalk, and the South Norwalk Electric and Water Company borrowed crews from the water company to help solve various electric problems.

Sen. Edith Prague, an outspoken liberal Democrat from Columbia, said that half of Groton that was covered by CL&P had virtual complete outages, but the local electric company in the other half of Groton had restored the area quickly.

Senator Hartley, who said her overall dealings with CL&P were positive, questioned how long it took for the out-of-state workers to get dispatched. A company official said it was "highly unlikely" that workers would be waiting around for 24 hours, as Hartley had heard.

After CL&P finished its opening testimony at about 10:45 a.m. Monday, the president and CEO of UI Holdings Company, James P. Torgerson, said that 363 crews - far beyond the company's normal 60 to 65 - were working at 10,000 separate locations to restore power in the company's service area. Overall, 75 percent of the customers were back in three days and 99 percent in 7 days, he said.

The company will spend millions on call-center technology and other efforts to improve service in the future, he said.

State Rep. Stephen Dargan said that the power outages were essentially a chicken-and-egg situation because the workers in the utility trucks would say they could not get their work done until the tree crews did their work. Then the tree crews said they couldn't work until the utility company shut off the power.

"The utility truck would come, and they would leave. The tree truck would come, and they would leave,"

Dargan said, adding that even West Haven's mayor did not have power in the days after the storm.

Lawmakers made opening statements before the power companies testified Monday.

"We are hear to examine Connecticut's readiness and response," said Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams, the highest-ranking senator.

With proper preparedness, the state will be "better prepared next time," Williams said.

"We must adapt, coming out of Hurricane Irene," he said. "We can never guard against every aspect of a weather emergency, but we can plan better" in the future. The point of Monday's hearing is to "make sure that we are as best prepared as we can possibly be," Williams said.

Today, the utilities testified until about at the state Capitol complex. Simsbury first selectman Mary Glassman testified on behalf of cities and towns as the current president of the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities.

At the peak, 65 percent of Simsbury customers were without power. In addition, Route 185 - a major thoroughfare for Hartford commuters - was closed on Monday morning following Sunday's storm.

Game and practice facilities for Griswold recreation leagues are beginning to take shape at 211 Sheldon Road, but the fields won’t see any play until next year.

“We anticipate the field being ready for play for next fall,” said Sheldon Road Field Committee member John Faulise. “We’d like the field to get one growing season in, at least, before it starts to be used.”

Faulise said that construction will continue this fall with seeding of the fields and installation of an irrigation system. The seven-member committee is currently applying for permits to begin construction of a building to house a concession stand and restrooms.

So far, the 5.5-acre site has received all the fill material it will need and the topsoil has been screened, Faulise said. The leach field and a septic system have been installed, as has the framework for the future scoreboard. The upper part of the parking area, adjacent to Sheldon Road, has also been paved.

The fields are intended to host football, soccer and other teams for both practice and play. The town first approved construction of the project in 2009 on property it received from the state Department of Environmental Protection through the efforts of Griswold selectmen and state Rep. Steve Mikutel (D-45th District).

“The price tag [for the project] would be in excess of $400,000,” said Faulise. “We’re working within a budget with grants and donations of $150,000. We’ve had a lot of local support from a lot of local businesses and contractors.”

American Industries, a Griswold construction, gravel and asphalt company, has been among the major donors and “deserves a lot of thanks for where we are [on the construction schedule],” Faulise said. He said that the company has been doing site work when they have crew available for the town project.

Faulise’s own landscaping and civil engineering business, Boundaries, donated the design work on the project. And the scoreboard, currently stored at the town garage, was donated by Jewett City Savings Bank, “to the tune of $15,000,” he said.

Construction of the field has been a true community effort, said Faulise. “There’s a long list of contributors. If I tried to name them all, I’d probably leave somebody out,” he said.

In addition, fundraisers like a recent wine-tasting have helped fill the project’s coffers, and other events are planned for future months in conjunction with the town’s recreation department. When the fields are competed, Faulise said, they will be turned over to the Griswold Recreation Department, which will govern scheduling and use of the fields.

Faulise said that his committee has been working with the recreation department to promote the project and sign up donors. “We’re still looking for additional donations of fencing and other assorted site improvements,” he said.

Collective outrage by Eastern Connecticut lawmakers about the acquittal of Casey Anthony in the death of her daughter could lead to stricter laws regarding parents who delay reporting a missing child.

State Reps. Mae Flexer, D-Killingly, and Susan Johnson, D-Windham, are among legislators who said they plan to pursue legislation known as Caylee’s Law during the next legislative session.

The proposed law comes in the wake of the Casey Anthony trial in Florida. Anthony recently was acquitted of murder in the death of her daughter, Caylee, 2. Caylee was missing for 31 days before her disappearance was reported. Police charged Casey Anthony in the death of her daughter.

Flexer and Johnson said the law would make it a felony if parents or guardians do not notify law enforcement of the disappearance of a child within 24 hours.

Johnson called it “simply unacceptable” to delay reporting.

“As a mother and grandmother, it breaks my heart to think that some parents knowingly jeopardize their children’s safety,” Johnson said. “Families have a very special duty to the members of their family.”

Flexer estimates she has 500 contacts, emails and phone calls from people appalled by the Anthony verdict and questioning why the state does not have a specific law in place addressing the issue.

“It’s rare for us to get this many contacts,” Flexer said. “It really resonates, especially when so many come from the district.”

Flexer said the existing risk of injury to a minor statute could be applied in certain situations when a child is placed in danger, but Caylee’s Law would go a step further.

State Sen. John A. Kissel, R-Enfield, last week announced his plans to propose similar legislation. Kissel is a ranking member of the Judiciary Committee and Judiciary and Program Review & Investigation, according to the state Senate Republican website.

State Rep. Steve Mikutel, D-Griswold, said language would be added to the risk of injury to a minor statute explicitly addressing the failure of a parent or guardian to report a missing child.

“The risk of injury statute protects kids under the age of 16 from harm or neglect,” Mikutel said. “It does not contain specific wording about not reporting a missing child. This should be a felony.”

He also said false information given by a caregiver to law enforcement during a disappearance should be included.

“This woman, in my opinion, murdered her child and not only failed to report it, but deliberately gave false information. She misled police. They should have slam-dunked her on that. I’ll work with my colleagues to send a message. In Connecticut, if you engage in neglectful conduct, you’re going to pay a stiff price,” Mikutel said.

Windham County State’s Attorney Patricia Froehlich said she would not want to comment on any proposal without reading the details.

“It’s too easy to have a knee-jerk reaction,” Froehlich said. “I don’t want to do that.”
Corene Leone, of Norwich, said common sense should make clear if a parent deserves to be charged.

“If your kid is under the age of 5 and they’re missing for more than two minutes, you should be notifying police. Any longer, and there should be an all-out search party,” Leone said.

State Rep. Steve Mikutel D-Griswold, earlier this month presented a citation to state Connecticut police Sgt. Luis Rosa to commemorate his upcoming participation in the 2011 Special Olympics World Games in Greece.

Steve Mikutel honors local state trooper Sgt. Luis Rosa

Sgt. Rosa is a resident of Griswold and will be the team leader of the final leg of the Law Enforcement Torch Run beginning in Athens and traveling through Greece, Istanbul and Cyprus.

He was honored in both the House of Representatives and Senate chambers.

“I would like to thank Sgt. Rosa for his tireless efforts in creating awareness of Special Olympics,” said Rep. Mikutel. “Especially for delivering a message of hope to communities where people with intellectual disabilities continue to fight for acceptance.”

From June 9 through June 25, the Flame of Hope will stop in over 100 cities and towns honoring the spirit of the Special Olympics global movement. At each stop, the Flame of Hope will be carried by teams of Special Olympics athletes and law enforcement personnel from around the world on a course allowing thousands of spectators to witness its important journey.

Rep. Steve Mikutel, whose 45th Assembly District consists of Griswold, Lisbon, Plainfield and Voluntown, didn't expect any slaps on the back from those in Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's administration at the close of the legislative session. Though both the governor and Mikutel share the same Democrat Party affiliation, the veteran lawmaker opposed much of the governor's policy agenda.

Mikutel voted against the budget, objected to the tax package, criticized the labor deal, opposed both the law that will decriminalize small amounts of marijuana and changes that will allow earlier release of prisoners who demonstrate good behavior and get involved in prison programs.

This Democrat harkens back to a time when Gov. William A. O'Neill and like-minded moderates in the legislature dominated the party. He bristles at the suggestion that because he will not support certain legislation, such as providing greater protection against discrimination for transgendered individuals, he is a closet Republican.

"I'm a populist at heart," said Mikutel when we sat down for a recent interview. "I'm for the working person. I just think sometimes we, as a party, have lost touch with what's really important to the people who are out there working hard every day for a living."

To prove his populist credentials he points to his support for the sick-leave law mandating that service businesses with 50 or more employees, such as restaurants and health care providers, provide up to five days of paid sick leave to workers. Republicans were almost unanimous in their opposition out of concern for hurting businesses.

"These are people, the waiters and waitresses, who live off the crumbs of the rich. They deserve a couple of days off, with pay, if they get sick. That's not going to break any business that size," he said.

What he does fear could break some of the families in his blue-collar district are the substantial tax increases approved in the $41 billion, two-year budget.

"We heard during the campaign that tax increases would be a last resort, instead we got them right out of the box," Mikutel said.

Perhaps most frustrating, he said, was the decision, after the governor came up $400 million short of his $2 billion target in labor concessions, to take the money from a projected surplus rather than make additional cuts.

"Once again we took the easy way out. The tough call would have been to cut into the spending. It would have demonstrated to everyone that we were serious about putting our fiscal house in order. We need fiscal stability to satisfy the business community that we won't be back for more taxes or new fees. But I don't know that we got that. I don't think business thinks we got that," said Mikutel.

Fearing that his comments were sounding too anti-Malloy, Mikutel added, "Don't get me wrong, he's a real leader, he pushed his agenda, you've got to hand it to him." The economy may begin to rebound and the state fiscal outlook stabilize, he said, adding, "I hope it does. If it does he'll be in great shape politically. But if not …"

Butting heads with party leaders in the legislature did not just happen with the arrival of Malloy. During the administration of Republican M. Jodi Rell, Mikutel often found himself disagreeing with those in his party, particularly on fiscal issues. It helps explain why, despite election to 10 straight terms, he has no committee chairmanship.

"The trade-off is not good enough," he said of the compromises that would be necessary to gain more influence.

On some policies, "I'm not far off" from the administration's approach, Mikutel said. He recognizes a need for additional tax revenues, but contends they were too much, while not enough state spending was cut.

He agrees that it is a good idea to give most prisoners an incentive of earlier release if they behave and take advantage of programs that benefit their chance of becoming good citizens and getting a job. But, Mikutel said, there are not enough programs in place and the law should have exempted violent criminals, particularly sex offenders, from early release.

As for making possession of a little pot equivalent to a traffic ticket, he said, "it sends the wrong message, particularly to young people."

Mikutel, who also serves as a selectman in Griswold, wonders if the party might try to find someone to challenge him in a primary in 2012. No one will easily knock him off because, while his positions may be discordant among Democrats in Hartford, he's probably right in line with many in his conservative, though Democratic, district.

He knows it too, which may make his contrarian positions as much practical as they are gutsy.

HARTFORD - The 2011 General Assembly session ended Wednesday night, but one issue still remains: final approval of a crucial deal with the state employee unions.

The agreement calls for $1.6 billion in projected savings and concessions over two years - a large chunk of the state's two-year, $40 billion fiscal plan that would need to be filled with cuts and layoffs if the agreement is not ratified by the unions. With no deal, the state legislature would be forced to go back into special session to balance the budget.

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy reiterated his point Thursday that thousands of state employees would be laid off if the rank-and-file rejects the deal that was crafted by union leaders and the Malloy administration.

"I'm not bullying anybody," Malloy told reporters at the state Capitol. "Talking in real terms and telling people the truth is not bullying. I just want people to understand the reality."

Malloy worked closely with the labor unions during his election campaign last fall, and their help was crucial as he beat Republican Tom Foley by one half of 1 percent. He says that labor should not be blamed for the state's problems, adding that some bad decisions had clearly been made in the past.

Both Republicans and Democrats say it would make little sense for the unions to turn down the deal. Some union members, however, have spoken against the agreement by writing on blogs throughout the state.

House Republican leader Larry Cafero said the following message should be sent to the unions: "Look what we're offering you here. Grab it and run. It's the best deal going."

Rep. Steven Mikutel, a conservative Democrat from Griswold, said he was surprised about the concerns raised by some union members.

"You would think it would be a slam dunk," Mikutel said. "All hell's going to break loose if they turn down that agreement. I think they'd be crazy to turn it down. They get four years of no layoffs. Then they get 3 percent in each of the next three years. That's a pretty good deal."

Mikutel added, "If you ask the person on the street, who is not a state employee, they would tell you that's a sweet deal. Maybe that tells you how disconnected they are from the private sector. People I talk to on the outside say Malloy was not tough enough on the concessions. The union leadership is with Malloy, but there's a lot of grumbling with the rank and file."

"I'm hearing that the corrections people don't want to give in," he said. "They feel they've got a tough, stressful job and they're not appreciated."

Despite widespread reports that many prison guards were dissatisfied with the deal, Steve Curran, a correction officer who is a board member of Local 1565 of the Connecticut Corrections Employees, declined to predict the deal's chances.

"I'll have to wait for the vote," Curran said. "This vote has to be a personal vote."

Curran, who works at the Garner Correctional Institution in Newtown, conceded that some union members were skeptical of the wellness program being pushed by the state. Union members would be required to pay an additional $100 per month if they refused to join the state's program, which will require age-appropriate tests, such as colonoscopies for those over the age of 50.

"The idea of being told to go to the doctor once a year is something we have to warm up to," said Curran, 47, who also sits on the board of AFSCME.

A rejection of the deal would prompt additional work by the legislature and consternation about changes in the now-settled budget.

"There would be some rather serious cutting, and they would have to come back in special session," said former state Rep. Michael Lawlor, a high-ranking undersecretary in Malloy's budget office.

Matt O'Connor, a spokesman for the union coalition, said that much of the voting would take place during the week of June 20, with the goal of completing the voting by Friday, June 24.

HARTFORD — The state Democratic House early Tuesday morning adopted a budget implementer bill Monday, two days before adjournment, that assumes union ratification of a $1.6 billion concessions package with state workers that Republicans complained over-estimates savings.

The vote was 84-63 after more than six hours of debate.

The bill also closes a $400 million gap over two years that Democratic Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s administration recommends be done mainly by using surplus money in the $40.1 billion biennial budget approved by lawmakers in early May.

“We are still in an economic recession and there’s talk now of a double-dip recession,” said Rep. Steven Mikutel, D-Griswold. “It seems to me it would not be a prudent decision to use our surplus to close the gap.”

The bill now goes to the state Senate where it is expected to be adopted Tuesday before Wednesday’s midnight deadline.

The 15 unions, which include 34 bargaining units, are not expected to finish voting on the package until June 24, with passage requiring 80 percent of those voting to be in favor of the wage, health and pension changes. There is a no layoff clause for four years for those unions who approve the contract changes and the bill allows the agreement to go into effect five days after the final union vote, if the lawmakers are not called back into session.

State Rep. Craig Minor, R-Litchfield, said Malloy has on several occasions indicated he favored lawmakers voting on the negotiated contract and he was surprised that the administration is not following through on that.

He asked state Rep. Toni Walker, D-New Haven, co-chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, if she would make such a recommendation, but Walker only replied that letting contracts go into effect has been the usual method for at least a decade.

The state Office of Fiscal Analysis could not back up the estimated savings in the contract package, which left House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk, to characterize almost $600 million of the $1.6 billion savings over two years as “wishful thinking.” “Our own Office of Fiscal Analysis doesn’t have enough information to verify this,” he said.

He applauded the proposed Value-Based Health Care Plan in the union deal that requires workers to get regular physicals and age-appropriate health screenings, for a projected savings of $205 million over two years, but he said the experience of companies that have tried this is that it usually costs money in the early years before there is a savings.

State Budget Chief Ben Barnes has said that the health savings were worked out with health care actuaries.

One of the main areas of confusion for the workers is this health plan, with the union leadership countering misinformation on what it means.

In other areas of the proposed contract, Cafero and others have questioned the $180 million in savings based on procurement ideas proposed by union members, and $90 million in technology initiatives, but the union leadership argued that this is a very conservative figure of potential savings over two years.

Malloy has said if the contract revisions, which include a hard wage freeze for the next two years and wage increases of 3 percent in each of the following three years, were not ratified, thousands more than the original 4,700 workers he predicted would be laid off out of the 45,000 members.

The implementer bill covered a long list of items in the budget, including canceling a surcharge on Connecticut Light and Power customers that raised $40 million to balance the current 2011 budget. The state also does not have to borrow $646 million this year to balance the current budget, which would have necessitated additional surcharges.

There is no plan at this point to reimburse the CL&P customers, who paid an average of $2.65 a month since January.

Other items in the implementer bill include: dropping a proposed cabaret tax on music venues, which was estimated to raise some $900,000, but keeping the so called “Amazon” tax, which aims to collect sales tax from Internet businesses selling to Connecticut customers with revenue estimated at $18.8 over two years.

There has already been pushback from big sellers, such as Overstock.com, who are pulling their ads from their affiliates, but Barnes wasn’t worried. “I’m pretty optimistic that we’ll meet our pretty modest revenue estimate,” he said Monday.

The bill also details fare increases for the Metro North’s New Haven rail line with a 1.25 percent hike in January 2012 and 1 percent hikes each year after that from 2013 to 2018.

It also holds harmless payment in lieu of taxes for manufacturing machinery and equipment for towns, which would received the same amount in 2012 that they got in 2011 and provides for about $8 million in competitive regional performance incentive grants.

The plan passed 83-63 following six-and-a-half hours of debate. The Senate is expected to take up the massive, 277-page bill on Tuesday.

When lawmakers approved the budget package last month, they assumed the Democratic governor's negotiators could reach a two-year, $2 billion labor savings agreement with state employee unions. Instead, that deal was $1.6 billion, $400 million short.

Malloy's plan to make up the difference relies on using more than $319 million of the approximately $1 billion surplus built into the budget -- a move that was criticized during Monday's debate by the Republican minority and one Democrat.

"We are still in an economic recession and there's talk now of a double-dip recession," said Rep. Steven Mikutel, D-Griswold. "It seems to me it would not be a prudent decision to use our surplus to close the gap."

The bill also sets up a method for the General Assembly to approve the tentative labor savings and concessions agreement, should lawmakers choose to act on it. The approximately 45,000 unionized state employees are not expected to finish voting on the deal until June 24, after the legislature adjourns on June 8.

Lawmakers can call themselves into a special session by June 30 to approve the contract. If they don't, the agreement is deemed to be approved by the legislature.

House Majority Leader Brendan Sharkey, D-Hamden, said it was responsible for lawmakers to pass the budget now, even though the unions have not yet ratified the deal. Not adopting a budget would send a signal to the state employees that the labor savings and concessions are not necessarily needed to balance the state's books.

The 277-page bill, he said, "provides the framework for ratification."

House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk, took issue with lawmakers essentially approving a labor deal he said doesn't add up financially, saying they were abdicating their responsibility as a legislature. He pointed to a review of the agreement by the General Assembly's nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Analysis that was requested by the House Republicans.

Throughout much of the report, OFA said it was unclear how certain savings would be achieved because the agency has not yet received all of the detailed, back-up information it needs to assess the estimates.

For example, a voluntary value-based health and dental plan, which requires participating employees to get specific medical exams, such as annual physicals, assumes $102.5 million in each year of the two-budget. But OFA said there was no back-up information to assess how the Malloy administration assumed 50 percent of state employees would participate, as well as other details.

The OFA said there also was no data available to determine how many people would pay a new $35 co-pay to use a hospital emergency room, or whether the projected savings from using new technologies -- $90 million over two years -- or pursuing union member savings ideas -- $180 million over two years -- are realistic.

Cafero said it was very important that lawmakers have an accurate assessment of the labor savings.

"It is incredibly important that we get this right because, remember, we took an oath to support this constitution and our constitution says we shall have a balanced budget by the end of this fiscal year," he said.

The massive budget bill includes 175 different sections that spell out the details of budget. Some sections make changes to the plan already approved last month, such as rolling back the planned three percent cabaret tax on establishments that offer live music, dancing or other entertainment while serving alcohol, and capping the tax on cigars at 50-cents apiece.

A watered-down version of a controversial bill to expand DNA collections was approved late Thursday night by the state House of Representatives.

The original version of the bill had called for DNA to be collected from all those arrested - but not convicted - of a serious felony. Now, the collection would not be made until the person was arrested for a second crime and had already been convicted for a previous crime.

In a vote about five minutes before midnight, the House voted 127 to 20 to pass the measure, which now goes to the Democratic-controlled state Senate.

Currently, DNA is taken upon conviction - not arrest - of a felony. But criminals who were convicted before 2004 did not have their DNA collected, and there would be no sample in the state's databank.

"It will establish the innocence of people who might be falsely accused," said Rep. John Hetherington, a New Canaan Republican. "I would strongly urge its adoption."

He said it was an example of the way the process should work because it was an overall compromise to get the measure passed.

Rep. T. R. Rowe, a Trumbull attorney, said, "I'm pleased it's been tightened up … and good for all parties."

Rep. Debralee Hovey, a Monroe Republican, said there must be a second serious felony arrest before a person's DNA would be taken.

"In my mind, this is one felony too many to be convicted," Hovey said, adding that a person who has been arrested two times for felonies has likely committed other crimes and has not been caught.

"You have to have been convicted of a previous felony to have your DNA taken when you are arrested on a serious felony," said Rep. Ernie Hewett, a New London Democrat who was the bill's chief proponent and studied the issue extensively.

He mentioned a series of 13 murders, dating back to March 1987, that he said might have been prevented if DNA had been taken from a man who was arrested for another crime in January 1987.

"Congress has mandated that DNA be taken upon arrest for all federal crimes," Hewett said in his closing remarks shortly before midnight. "DNA is the truth - truth that identifies."

He mentioned the case of the "East Coast rapist" who was recently arrested because of DNA.

A serious felony, Hewett said, is defined as murder, felony murder, arson murder, first and second-degree manslaughter with a firearm, misconduct with a motor vehicle, among others.

The person does not have to be convicted on the second felony for the DNA to be collected, and the DNA would be erased from the system if the person was acquitted of the second felony.

Rep. Steve Mikutel, a veteran Democrat from Griswold, said, "I feel that it will help protect the public safety by solving many unsolved crimes. I think it will exonerate some people who are in prison. It's not quite strong enough, as I would have liked it. It was a better bill in the original version, but I understand why the changes were made."

Deputy House Speaker Marie Kirkley-Bey of Hartford thanked Hewett for doing the legwork to get the bill finally passed.

"Fingerprints are outdated. DNA will be the way they test people in the future," Kirkley-Bey said.

"DNA is a wonderful thing," said Rep. Christopher Coutu, a Norwich Republican. "I strongly support it, and I hope my colleagues do the same."

Rep. Frank Nicastro, a Bristol Democrat, said that 24 other states have similar laws, and those laws have been upheld in the courts.

"This bill is personal. Almost 31 years ago, my son's mother was raped and murdered in Bridgeport," said Rep. Don Clemons, a Democrat. "At that time, there were several women who were raped and murdered in Bridgeport. To this day, those crimes have not been prosecuted. Nobody has been brought to justice for those crimes. So when you talk about not having closure, I know personally. … As a family, we have not had closure."

Rep. Gary Holder-Winfield, a New Haven Democrat who is arguably the biggest opponent of the bill in the legislature's judiciary committee, said, "I can do math, so I recognize this bill will probably pass."

The reason, he said, is that the person is innocent of the second crime until proven guilty "with all due respect to those who think we are doing the right thing."

"It is not to clear anyone," he said.

Rep. Peter Tercyak, a New Britain Democrat, agreed with Holder-Winfield. "While DNA may be infallible, the people who test it are not," he said. "There will always be a victim to point to who could have been helped by this. … Our job is to look out for the rights of everybody in our state. I do not think this bill looks at the rights of everybody in our state. Personally, I still believe in rehabilitation. As a society, we've got more people locked up than anybody, percentage-wise. … Now, we're taking away the most basic rights to privacy and maintaining the integrity of our own body. … One of the things that makes America exceptional is that we value our rights."

But Rep. Stephen Dargan, the longtime co-chairman of the public safety committee, said he agreed with Clemons that there might be a chance that the family's case in Bridgeport could be solved.

"This actually works," Dargan said. "I would like to see it a lot stricter. … We call this chamber the act of compromise. This is a good initial step to get to the next stage. This isn't about somebody's rights. This is also about the rights of the victims."

The state currently cannot get the DNA of some criminals who are now in prison because of the laws, he said.

"In 99 percent of the cases in our country, it shows it works - at a minimum cost," Dargan said, referring to prisons as "hotels." "We need to go a little further. This is a bill that will work to protect the innocent in our state."

Rep. Al Adinolfi, a Republican from Cheshire, said his family had a similar situation as his 23-year-old nephew was killed with a friend by "professionals" who must have committed crimes in the past.

“I would like to thank Sgt. Rosa for his tireless efforts in creating awareness of Special Olympics,” said Rep. Mikutel. “Especially for delivering a message of hope to communities where people with intellectual disabilities continue to fight for acceptance.”

From June 9-25, the Flame of Hope will stop in over 100 cities and towns honoring the spirit of the Special Olympics global movement. At each stop, the Flame of Hope will be carried by teams of Special Olympics athletes and law enforcement personnel from around the world on a course allowing thousands of spectators to witness its important journey.

To symbolize the significant contribution of law enforcement and the inclusion of Special Olympics athletes in this unified torch run, the final leg team will conduct extensive runs and ceremonies to heighten awareness of Special Olympics and the World Games.

Special Olympics is an international organization that changes lives through the power of sport by encouraging and empowering people with intellectual disabilities, promoting acceptance for all, and fostering communities of understanding and respect worldwide.

Hartford - The Democrat-controlled state House passed an anti-discrimination bill late Thursday night that supporters said would protect transgender people from discrimination but which some lawmakers feared could encourage cross-dressing teachers and Peeping Toms.

The measure, which passed on a 77-62 vote with all Republican opposition, would add "gender identity or expression" to the list of attributes protected under state law in matters of employment, housing, public accommodations and school settings. It would also allow individuals who view themselves as a different gender than their biological sex to use the restroom and locker room facilities of the gender with which they identify.

The bill now goes to the state Senate. Proponents said it would make life easier for transgender people, who regularly face discrimination. At least 13 states have approved similar legislation.

"It is important for those individuals who are in this situation," said state Rep. Gerald Fox, D-Stamford, who is the House chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

Yet critics were more outspoken Thursday night during the five hours of deliberations.

State Rep. Steve Mikutel, D-Griswold, voiced concern about the societal impact, particularly on children. He was disappointed to hear that the bill might protect a cross-dressing teacher who opts to switch his or her gender on a weekly basis.

"How does a young child deal with this situation where one day their teacher is dressed like a man and the next week he's dressed like a woman," Mikutel said. "I imagine that situation can happen."

State Rep. John Hetherington, R-New Canaan, criticized what he considered the spirit of the anti-discrimination bill: "I feel therefore I am."

"What we are doing is creating a class of persons who are able to define themselves," he said.

The bill sets a penalty for discrimination against transgender people of up to a year imprisonment or a fine of up to $2,000.

State Rep. Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk, said his opposition was founded in common sense, "not based on cruelty or meanness." He described a scenario in which a man who looks like a man but identifies as a woman creates a public disturbance at a restaurant by using the women's restroom.

"That might be offensive, shocking, disturbing to other people," Cafero said. "So maybe the proprietor of the restaurant says, 'Hey, excuse me, I can't have you use the restroom. Would you mind using the other one?' And now [the man] can say, 'You're violating my rights. Today I feel like a woman. I'm going into that bathroom. And if you don't let me, I'm going to sue you.'"

State Rep. T.R. Rowe, R-Trumbull, introduced an amendment that would have maintained segregation of the biological sexes in restrooms, locker rooms and for sleeping accommodations. The amendment failed 67-62.

Without such an amendment, Rowe said he feared the bill would protect and embolden perverts and Peeping Toms. He presented the situation of boys on a soccer team "availing themselves to the girls' locker room."

State Rep. Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford, described another bathroom scenario, this one involving his 6-year-old daughter. "Male genitalia," he said, "If we pass this bill today, that's what my daughter will be exposed to when we go out to a restaurant and she needs to use the bathroom, and I can't go in there with her."

And state Rep. Chris Coutu, R-Norwich, worried about options for protecting his young daughter if she were to be targeted while using a women's restroom. "What would happen if a pedophile or a predator … goes in that bathroom — could be dressed up, could not be — and just ran in real quick and does something to my daughter?" Coutu said.

The legislation received a spiritual defense by Kim Fawcett, D-Fairfield, a devout Christian would said she believes the bill would pass the "What Would Jesus Do?" test.

"The question I would ask myself tonight and maybe you is 'Would my God discriminate against any person because of gender identity?'" Fawcett said.

The bill generated substantial interest during its March public hearing before the Judiciary Committee.

Jerimarie Liesegang, founder of the CT TransAdvocacy Coalition, told of discrimination she has suffered as a transexual woman.

Her group receives numerous calls from transgender individuals who have lost jobs or been unable to secure work because they are transgender, Liesegang said in written testimony.

Liesegang said she was forced to shutter her own business several years ago because she lost contacts after her transition to a woman. She also lost custody of her children in a divorce.

"I lost so very much in my life simply because I am a transsexual," Liesegang said, "yet I also learned about true friends and people who did not judge me simply upon a stereotype or vicious statements by bigots, but rather took the time to see that I am an intelligent and warm human being."

Andrew McDonald, general counsel for Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, described in written testimony the story of a hardworking Stamford attorney who transitioned from a man to a woman.

"Suffice it to say she remains a very valuable asset to the city of Stamford as an attorney, and she remains a personal friend of both the governor and mine," he said.

The bill would include "gender identity or expression" as a protected characteristic along with race, national origin, sex and other attributes under current state law. It now moves to the Senate for further action.

State lawmakers voted 77 to 62 in favor of the bill, following five hours of debate that touched on such issues as employment law and whether pedophiles might be encouraged to misuse the law to track down young girls in women's restrooms.

Proponents said the legal protections are needed to help a small group of people who've experienced discrimination regarding employment and housing matters.

"It is a reality, and there are members of our community who face this crisis in their own lives and all we're doing tonight is saying that it's not our place as a society to discriminate against those people. It's not our place as a majority of the population to decide that they are not entitled to the same rights and privileges that the rest of us enjoy," said House Majority Leader Brendan Sharkey, D-Hamden.

But much of the debate focused on the potential for people to abuse the legislation.

Rep. Christopher Coutu, R-Norwich, said he worries that male pedophiles will become emboldened by the legislation and try to gain access to women's restrooms. He said the legislation could prove disastrous.

The House narrowly defeated an amendment, proposed by Republicans, which would have created some exemptions under the law. For example, separate bathrooms based on gender and locker rooms would have been exempted. Some legislators said the bill created a potential hardship for business owners, especially those with public restrooms.

Members of the Family Institute of Connecticut, a conservative group that dubbed the legislation "the bathroom bill," sent numerous emails to legislators, warning how the bill could be abused by peeping toms and sex offenders.

The amendment failed on a 67-62 vote.

In attempt to quell some concerns, the bill was amended with language that allows a court to seek evidence of person's gender identity issues, such as medical history, to determine if they've been discriminated against. The amendment passed on a voice vote. The bill defines gender identity or expression as a person's gender-related identity, appearance of behavior, even if that identity is different from what's traditionally associated with the person's physiology or sex at birth.

The legislation has been a perennial bill for years. Proponents are optimistic about its chances this year, however, because Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has said he'd sign the bill into law.

At times, Thursday's debate was emotional, graphic and personal. One lawmaker, Rep. Richard Roy, D-Milford, spoke of a male cousin who decided last year to become a woman.

"I'm going to support (the bill) with the hope that we all move forward from tonight and treat all of our fellow human beings with a little respect, with no scorn and perhaps we can find some love," he said.

Rep. Linda Scholfield, D-Simsbury, a health care consultant, provided her fellow lawmakers a detailed explanation of how people can be born with gender assignment issues, such as a mismatched mental gender and physical gender, or mismatched genitalia.

"We shouldn't discriminate against people just because Mother Nature or God made them differently," she said.

But Rep. Steven Mikutel, D-Griswold, who opposed the bill, said he worried about how students could be emotionally impacted if their teacher one day changed his or her gender.

"I have nothing against what people do in the own homes but when it impacts society, when it impacts children in particular, we must be careful that we are not turning the norms of society upside down to protect the small class of individuals' desire to be different, to express themselves differently," he said.

Jerimarie Liesegang, a transsexual woman and director of the Connecticut TransAdvocacy Coalition, told legislators this year that a survey taken in the greater Hartford area found half of transgender people interviewed said they had experienced employment discrimination. More than 40 percent said they've experienced housing discrimination.

At least 13 states have passed similar legislation.

Hartford - State Sen. Edith Prague, D-Columbia, doesn't believe in the death penalty.

She says she would like to see it abolished in Connecticut, and until last week, was ready to lend her vote to the latest repeal bill in the legislature.

But Prague said she changed her mind after an emotion-filled meeting last Friday at the Capitol with Dr. William Petit, the lone survivor of the 2007 Cheshire home invasion that left his wife and two daughters dead.

She and fellow senator Andrew Maynard, D-Stonington, reversed their pro-repeal positions after sitting down on separate occasions with Petit and his sister, Johanna Chapman, and his lawyer, Jeffrey Meyer, the son of Sen. Edward Meyer, D-Guilford.

"I just feel that if there is anything I could do to help this man at all, I've got to do it," Prague said Wednesday. "This man has been through enough without us making it more difficult on him."

Maynard said he was particularly convinced to change his vote after he heard Petit, Chapman and Meyer detail their experience with the legal system.

At one point during legal proceedings, the defendants were referred to as "gentlemen" while Petit's wife and two daughters were called the "alleged victims," Maynard said.

"That statement stung me as I thought about being in his place," Maynard said Wednesday night. "I know that is not a reason to change your mind on the position, but you're suddenly confronted with: What in the world are we doing to people that have suffered these kinds of horrific experiences?"

Proponents of capital punishment declared a victory Wednesday afternoon after learning that the two senators from southeastern Connecticut had changed their minds.

Several legislators said that without the Prague and Maynard votes, they no longer expect the capital punishment repeal bill to pass the Senate. Prague, a senator since 1994, said it's rare for her to flip her stance like this on an issue.

"I don't think I've ever changed my mind on something that I had made up my mind to vote for," she said.

The last effort to abolish Connecticut's death penalty squeaked through the Senate with a 19-17 vote in 2009. The bill also passed the House but was vetoed by then-Gov. M. Jodi Rell, a Republican.

The current bill, which last month passed the Judiciary Committee, would end the death penalty in Connecticut for future murders, making life imprisonment without parole the new maximum sentence. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, a Democrat, has indicated that he would sign such a bill.

Prague said she would still vote to end the death penalty at some later date, just not now before the second accused killer in the Petit triple homicide stands trial. Petit's wife, Jennifer Hawke-Petit, 48, and his daughters, Hayley, 17, and Michaela, 11, were all killed during the invasion and the family's house was burned. The wife and one of the daughters were also sexually assaulted.

"I did not realize that I was that 18th vote," Prague said of her swing-vote position. "Even if I am, I can't do it to the Petit family."

Steven Hayes was sentenced to death last year for the Petit murders. The trial of the second man, Joshua Komisarjevsky, is scheduled for September.

"We don't think the timing is particularly good for Dr. Petit and what he's going through," Maynard said of the bill. "I won't vote for a repeal and I hope we don't actually call it up for a vote this year."

Maynard and Prague also said they shared the concerns of Petit's lawyer that a new state ban on capital punishment could be used by defense attorneys to obtain a more lenient sentencing for the second accused killer.

Maynard said he does support revamping the habeas corpus appeals process in Connecticut for death penalty cases so that it is easier on victims' family members and doesn't turn killers into media celebrities.

State Rep. Steve Mikutel, D-Griswold, a leading proponent of keeping capital punishment, praised the two senators for supporting "Dr Petit's quest for justice."

"This is a victory for justice if this holds - justice for all of Connecticut's innocent victims of murder," Mikutel said. "The majority of the people of Connecticut want to keep the death penalty for cold-blooded killers like Steven Hayes and Michael Ross."

State Rep. Gary Holder-Winfield, D-New Haven, who introduced the repeal bill in the Judiciary Committee, said he doesn't think the bill has the votes to pass the Senate.

However, he said he hopes that death penalty opponents can still sway some lawmakers' opinions before the regular legislative session ends next month.

Ten people are on death row in Connecticut.

Hartford — House Republicans mounted a full assault Tuesday on Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's $40.1 billion biennial budget, although like their Senate counterparts, they failed to break its momentum.

The budget passed the House on a 83-67 vote a minute before midnight. Fifteen Democrats -- including two from southeastern Connecticut -- broke ranks to join Republicans in their opposition to the plan and its $1.4 billion in new taxes for the fiscal year starting July 1 and $1.2 billion in year two.

The document now awaits the governor's signature.

"With the passage of this budget by the Democrats in the House of Representatives, coming on the heels of [Tuesday morning's] passage by the Senate, Connecticut has taken another important step toward much-needed fiscal stability," Malloy, a first-term Democrat, said in a statement. "This budget is balanced, honest and contains none of the gimmicks that helped get us into this mess."

But for the moment, the budget leans on a $2 billion placeholder. The Malloy administration has been in closed-door talks since March with state employee unions to obtain $1 billion in annual savings and labor givebacks.

Roy Occhiogrosso, the governor's senior adviser, told reporters that the first round of employee layoff notices will go out Friday if an agreement isn't reached. He declined to say the expected number of notices. The layoffs would not go into effect until July 1.

"I think at some point there's either a deal or there's no deal and no chance of getting one," Occhiogrosso said.

Those voting for the budget Tuesday included State Reps. Ernest Hewett, D-New London; Ted Moukawsher, D-Groton; Melissa Olson, D-Norwich; Betsy Ritter, D-Waterford; Diana Urban, D-North Stonington; Elissa Wright, D-Groton, and Kevin Ryan, D-Montville.

Those voting nay included Republican Reps. Christopher Coutu, R-Norwich and Marilyn Giuliano, R-Old Saybrook. They were joined by Democrats Steven Mikutel of Griswold and Ed Jutila of East Lyme.

"I wanted to see more spending cuts and a little less on the taxing side," Mikutel said after the voting, adding that the budget plan did get better last month when some new taxes were done away with. "There were some improvements on the taxing side but it didn't come with equivalent spending cuts."

Whether or not he obtains full concessions, Malloy said the legislature would later vote again on a budget to either ratify what was approved Tuesday or move forward with a plan B.

The budget now approved plugs a $3.3 billion hole in the next fiscal year through a mix of spending cuts and tax increases on income, property, retail sales, services and corporations.

The Malloy administration says the average taxpayer would pay $20 more a month under the new budget. But Republicans say it would be far higher.

House Republicans held forth for hours during Tuesday's deliberations, blasting the Malloy plan as spendthrift and labeling its tax increases as unfair to struggling middle-class residents. It would also drive businesses out of state, they said.

"I've visited hundreds of businesses across my district and the region, and there's been one constant message from these thousands of people: 'Please think of us and don't raise taxes,'" Coutu said.

The budget anticipates a $369 million surplus in its first year and $635 million in the second. Democrats say the surplus would go toward debt repayment and rebuilding the depleted rainy-day fund. Republicans criticized them for not using the surplus to obviate the tax hikes.

The budget also calls for $1 billion in spending cuts over two years, in addition to the requested labor concessions. And officials said the number of state agencies will be consolidated from 81 to 56.

Unveiled Feb. 16, the Malloy budget sprinted through the committees and chambers of the General Assembly. Budget votes usually don't come until near the end of regular legislative sessions, or beyond.

But the Connecticut's first Democrat governor in two decades had party allegiance on his side, with Democrats controlling both the House and Senate.

"We have a sound meaningful budget document that represents a consensus, at least among most of us here in state government, about how we should be moving forward," House Majority Leader Brendan Sharkey, D-Hamden, said moments before roll call. "We are reaching a vote and a decision tonight on a state budget that is earlier than we've ever had in recent memory."

The majority leader's consensus did not extend to any Republicans. Sean Williams, R-Watertown, noted during budget deliberations that Connecticut's 9.1 percent unemployment rate is above the 8.8 percent national average. The Malloy budget would make it worse, he said.

"We're losing jobs left and right," he said, "And the common denominator is (businesses) can't afford to be here anymore."

House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, criticized how the budget would cut $200 from residents' $500 property tax credit

"We're going to take the one tool you have to fight property taxes and we're going to reduce it by 40 percent," Cafero said, his voice heavy with indignation. "Where's the pro-quo? What do they get for it? Nothing. And we're telling them you gotta like it — you've gotta sacrifice."

The Republicans tried without success to replace the budget with the GOP alternative — a "no tax increase" budget. That amendment, which failed in the Senate Monday, was voted down in the House Tuesday night by a 97-52 vote along party lines. A flurry of other Republican amendments to blunt the new budget's taxes also languished.

The Malloy budget would expand from three to six the number of income tax brackets, raising the top rate to 6.7 percent from 6.5 percent and lowering the threshold for higher rates.

Single filers with incomes over $50,000 a year and couples earning more than $100,000 would pay more than they do now. The brackets will be retroactive to Jan. 1.

The sales tax rate would rise from 6 percent to 6.35 percent, and clothing and shoes under $50 would no longer be exempt.

The budget calls for new or higher taxes on a variety of items and services including cigarettes, alcohol, cosmetic procedures including Botox, pet grooming, yoga studios, energy generators, and "luxury" vehicles, boats, jewelry and clothing. It also would double the 10 percent corporation tax surcharge.

The adopted budget is different in several aspects to the plan Malloy presented in February. It removed proposed new taxes on services including hair cuts, car washes and boating, and restored $300 of the $500 property tax credit that the governor first sought to eliminate completely. It also maintained a greater level of assistance to manufacturing-heavy cities and towns.

A final round of budget tweaks did away with a 3-cent-per-gallon increase to the state's tax on gasoline. However, lawmakers kept a 3-cent-per-gallon tax hike on diesel fuel.

Occhiogrosso, the governor's senior advisor, strongly disagreed Tuesday with statements by Republicans that the new taxes go after susceptible working people and small businesses still suffering from economic downturn.

"He's aware of what he is asking people to do, but thinks that it is not unfair given what people will get in return, which is stabilizing the state's finances, allowing the state to create jobs," Occhiogrosso said.

Much earlier on Tuesday, the state Senate adopted the budget bill by a 19-17 vote in a marathon session that started Monday afternoon and ran until 3:15 a.m.

Three Senate Democrats broke ranks to join Republicans in opposing the budget. Democrats who voted for the budget included state Sen. Andrew Maynard of Stonington, Andrea Stillman of Waterford, Edith Prague of Columbia and Eileen Daily of Westbrook.

With a few hours sleep, Maynard was soon back at the Capitol for a late morning committee meeting. But the Senate vote weighed heavy on him.

"I'm not feeling very buoyant today," Maynard said. "That was a very challenging vote. I have to say, I'm not entirely satisfied that we reduced spending as much as we could."

He said that although he did not regret his vote, his support for the spending plan was less than a full embrace. Maynard pushed hard in budget discussions for several changes, including the successful elimination of proposed boating and aviation taxes, a reduction of the "luxury" tax and preservation of municipal aid and tourism funds.

"A 'no' vote after all of the changes we made in getting some improvements in the budget would have really been a slap in the face, and would have undercut my ability in being an effective team player in whatever comes next," Maynard said.

He said he conferred with two other Democratic swing votes — Sens. Paul Doyle of Wethersfield and Bob Duff of Norwalk — and they shared a belief that legislative approval would "give the governor some support in a very difficult set of negotiations" with labor unions. If the governor lost such leverage, Maynard feared an eventual result would be cuts to municipal aid.

After the House vote, state Rep. Urban noted that few speakers voiced concerns about how the budget's cuts would affect state programs, such as those assisting children and families.

"There's been so much emphasis on the tax side of the equation and not the cut side," Urban said. "But I get it, we need to have a sustainable government, and I feel that this budget is getting us there."

“There is no mandate from Connecticut residents to repeal capital punishment,” said Rep. Mikutel. “On the contrary, there is a mandate to keep it and we should do the will of the people.”

The bi-partisan group, including those in the protective services field, support reforming the appeals process for capital cases to create a workable death penalty. Statistics show it is more difficult to get the death penalty verdict carried out in Connecticut than any other state.

“The people of Connecticut, by a strong majority, support the death penalty for the most heinous crimes,” said Rep. Labriola. “We must create a workable death penalty, so the crime victim’s families can have a reasonable expectation that the sentence will in fact be carried out.”

A recent Quinnipiac University poll indicates 67 percent of Connecticut voters supported the death penalty, the highest pro-death penalty numbers in recent years. When asked about Steven Hayes, who was convicted in the Cheshire murders, the number spikes to over 70 percent.

“My constituents cannot understand why it took 15 years to execute a cold-blooded serial killer like Michael Ross,” said Rep. Mikutel. “The system should work better than that.”

Protective services groups that support reforming the post conviction process include:

• Uniformed Professional Fire Fighters
• City of Hartford Police Union
• Connecticut Police and Fire Union Local 74 AFL-CIO  
• Connecticut Council of Police AFSME Council 15

“Current laws concerning the committing of a capital felony and the imposition of the death penalty serve as a deterrent to criminals who might otherwise choose to murder police officers, firefighters and other public safety officials,” said William J. Boucher, President of the Connecticut Police and Fire Union. “The proposed changes to the existing statutes would increase the likelihood that criminals would not think twice before taking the life of one of these public safety professionals. The men and women who put their lives on the line every day to serve and protect the citizens of the State of Connecticut deserve to be protected to the fullest extent by the laws of the State.”

"When an individual murders another individual, society must stand up and denounce this act, and if the act was so heinous that it warrants death then that individual chose their fate by his/her actions,” said Sgt. Richard T. Holton III, President of the Hartford Police Union. “The death penalty is not about “an eye for an eye or a tooth for a tooth” it’s about protecting/safeguarding innocent victims (men, women, children and the elderly) from predators within society who do not have a moral compass and do not value life as the rest of society does".

“Our choice is to spare the lives of those who have committed the most horrendous crimes and to, thereby, sacrifice the lives of the innocent or to execute them and to, thereby, spare the lives of the guilty,” said Rep. Mikutel.

A jury may be considering whether DiMeo should get the death penalty for the Feb. 2, 2005, murders of Fairfield jewelers Kim and Tim Donnelly, but by the time they finish, the state Legislature will probably have made the penalty history.

This despite the fact that a recent Quinnipiac University poll shows 67 percent of the population supports the death penalty.

"The bill to abolish the death penalty will probably pass," said state Rep. Steven Mikutel, D-Griswold, a supporter of the death penalty. "It will definitely be passed by the house, and I expect it to be close in the Senate."

On Monday, Mikutel testified in support of the death penalty during a public hearing before the General Assembly's Judiciary Committee, but he said he doesn't think he changed any minds.

"The Judiciary Committee has their own agenda. They are not in step with the people," he said. "I knew going in that this was a stacked deck, but I wanted to call out the Judiciary Committee for basically not representing the will of the people. The will of the people is they want a workable death penalty in the state of Connecticut."

In the very near future, the Judiciary Committee is expected to send a bill to the floor of the House to abolish the death penalty and replace it with life in prison without the chance of parole. The bill is expected to exclude the 10 people who are currently on death row and apply to any new cases. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has said he would sign a bill abolishing the death penalty, as long as it did not apply retroactively.

But state legal experts and Mikutel say that is a bunch of hooey. They say as Malloy -- a former criminal defense lawyer and prosecutor -- knows well, the state Supreme Court will strike down any language from a law that doesn't apply to all death row inmates.

"That's really a deceptive move on the part of the Judiciary Committee. Anyone, even the death penalty opponents, will tell you that if that bill passes, there will be no more executions in the state of Connecticut," Mikutel said. "Not for those on death row, not for the Cheshire home invader murders."

The Connecticut Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty and the Connecticut Public Defenders Association have aggressively lobbied the Legislature to abolish the death penalty, going so far as to bring in people from other death penalty states to testify about innocent people wrongly executed in those states.

"They don't want to look at Connecticut because Connecticut has a very sound, clear system of administering capital punishment," Mikutel said. "There are no innocent people on death row in Connecticut."

In fact, many of those on death row here have confessed to their crimes.

The Connecticut Network to Abolish the Death Penalty put their own spin Thursday on the Quinnipiac poll.

"This latest poll reveals what all previous polls here in Connecticut have also shown," said Ben Jones, the group's executive director. "When people are given the option of life without parole, support for capital punishment drops dramatically.

"One can't help but wonder how people would answer if they were told that, nationwide, 138 individuals sentenced to death were later exonerated, and that four individuals convicted of murder in Connecticut have since been found innocent in just the past two years," Jones said.

The support for capital punishment is a new high, the pollsters said. In addition, 48 percent of voters said the penalty for first-degree murder should be the death penalty, rather than life in prison with no chance of parole, which is also a new high. Only 43 percent of voters said they believed the penalty should be life in prison without parole.

"Historically, voters favor the death penalty about 2-1 when they are asked a simple yes/no question. When they are offered the choice, however, between the death penalty and life in prison with no chance of parole, voters have been evenly divided," Quinnipiac University Poll Director Douglas Schwartz said.

The poll reveals the public's thoughts have been heavily affected by recent major crimes, including the Cheshire home invasion murders of Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her two children in July 2007. Locally, the death penalty has moved into the forefront, as 30-year-old New York resident Christopher DiMeo faces death for the 2005 murders of jewelry store owners Tim and Kim Donnelly. The death penalty hearing for DiMeo is under way and is expected to be completed within the next few weeks.

Jeffrey Seiser, 23, a student at Fairfield University, said he supports it in some cases.

"Although studies show that the death penalty does little to deter crime, I do support the use of capital punishment in situations were the crime is so terrible, brutal and clear as the case is with Stephen Hayes. In heinous situations such as this communities should have the right the carry out the ultimate form of punishment," he said.

But Wyatt Uhlein, 23, of New Canaan, said there are other alternatives.

"Personally, I think solitary confinement would be worse, and it wouldn't cost as much money," he said. "It takes more money to kill someone. And solitary confinement really would crush a person. I think it is likely that the increased support is probably because of these recent events, which isn't surprising."

HARTFORD — Some invoked a doctrine that honors life; others cited the deterrent power of a death sentence.

There was talk of the enormous cost of sending a convict to death row and there were heartfelt expressions of compassion for the families of murder victims.

Monday's marathon hearing before the legislature's judiciary committee on the fate of capital punishment in Connecticut brought together religious leaders, academics, several men who were accused of crimes they did not commit and people who have lost loved ones to homicide.

For the second time in three years, lawmakers are pondering a repeal of the death penalty statute. In 2009, both chambers passed a similar bill, but it was vetoed by Gov. M. Jodi Rell. Her successor, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, is an opponent of the death penalty and has said he will sign a repeal bill should one reach his desk.

Capital punishment is inconsistent with the Catholic Church's doctrine of respect for life "from conception to natural death," said Peter Rosazza, retired auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Hartford.

"The death penalty diminishes us all," Rosazza told committee members. "We cannot teach respect for life by taking a life."

William Petit Sr., whose daughter-in-law and two grandchildren were tortured and killed during a home invasion in Cheshire in 2007, said he had no problem reconciling his Catholic faith with his support of the death penalty.

"The Catholic Church has now taken a position against the death penalty but it hasn't always," he said. "I've always been comfortable with my approval of the death penalty. I don't think I've been at odds with my religious beliefs."

The Cheshire home invasion case loomed over the debate. Supporters of the repeal effort were quick to point out that any changes to the law would not effect the two men charged with the crimes. One of them, Steven Hayes, has already been convicted and sentenced to death; the second defendant, Joshua Komisarjevsky, is expected to face trial in the fall.

But others expressed concern that the state would have a hard time defending a decision to execute Hayes or any of the other nine men currently on death row because it would effectively create two classes of people and give defense lawyers a potent argument that the law is unjust.

Rep. Steve Mikutel, D-Griswold, said he cannot understand how the legislature could contemplate repealing the death penalty when the overwhelming majority of state residents support it.

"We should be listening to the people on social matters such as this," Mikutel said. Death penalty opponents rebutted his assertion. They said the death penalty has far less public support in polls when it is compared with life in prison without the possibility of parole.

The committee will probably vote on the measure in coming weeks, but from there its fate is hardly clear. If the bill reaches the state Senate, the vote there is expected to be extremely close.

The lengthy hearing at the state Capitol complex, which began before noon and stretched well into the night, also featured nationally renowned lawyer Barry Scheck. A veteran of O.J. Simpson's "dream team" of lawyers — a credential he acknowledged that he doesn't usually highlight — Scheck is now a law professor and co-director of the Innocence Project, which uses post-conviction DNA evidence to help exonerate the wrongly accused.

Scheck said he will leave the moral and religious arguments against the death penalty to others. His opposition is based primarily on two factors: Innocent people can wind up on death row, and the enormous resources it costs to implement the death penalty would be far better spent on better forensics testing and other law enforcement tools.

"Reasonable people can certainly differ as to whether or not capital punishment is a morally appropriate sanction for the most heinous of crimes," Scheck told the committee.

But the public policy decision to have a death penalty has broad repercussions, Scheck said. It is a costly endeavor to sentence a person to death, given the lengthy appeals process.

"Let's have an honest debate about this," he said. "You spend more money on the death penalty, you take away money from public safety. … We could solve more rape cases, we could solve more robberies … if we had more money to put into that instead of the death penalty."

Scheck also cautioned lawmakers about believing that the criminal justice system is infallible. Not so long ago, most experts believed that fingerprints were the gold standard of proof, but forensic experts now believe that fingerprints can sometimes lead investigators down a flawed trail, he said.

Underscoring Scheck's point, several men who were convicted of crimes they did not commit testified Monday.

Ray Krone, an Air Force veteran convicted of killing a woman in Arizona, spent 10 years in prison. He was released from death row in April 2002 after DNA proved his innocence.

"I'm here to tell you those mistakes are going to happen," Krone told the committee. "We're human."

But supporters of the death penalty say that some crimes are so heinous, the ultimate price must be paid by those who commit them.

"I realize that prison life is no picnic," said Johanna Petit Chapman, the sister of Dr. William Petit Jr., the sole survivor of the Cheshire home invasion. But, she noted, those serving life sentences "still have ability to read books, take a class, shop at commissary, to write to loved ones."

Linda Binnenkade's brother-in-law, Barry Rossi, was murdered at B&B Automotive in Windsor Locks in 2003. A supporter of capital punishment, she proposed that the state keep the concept of death row, even if it eliminates the death penalty.

"These murderers are afraid of spending the rest of their lives on death row, not death itself," Binnenkade said. "Replace the sentence of death with the sentence of life on death row."

HARTFORD -- Despite opposition from the state Department of Public Safety, a legislative committee on Tuesday approved a bill that would allow promoters to stage increasingly popular mixed martial-arts competitions.

The bill, which next moves to the House floor for referral to other committees, would let promoters stage unarmed combat including punching, kicking, grappling and other free-lance tactics. Currently, the fights are restricted to the two Indian casinos, which are on sovereign tribal property.

Forty-four other states allow professional and amateur mixed martial-arts bouts, but Rep. Steven T. Mikutel, D-Groswold, the lone dissenting vote on the Public Safety and Security Committee, said it's not worth the added oversight from the Department of Public Safety.

"It's inconsistent with their mission of protecting public safety," Mikutel said prior to the committee vote. "In their words, it's a modern-day gladiatorial event."

Rep. Stephen D. Dargan, D-West Haven, said after the meeting that the fights are popular throughout the nation and could generate added revenue in places such as Bridgeport's Arena at Harbor Yard. Dargan said he understands the opposition of public safety officials, but it's the Legislature's job to decide.

"People testify all the time about things they don't agree with," Dargan said in a phone interview. "It could be a revenue-producing item. It's more popular than boxing."

If approved by the Legislature before the June 8 adjournment date and signed into law by the governor, Dargan anticipates two to four large-scale professional events annually in the state.

Rep. Rosa C. Rebimbas, R-Naugatuck, a member of the committee, successfully introduced an amendment that would require the rest time between rounds to be a minute long.

Under the legislation, the state boxing commissioner would have jurisdiction over matches and would adopt rules for conduct, safety and license revocation.

Existing state law would be amended to include mixed martial arts under existing boxing rules and promoters of events would have to be registered and pay a tax of five percent of total receipts after federal taxes were deducted.

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy had it right Wednesday when he said that the fiscal crisis facing state government is not only an enormous challenge, but also a historic opportunity. Unfortunately, his proposed two-year budget proposal for fiscal years 2012 and 2013 does not fully seize that opportunity.

With the urgency of the massive deficits confronting the state and with his own Democratic Party in control of both legislative chambers, this new governor could have called for dramatic change in reorganizing government. Instead, his proposed modest agency consolidations, which don't appear to reduce government in any substantial way, "amount to rearranging the deck chairs, not turning the ship," Rep. Steven Mikutel, D-Griswold, aptly observed after the governor's budget address.

But to the governor's credit, this appears to be an honest fiscal plan. In dealing with deficits projected at $6.2 billion over the next two years, it does not borrow money to pay for operational expenses and it fully funds state pension obligations. Borrowing and delaying pension payments by past administrations and legislatures helped get Connecticut in the mess it is in.

As an honest budget it provides the proper framework for the debate that should now begin over the fair balance of taxes and spending reductions to close the fiscal gap. We endorse Gov. Malloy's stated parameters for that debate. The legislature must hold the line on spending, achieve genuine savings from state workers and not mortgage the future to solve the current problem.

What we like

The budget maintains the social safety net. Especially in difficult times, a compassionate society must provide for those in need.

It maintains municipal and education aid to towns and cities. As a former mayor, the governor knows that the easy thing, substantial cuts in municipal aid to balance the state budget, would not be the right thing because it would pass the buck in the form of higher local property taxes.

This fiscal plan would begin the transition to generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), which should bring an end to the creative and less than forthright bookkeeping the legislature has become infamous for.

Even while trying to control spending, it does find money to invest in transportation, incentives for job growth and $15 million to promote the state tourism industry, all vital to economic expansion.

We also welcomed Gov. Malloy's tough tone when it came to seeking concessions from the state labor unions, projecting $2 billion in savings over two years. "Their current wage, health care and pension benefit levels are not sustainable," said the governor.

He is seeking concessions in health care coverage, a wage freeze, more unpaid furlough days, raising the retirement age and other changes.

"Let me be clear: We have to get to that number," said Gov. Malloy of the needed savings. "The alternative (to concessions) … would require us … to lay off thousands of workers."

What we didn't like

The governor's call for across-the-board tax increases - $1.5 billion year one, $1.3 billion year two - is too steep and weighs too heavily on the middle class. Sixty-two percent of new tax revenues would come from families making $250,000 or less, 36 percent from those making under $100,000.

Spending would actually go up 2.4 percent each fiscal year, to $19.3 billion and then to $20.2 billion. Despite the administration's efforts to spin the numbers, pointing to reductions in spending for ongoing services, the bottom line is the bottom line. The budget needs to go down.

While the governor keeps talking of shared sacrifice, spending for his own office actually goes up from $2.761 million to $2.837 million. The governor's office attributes this to Gov. Malloy's increased travel schedule and increases in dues the office pays. They actually cut five positions. Still, you can't call for large-scale tax increases and then boost your own spending. By the way, spending for the legislature goes up, too.

Finally, this is not the time to introduce a state earned income tax credit, which would put money in the pocket of the working poor, but would also add $100 million to the budget.

The proposal is a start. Now the legislature must do its work. Trim the tax increases and find more budget cuts.

HARTFORD — Imagine the long arm of the law reaching into your car and snatching your cell phone out of your hand.

Some state lawmakers are wondering whether confiscating cell phones would teach law-breaking motorists a lesson.

It is against Connecticut law to use handheld wireless devices to talk or text while driving.

The legislature’s Transportation Committee is considering bills to stiffen the penalties for violating the state’s cell phone ban.

None propose to authorize the confiscation of cell phones. However, one bill would empower police officers to seize an operator’s license from a repeat offender for 24 hours.

Sen. Toni Boucher, R-Wilton, raised the possibility of phone confiscations during a public hearing Monday on a half dozen bills before the Transportation Committee.

“Once the news spreads, it spreads like wild fire, so people change their behavior as a result of that,” she said.

The subject of confiscation has been raised in New Canaan, one of the towns that Boucher represents. Police Chief Ed Nadriczny testified during Thursday’s hearing.

“From my understanding, there is nothing in the current legislation that prohibits police from seizing a cell phone, but, then again, there is nothing in there that allows us to do that,” Nadriczny said.

As a result of ambiguity, he said police in New Canaan are just issuing tickets. He acknowledged confiscation could be problematic.

“You can see how that could be a very contentious issue to take a cell phone away from a driver,” Nadriczny said.

Rep. John W. Hetherington, R-New Canaan, introduced the bill to allow police to seize a driver’s license from repeat offenders of the cell phone ban. Nadriczny testifed on that legislation Monday.

State law has prohibited drivers from using handheld mobile phones to talk or text since 2005. A first offense carries a maximum fine of $100. It may be suspended if you buy a hands-free device.

The legislature last year set a $150 fine for second offenses and a $200 fine for all subsequent violations. It also directed that 25 percent of each fine go to the municipality where a driver was ticketed. The increases took effect Oct. 1.

Rep. Jason Perillo, R-Shelton, is now proposing legislation to raise the fines to $200 for first offenses, $250 for second offenses and $300 for subsequent offenses. Sen. Kevin Witkos, R-Canton, is seeking to double fines for violations that occur in school and construction zones.

Rep. Lawrence Miller, R-Stratford, is targeting drivers who cause accidents while violating the cell phone ban. Under his two bills, it would be a felony offense. The legislation would also suspend driving privileges for six months for second offenses.

Rep. Antonio Guerrara, D-Rocky Hill, co-chairman of the Transportation Committee, is co-sponsoring legislation to make the existing fines uniform. Despite last year’s revisions, the law sets a maximum fine of $100 for 16- and 17-year-olds and school bus drivers.

Rep. Steven Mikutel, D-Griswold, expressed opposition Monday to increasing the fines. “It has been my understanding and experience that law enforcement is reluctant to enforce the existing cell phone law,” he said.

Mikutel said he doubts increasing fines will improve the situation. “In fact, it may lead to less enforcement,” he said.

HARTFORD — Should drivers stuck in rush-hour traffic be allowed to use the mostly empty high-occupancy vehicle lanes?

How about allowing general traffic into the HOV lanes whenever a crash is causing a serious backup?

Or maybe selling the right to use the HOV lane: A driver in a hurry could bypass a traffic jam, but would have to pay for the privilege.

Those are a few options that lawmakers are considering this year as the cash-starved, traffic-congested state tries to get better use from the HOV lanes it built about 20 years ago.

At a daylong hearing Monday, legislators heard several ideas for ways to better use the HOV lanes, along with separate proposals to allow police to get blood or urine samples from suspected drunken drivers, start using "red light cameras" to stop drivers from blowing through traffic signals, and to crack down on distracted motorists.

Some of the ideas have been floated through the General Assembly's transportation committee before, but key legislators said Monday that they stood a better chance of becoming law now.

"You're on to something if it can keep traffic moving at 50 to 55, not that stop-and-go Slinky effect we're all used to," Sen. L. Scott Frantz, R- Greenwich, said about a bill that would open HOV lanes on Connecticut's interstates to all traffic between 4 and 6 p.m.

"I couldn't agree more," said Rep. Tony Guerrera, a Rocky Hill Democrat and co-chairman of the committee.

"I'm very intrigued," added Rep. David Scribner, R- Brookfield.

The state delighted environmentalists and transit advocates in the early '90s by building HOV lanes around Greater Hartford to encourage carpools, vanpools and public transit. Sen. John Kissel, R-Enfield, is sponsoring a bill to let any drivers use those lanes during the afternoon rush hour because the original plan, he said, simply doesn't work.

"The HOV lanes were a great experiment. It had a laudable goal," Kissel said. "But after 20 years, there hasn't been a huge change in driving habits."

Other lawmakers suggested going further by opening the lanes to all traffic during the morning rush hour as well. Others recommended a new use for the huge overhead highway signs that warn of traffic congestion ahead: Have them also announce the HOV lanes are open to anyone until the backup is cleared.

In previous years, environmentalists and transit advocates resisted weakening the HOV rules. On Monday, Ryan Lynch of the nonprofit Tri-State Transportation Campaign told lawmakers he doesn't back Kissel's idea, but not because he believes the HOV system is working.

"Increasing highway capacity does nothing to decrease congestion over the long term, and fosters suburban sprawl," Lynch said. "A smarter way to manage congestion would be to convert HOV lanes to high-occupancy tolling lanes. If you're late for a meeting, you can pay a fee and bypass traffic."

Sen. Andrew Maynard, the committee's co-chairman, noted a complication to any change. The original HOV construction was done with federal money, and the federal government restricts adding tolls — or changing HOV rules — on projects it paid for.

But several lawmakers noted that Guerrera wants to seek federal waivers for a more wide-scale toll system, and suggested that HOV revisions be included in that.

Other bills the committee considered Monday include:

• Authorizing police to get blood or urine samples from suspected drunken drivers who go to hospitals after crashes.

Cromwell Police Chief Anthony Salvatore testified that suspected drunken drivers who are taken to hospitals immediately after crashes often refuse to let nurses or doctors take blood samples, knowing the results could later be used against them.

"This dodge has become widely known. Even some of our brother officers have used this dodge — shame on them," said Police Chief James Strillacci of West Hartford, who spoke in favor of the proposal.

He appeared to be referring to the case of Windsor Locks police Officer Michael Koistinen, who struck and killed a bicyclist in October. Koistinen's father, Robert, a sergeant with the department, has been charged with hindering prosecution in the case.

Strillacci and Salvatore also endorsed measures to require convicted drunken drivers to install breath-monitoring ignition locks on their cars. If the device shows the driver has been drinking, it disables the ignition. The system is better than simply suspending the person's license, because that reduces their ability to work, Strillacci said.

"This will keep drunks from starting their cars, but will allow people to drive sober," he said.

Raising the penalties for motorists caught using cellphones or texting while driving.

The fee is currently up to $100, but lawmakers want to examine whether to raise that fee to $200 and $300 for second and third offenses, or perhaps to include a 24-hour license suspension, too. Other proposals would make it a felony to seriously injure or kill someone in a crash when texting or phoning from behind the wheel.

Letting municipalities install cameras at intersections and then fine drivers who are photographed driving through red lights.

"We talk about having cameras at tolls to stop someone beating the state out of a couple of bucks, but we have an aversion to using cameras to save lives?," said Sen. John Fonfara, D-Hartford, one of more than a dozen people who testified on behalf of the idea.

"Red light cameras are an integral component for creating safe streets for all users of the road," Lynch said.

"Automated safety cameras would be good for the people of Hartford and many other communities," said Hyacinth Yennie, president of the Maple Avenue Neighborhood Revitalization Zone. "They will cut down on speeding in our neighborhoods, cut down on red-light running and cut down on accidents, injuries and deaths."

Communities can install cameras currently, but the photos can't be used as evidence against drivers or the vehicle owners. State Rep. Steven Mikutel, D-45th District, vice chairman of the committee, said he originally supported privacy rights in opposing the cameras, but has changed his view.

"We don't come down on the side of public safety enough," he said.