HB 5271, An Act Concerning the Siting Council, extends what's called the pre-application process, from 60 days to 90 days, giving towns more time to participate before siting decisions are made. The bill also requires that towns be given more precise information and maps, describing why a cell tower is needed in the area and it invites the towns to play more of a role in making their own siting suggestions.

Rep. Reed said, “I am grateful to my colleagues from all over Connecticut and from both sides of the aisle for their input in crafting the bill and for their enthusiastic support. This legislation offers additional protection for residential neighborhoods, schools, child daycare centers and scenic treasures.”

Rep. Pat Widlitz, (D-Branford/Guilford) who co-sponsored the bill, said “I enthusiastically support Rep. Reed's efforts to improve the requirements for the siting of cell towers. This legislation will not only greatly improve our ability to influence the siting of cell towers but will also encourage the use of the least obtrusive technology. It's an important step forward for the protection of our shoreline vistas."

Rep Tony Hwang (R-Fairfield/Trumbull), who also co-sponsored HB 5271, says the bill will give impacted towns a stronger voice in the process of locating telecommunication cell towers. "Our modern technology driven world has forced us to consider a proper balance between our desire for telecommunication ease and community aesthetic and safety," said Hwang. "Current law does not require the Siting Council to take into consideration a number of issues which are a significant concern to host communities and residents who are located next to proposed cell tower sights and the height restrictions for the community. This bill will require that some of these concerns be taken into consideration. I want to applaud Rep. Reed’s leadership in guiding this bill toward passage."

Cell towers in Connecticut are approved by the CT Siting Council, an independent board of nine members. The Council holds proceedings and hearings to evaluate, modify and approve or reject tower applications.

Last session, a similar bill made it through the House and Senate process but prompted a veto due to unintentional technical language. This bill is expected to be signed by the Governor.

The legislation (HB 5358), which includes funding for school building projects around the state, was co-sponsored by Rep. Widlitz and Sen. Meyer. The bill now goes to Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, who has indicated that he will sign it. 

“In these difficult financial times, I am very happy that we have been able to secure the state funding that Guilford voters were counting on when they approved the $92.2 million building project in a referendum in June,” said Widlitz, who is also a member of the State Bond Commission.

“Not only did we secure the $28 million, but we were also able to obtain a waiver so that Guilford does not have to pay back $615,000 to the state because of other project requirements,” Widlitz said. “This is a great day for Guilford and the legislative delegation representing our town.”

Meyer and Kokoruda also stressed the importance of the funding.

“Because the new high school is so important to Guilford families, we worked hard to get a significant contribution from the state toward the construction cost,” Meyer said.

“A new Guilford High School has long been a priority for town leaders and Guilford families,” Kokoruda said. “I am proud to join my colleagues in securing this funding for a much needed new high school.”

Construction is expected to begin this fall and be completed the fall of 2014.

Under the recently approved 2013 budget adjustments (HB 5557) and Education Reform bill (SB 458) the Town of Branford will receive an additional $65,517 in education aid grants in fiscal year 2013.

Rep. Lonnie Reed (D-Branford) said, “We must address the distressing achievement gap that punishes students who attend our state’s lowest performing schools, but in doing so, we cannot forget the ever changing educational needs of Branford’s children.” She added, “I am proud of our vote for education reform and grateful that Branford’s education grant will actually increase.”

The Town of Branford school district will receive state grants for both summer school/weekend programs and extending school hours to provide academic enrichment and support and recreation programs for students.

Rep. Pat Widlitz (D-Branford/Guilford) said, “The education reform bill passed in the House today is a step in the right direction for our children and the economic future of Connecticut. The focus is on student achievement, early childhood intervention, teacher evaluation and training, stronger curriculum and increased funding for Branford.”

The budget bill keeps appropriations under the state’s constitutionally-mandated spending cap by approximately $86.4 million and maintains a strong commitment to education.

In spite of cuts in many areas, funding for cities and towns has been saved. Other highlights of the legislation include:

• Funding for the Youth Employment Summer Jobs Program and Adult Education
  
• A renewed commitment to arts and culture
  
• An urban youth anti-violence program

Recognizing the value of early childhood education, the education reform bill creates 1,000 new pre-K School Readiness seats focused in high need, low performing communities. It also creates a pilot program to enhance literacy for students in kindergarten through third grade.

The bill also establishes the Commissioner’s Network, which provides the intensive support and interventions needed to turn around 25 of the most chronically low-performing schools in Connecticut. It grants the state commissioner of education the needed authority to develop or modify plans with teachers and parents at “turnaround” schools, while respecting collective bargaining rights.

The legislation requires at least 10 Family Resource Centers and at least 20 new or expanded School Based Health Centers to be located in education reform districts. It also increases funding for existing Family Resource Centers.

The bill reforms the teacher tenure system by increasing the frequency of teacher evaluations and linking tenure to evaluations. It also requires the education commissioner to administer an evaluation pilot program in 8 to 10 districts for the 2012-2013 school years.

There are also funding increases for vocational/technical and vocational/agricultural schools, charter and magnet schools, and a new kindergarten through 8th grade science initiative.

HARTFORD — The so-called zapper bill zipped through the House on Wednesday.

The legislation looks to outlaw electronic devices called zappers and other computer software that permit tax-dodging businesses that use electronic cash registers to create shadow receipts or virtual tills.

The use of zappers and such "phantom-ware" permits businesses to to manipulate sales records to get out of paying sales taxes or even possibly filching taxes that customers pay.

The Department of Revenue Services is requesting the legislation. It worked with the attorney general's office and the Department of Consumer Protection on the proposal..

The legislation would make the sale, purchase, installation or possession of zappers and phantom-ware a crime.

The House unanimously approved the bill, though some members questioned whether such a prohibition is necessary. The bill still requires Senate approval.

Rep. Patricia M. Wildlitz, D-Guilford, House chairwoman of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee, could not say how many businesses might be employing such a high-tech tax dodge.

"It has come to our attention that it is a growing problem nationwide," she said.

Widlitz said the tax department has not reported any use of zappers and phantom-ware in Connecticut.

"We don't have a specific case. This is really more of a pro-active piece of legislation to prevent this from happening," she said.

Widlitz told Rep. Arthur J. O'Neill, R-Southbury, that any tax dodgers that get caught using zappers or phantom-ware today could be cited for tax evasion under current law.

"We don't have a current law prohibiting the use of zappers. That is why we are bringing this legislation forward," she said.

Widlitz said there is no legitimate use for the targeted devices and software.

At this time, a dozen states have enacted anti-zapper laws, she said. However, she could not say if any states realized additional sales taxes as a result.

O'Neill and Rep. John W. Hetherington, R-Canaan, questioned how tax agents would detect the use of zappers and software and the lost taxes

"I think it is unlikely that a vendor would come forward and say, 'By the way, we have suppression software,'" Wildlitz said.

She expected the tax department would uncover the use of outlawed devices and software through routine audits, or possibly through complaints from customers or competitors.

"One wonders how widespread the problem is, and since we don't have any idea on how much revenue this is costing us, I would wonder about the significance of it, but perhaps it is significant. I guess it has that potential," Hetherington said..

Violators of the proposed anti-zapper law could face a maximum prison sentence of five years.The punishment could also include a fine of up to $100,000.

Additionally, violators would be liable for all taxes, penalties and interest. They would also forfeit all profits from the sale or use of the banned devices and software.

HB 5271, An Act Concerning the Siting Council, extends what's called the pre-application process, from 60 days to 90 days, giving towns more time to participate before siting decisions are made. The bill also requires that towns be given more precise information and maps, describing why a cell tower is needed in the area and it invites the towns to play more of a role in making their own siting suggestions.

"I enthusiastically support Rep. Reed's efforts to improve the requirements for the siting of cell towers," Widlitz said. "This legislation will not only greatly improve our ability to influence the siting of cell towers but will also encourage the use of the least obtrusive technology. It's an important step forward for the protection of our shoreline vistas."

"I am grateful to my colleagues from all over Connecticut and from both sides of the aisle for their input in crafting the bill and for their enthusiastic support. This legislation offers additional protection for residential neighborhoods, schools, child daycare centers and scenic treasures," Reed said.

Cell towers in Connecticut are approved by the CT Siting Council, an independent board of nine members. The council holds proceedings and hearings to evaluate, modify and approve or reject tower applications.

The bill now heads to the Senate and, if passed, is expected to be signed by the governor.

The test currently is an elective procedure, but would be required under the new legislation (SB 56), An Act Concerning Pulse Oximetry Screening for Newborn Infants. Widlitz said the test is a simple, inexpensive and non-invasive procedure for determining whether a potential congenital heart defect exists.

“The children of Connecticut, especially our newborns, deserve the best care we can give to make sure they have a healthy and productive adulthood,” Widlitz said after the vote Thursday.

“Failure to detect heart defects before an infant leaves the hospital has the potential to impact the entire life of the child and his or her family. And there is an even worse possibility that the undetected congenital heart defect will lead to sudden infant death,” Widlitz said.

Previously, the Senate also unanimously approved the bill, which now goes to Gov. Dannel P. Malloy for his expected signature.

The legislation lists various diseases for which marijuana could be prescribed to ease related pain and symptoms including cancer, glaucoma and multiple sclerosis. Licensed pharmacists approved by the Department of Consumer Protection (DCP) would fill the prescriptions.

Rep. Reed said, “This new law allows physicians to prescribe medical marijuana for those patients who can benefit; certain patients who are experiencing excruciating pain or struggling with other aspects of chronic conditions or illnesses, some of them terminal. The law provides another humane option for relieving suffering.“

Rep. Widlitz said, “Out of compassion for those who are suffering from the pain of debilitating diseases, I support this legislation. This legislation will allow legal, strictly controlled access to medical marijuana for palliative care.”

No insurance company would be required to provide coverage for prescribed marijuana. In addition, medical cannabis could only be grown and dispensed within Connecticut borders and could not be imported or exported. Use of the herb by patients would be prohibited in public, the workplace or in the presence of a minor. DCP along with an 8-doctor board would oversee implementation of the new medical marijuana law.

The legislation received bipartisan support and now moves to the state Senate for consideration. If passed there and eventually signed into law by Governor Malloy, it would take effect October 1.

A total of 16 states have enacted laws legalizing medical marijuana with California being the first in 1996 via statewide referendum. Rhode Island’s legislature overwhelmingly approved the use of medical marijuana in 2006.

Widlitz, House chair of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee and member of the State Bond Commission, led the legislature’s effort to secure $750,000 in state grants to help fund the expansion project. Last year, Widlitz presented an official Connecticut General Assembly citation to Roses for Autism for its significant contribution to the autism community of Connecticut.

“I commend Roses for Autism for this project, for opening the door and breaking down barriers for people who are challenged each day and who still find a way to rise to the occasion,” Widlitz said.

Widlitz joined Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, Sen. Ed Meyer (D-Guilford) and other dignitaries for the ceremony. The project included new expanded space for the training program, retail and office.

“The organization has played such an important part in helping people with autism and other disabilities. It has given them the chance to learn new skills while gaining their independence through meaningful employment in the business world,” Widlitz said.

Roses for Autism, located at Pinchbeck’s Rose Farm in Guilford, provides training and employment for individuals on the autism spectrum. Started in 2009, Roses for Autism is the first business endeavor for Growing Possibilities, a nonprofit social enterprise founded by Ability Beyond Disability that is dedicated to growing independence in the business world for individuals with autism and other disabilities.

Autism, a condition that affects as many as one in every 110 children in the United States, is a general term used to describe a group of complex developmental brain disorders known as Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDD). The other pervasive developmental disorders are PDD-NOS (Pervasive Developmental Disorder – Not Otherwise Specified), Asperger's Syndrome, Rett Syndrome and Childhood Disintegrative Disorder. Many parents and professionals refer to this group as Autism Spectrum Disorders.

Hartford — Legislation aimed at reducing the number of stray, sick and euthanized dogs in Connecticut by shifting more of the costs for sterilization and vaccination onto those who adopt from public shelters passed the state House of Representatives Tuesday by a unanimous vote.

The bill, still subject to approval from the Senate, would give municipal shelters the option to charge buyers for the shelter's expenses from spaying, neutering or vaccinating the adopted animal.

State Rep. Patricia Widlitz, D-Branford, said the bill would result in more dogs leaving public shelters spayed or neutered and with all their shots.

"This allows our municipalities to be proactive in controlling animal populations," Widlitz said.

Under current law, state residents who adopt an unsterilized dog from a public shelter must pay a $45 fee in exchange for a 60-day Animal Population Control Program voucher. The voucher is good for a one-time, $100 sterilization credit for a male dog and a $120 credit for a female.

Of the 2,991 dogs adopted from Connecticut municipal shelters in the 2011 fiscal year, nearly 30 percent were not spayed or neutered, according to the legislature's nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Analysis.

But not everyone uses the voucher. At a public hearing last month on the bill, Debora Bresch, a lobbyist for the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and president of CT Votes for Animals, testified that nearly one-third of the sterilization vouchers are allowed to expire.

She urged lawmakers to oppose the bill, arguing that its underlying goal is admirable but the "mechanism" is flawed. Bresch's testimony questioned what would happen to the existing voucher system if the legislation becomes law, and warned of "allowing a municipality to charge in excess of what many adopters from the public shelter could afford. ... The consequences could be decreased adoptions."

“This bill makes it more affordable to adopt healthy pets and place them in good homes,” Widlitz said.

“We’re beginning to solve a problem instead of perpetuating one that is heartbreaking and endangering the public,” Reed said. “This bill is permissive, not mandatory. It mirrors the best practices at the most pro-active animal shelters.”

Widlitz and Reed were co-sponsors and champions of the bill (HB 5408).

During a recent public hearing by the legislature’s Planning and Development Committee, Branford Animal Shelter Director Laura Burban said animal shelters are overburdened with unwanted pets and allowing municipalities the option to charge certain fees would benefit everyone.

“Under the legislation, municipalities will now have the option to subsidize adoption fees to better ensure animals are spayed or neutered and vaccinated,” Widlitz said.

“Allowing municipalities the option of passing the cost of these critical procedures onto a potential pet adopter will help relieve a financial burden on the municipalities, which are trying to end the cycle of unwanted animals burdening our animal shelters,” Reed said.

Currently, the practice is to provide a voucher to an adoptive family, which entitles them to get a lower price for participating veterinarian services. Research shows that 40 percent of those vouchers are not being used.

HARTFORD — After more than nine hours of debate, the Connecticut House of Representatives voted on Wednesday to repeal the state’s death penalty, following a similar vote in the State Senate last week. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, a Democrat, has said he will sign the bill, which would make Connecticut the 17th state — the 5th in five years — to abolish capital punishment for future cases.

Representative Patricia M. Widlitz was for the repeal bill.

Mr. Malloy’s signature will leave New Hampshire and Pennsylvania as the only states in the Northeast that still have the death penalty. New Jersey repealed it in 2007. New York’s statute was ruled unconstitutional by the state’s highest court in 2004, and lawmakers have not moved to fix the law.

The vote, after more than two decades of debate and the 2009 veto of a similar bill by the governor at the time, M. Jodi Rell, a Republican, came against the backdrop of one of the state’s most horrific crimes: a 2007 home invasion in Cheshire in which Jennifer Hawke-Petit and her daughters, Hayley, 17, and Michaela, 11, were held hostage and murdered, two of the three raped, and their house set afire by two habitual criminals who are now on death row. Ms. Hawke-Petit’s husband, Dr. William A. Petit Jr., who was badly beaten but escaped, has since been an ardent advocate for keeping the death penalty.

The bill exempts the 11 men currently on death row, including Joshua Komisarjevsky and Steven J. Hayes, the men convicted of the Petit murders.

The measure was approved by a vote of 86 to 62, largely along party lines.

The legislation will make life in prison without possibility of parole the state’s harshest punishment. It mandates that those given life without parole be incarcerated separately from other inmates and be limited to two hours a day outside the prison cell.

In a statement released late Wednesday night, Governor Malloy said the repeal put Connecticut in the same position as nearly every other industrialized nation on the death penalty.

“For decades, we have not had a workable death penalty,” he said, noting that only one person has been executed in Connecticut in the last 52 years. “Going forward, we will have a system that allows us to put these people away for life, in living conditions none of us would want to experience. Let’s throw away the key and have them spend the rest of their natural lives in jail.”

Thirteen proposed amendments from supporters of capital punishment, most of which would have allowed the death penalty in certain cases, were defeated during the debate, in which many legislators told personal stories of the effects of violent crime. The lawmakers also invoked a wide variety of people, from mass murderers to Immanuel Kant to Sir Thomas More.

State Representative Patricia M. Widlitz, a Democrat from Branford and Guilford, said that like many members, she was torn over her vote. But she recalled a murder in her community and the difficulty residents went through in explaining it to local children. “I just couldn’t reconcile telling them that it’s O.K. for the government to kill after teaching them that killing is wrong, it’s unacceptable, it’s immoral,” she said.

She added that the killer was sentenced to life without parole. “I think in many ways, that is a death sentence, with no chance of parole, no chance of doing anything with your life,” she said.

Republican critics of the bill said the exemption for those currently awaiting execution cast a cloud over the vote, both because it undercut the moral argument of death penalty opponents and because future appeals or government action had the potential to spare the 11 men.

“Let’s not mislead the public; let’s not mislead ourselves” said the House minority leader, Lawrence Cafero Jr., of Norwalk. “If it is the will of this chamber that this state is no longer in the business of executing people, then let’s say it and do it. You cannot have it both ways.”

But Democratic legislators — swayed by at least 138 cases nationally in which people sentenced to death were later exonerated and by arguments that the death penalty is imposed in a capricious, discriminatory manner and is not a deterrent to crime — voted for repeal. They noted that a repeal in New Mexico in 2009 that also exempted those already on death row had thus far withstood challenges.

After Connecticut’s repeal, 33 states will have capital punishment, along with the United States government when it prosecutes cases in the federal courts. Voters in California will be asked in November whether to abolish the death penalty in that state.

Capital punishment in Connecticut dates to colonial times. From 1639 to 2005, it performed 126 executions, first by hanging, then by the electric chair, and since 1973, by lethal injection. But since 1976, when the Supreme Court allowed the resumption of executions, there has been just one person executed in the state: Michael Bruce Ross, a serial killer who voluntarily gave up his right to further appeals and was put to death in 2005. The last person involuntarily put to death, in 1960, was Joseph (Mad Dog) Taborsky, who committed a string of robberies and killings.

Of the 1,289 executions since 1976 in the United States, 935 were in seven Southern and border states. Texas alone accounts for 481 executions.

In the Connecticut Senate, where passage seemed most in doubt, the bill was approved 20 to 16 on April 5, with 2 Democrats and all 14 Republicans opposed. Democrats have a majority in both chambers of the General Assembly.

Before that vote, Dr. Petit spoke at a news conference where he called for the Senate not to pass the bill. “We believe in the death penalty because we believe it is really the only true just punishment for certain heinous and depraved murders,” he said.

The Petit murders were cited by several opponents of the repeal, most vividly by Representative Al Adinolfi, a Republican from Cheshire, Hamden and Wallingford, who said he witnessed the chaos at the Petits’ smoldering house that day. He recounted gruesome details of the crime in arguing against the repeal.

“And we say here that Komisarjevsky and Hayes don’t deserve the death penalty? Shame on us,” he said. “They do deserve the penalty, and so do many others.”

But Democrats in favor of the bill cited support from many families of murder victims and the fact that capital punishment has long been banned by nearly all of the world’s democracies. In a review of 34 years of Connecticut death penalty cases, Prof. John Donohue of Stanford Law School concluded that “arbitrariness and discrimination are defining features of the state’s capital punishment regime.”

The political fight over the bill could persist long after the vote. Republicans are likely to put the issue in play in the fall when all 36 State Senate and 151 State House seats are up for election. A recent Quinnipiac University poll found that 62 percent of Connecticut residents thought abolishing the death penalty was “a bad idea,” though polls over time have found respondents split relatively evenly if given the option of life without parole as an alternative to executions.

In the final remarks in the debate late Wednesday, the House majority leader, Brendan Sharkey, a Democrat from Hamden, said the death penalty offered a false promise that did more harm than good.

“I believe that we, as human beings, should not create laws that reciprocate the evil perpetrated against society,” Mr. Sharkey said. “Those laws don’t protect us.”

Guilford, Connecticut (CNN) -- Tom Pinchbeck never dreamed he'd turn his family rose farm into an employment center for people with autism.

In 2008, faced with a sagging U.S. economy and fierce international competition from South American rose growers, Pinchbeck found himself priced out of the market. He had no choice but to do the unthinkable -- close the farm started by his great-grandfather.

Shortly afterward, a college friend of Pinchbeck's, Jim Lyman, approached him with an interesting proposition. Lyman was looking for a way to address the very real problem that many young adults with autism, including his own son, Eli, face: How to transition successfully into adulthood as they grow beyond the cutoff age of built-in state benefits and supports.

"Lyman approached me with the idea of using the greenhouses as a background for vocational therapy for people on the autism spectrum," Pinchbeck says. "I was still reeling from having to close the place down, and it seemed like an interesting way of putting together a really unique program from the ashes of Pinchbeck's Farm."

Now Pinchbeck is working with the group Ability Beyond Disability to put a dent in a staggering statistic: the group says 88% of American adults with autism are unemployed.

"Our program is really designed for people to come into the program, to learn the skills they need and to help place them in their community, help them find a job, hopefully find a career, and really be a productive member of society," says Joan Volpe, Ability Beyond Disability's vice president. "That's really the goal of Roses for Autism is for folks to be a part of a work life that we really take for granted."

Helping achieve that goal is Lori Gregan, the farm's retail manager who's part cheerleader, part mom and part boss.

"I don't have the book knowledge on autism," she says, "But I do have the people knowledge, the instinct."

She works with employees such as 29-year-old Ethel Bondi, who came into the Roses for Autism program struggling with anything outside her set routine.

"Ethel came, and anytime there was any change, anytime I asked her to do anything at all, it was like, 'I quit.' She would get her coat and she was gonna leave," says Gregan. "I'm like, 'whoa whoa whoa, why are you quitting?' She's like, 'I can't do that.' It was always 'I can't.'

Now it's like, 'I will. I can. And I am going to.' "

Bondi possesses a talent for making dried rose wreaths -- one of the farm's best-sellers.

"They were supposed to be for just Valentine's Day, but then people wanted them afterward, and they are still wanting them," she says.

How does that make her feel? "Proud," Bondi says, smiling tentatively. "They are a big hit."

"If I show Ethel she can make this wreath, she wins," says Bondi. "She owns that, and now the next girl that comes in next to her, she can show her, and my job is done. She's a viable employee. There might be a quirk or two, but that's what makes us who we are, if all the stones in the river were the same, there would be no song."

Will Swartzell, a 19-year-old Roses employee with autism, thrives on the uniqueness that makes him who he his. And he hopes success stories like his can help shatter misconceptions that might make employers hesitant to hire people on the autism spectrum.

"We all stereotype," Swartzell says. "But I think it's so important not to; to keep your mind open. Everybody's different. Nothing defines a person except themselves."

It's a sentiment echoed by his mother, Sandra.

"I think it's really important for these kids to have a place where they fit in and contribute," she says. "They have so many great strengths, and I think people are focused more on their challenges more than their strengths. But a place like Roses can really allow them to celebrate who they are and at the same time learn important job skills that are so necessary for them to be productive members of our society. They are so capable of that. There is no doubt about it."

Working often makes adults with developmental disorders happier and more satisfied with their lives, says Dr. Max Wiznitzer of Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine in Cleveland. It gives them a sense of purpose, and they usually do a good job, he says. They're often very focused.

"They follow the rules," says Wiznitzer. "Autism is that way -- one of the diagnostic criteria is the desire for sameness. They're going to be punctual. They're going to show up every day. They have a lot of positive behaviors that employers like. It can be very beneficial both for the employer and the employee."

But there's somewhat of a downside, says Wiznitzer. They work several hours a day, and "then they go back to where they're living, and they're somewhat isolated from everyone else and -- what do they do with their leisure time? We have to make sure they have time for the other stuff, too."

Looking across the retail center, where her employees are hard at work cutting, pruning, designing and packing, Gregan's voice fills with optimism.

"To see the change in my employees from day one to day 10, there are no words. I can see this going global. There are people who are autistic all over the world. They just need to know how they fit in and we need to give them those tools. "

With the help of a few charitable grants, Roses for Autism is doing just that -- helping young adults with autism fit in, find their strengths and improve their lives.

Pinchbeck's alliance with Ability Beyond Disability has saved the family farm -- turning it into a nonprofit business that produces almost a million flowers per year.

It's a solution as unique as the workers who helped save the Pinchbeck family legacy, all the while finding their own place to shine.

See the video

HARTFORD — The next time there's a big environmental funding battle or a major natural disaster involving Long Island Sound, the people who represent us in Hartford won't have to scramble quite so much to unify, mobilize and speak with one organized voice.

That's because they'll already be organized and working toward common goals with their counterparts across and around the Sound in New York via a new bipartisan Long Island Sound caucus that Gov. Dannel P. Malloy gave his support to Wednesday.

The caucus will be guided and organized by a 12-member steering committee that includes six shoreline-area state senators and six state representatives -- both Republicans and Democrats. They will work together to address environmental, economic and energy issues affecting Long Island Sound.

"The Long Island Sound caucus will help unify and connect environmental and economic policy in a way we have never done before in Connecticut," said Malloy. "The Sound "is under constrant threat -- pollution, sewage and storm water runoff are damaging the ecosystem and the economy.

"Connecticut has responded by investing in the Clean Water Fund, but we cannot do this alone," Malloy said. "It will take a regional effort to clean up the Sound and protect it for generations to come."

State Rep. Lonnie Reed, D-Branford, who spearheaded formation of the caucus along with state Rep. Patricia Widlitz, D-Guilford, and others, said one of her key goals "is to reinvigorate our bi-state cooperation with New York" on issues that are important to the Sound.

Reed will co-chair the steering committee along with state Sen. Leonard Fasano, R-North Haven -- whose district also includes hard-hit East Haven -- Rep. Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford (whose district also includes part of East Haven) and state Sen. Andrew Maynard, D-Stonington.

Other members include state reps. Elissa Wright, D-Groton, Clark Chapin, R-New Milford, and Marilyn Giuliano, R-Old Saybrook and state senators Ed Meyer, D-Guilford, Scott Frantz, R-Greenwich , John McKinney, R-Fairfield, and Eileen Daily, D-Westbrook.

Goals of the caucus include:

• Economic development and job growth opportunities.
• Attracting maritime businesses while solving the inevitable dredging conflicts that accompany such ambitions.
• Environmental issues--reducing runoff from storm water and other pollutants; protecting the Sound's beaches, water quality, the shellfish industry, storm preparation, future shoreline development, zoning, insurance, homeowner rights, seawalls and breakwaters.
• Bi-state cooperation with New York.
• Acquiring important coastal areas for public use.
• Expanding funding for improvement projects beyond marinas to things like ferries, expanding the clean marina program, working on incentives for environmentally beneficial projects
• Supporting federal funding for projects that are critical to Connecticut (NOAA, LIS Restoration Fund, Clean Water State Revolving Fund).
• Meeting the 2014 deadline for nitrogen reductions.
• Protecting lobsters (prohibiting insecticides from water).

There have been efforts to organize around Sound issues before, but they often coalesce around a particular issue -- most recently the successful effort on both sides of Long Island Sound a few years back to fight the Broadway liquid natural gas plant that had been proposed for the center of the Sound, said Reed.

"The last time we were really mobilized was Broadwater," said Reed, who has been the General Assembly's loudest voice in recent years for cross-Sound cooperation and was a co-founder of a bi-state coalition formed to fight Broadwater.

"We need to reinvigorate our relationship with New York," Reed said.

"This is an exciting opportunity to tackle the many issues of importance regarding the Long Island Sound," said Widlitz, whose district also includes the Stony Creek section of Branford. "We don't need legislation to reach out and partner with legislators from New York - let's just do it!

"The Sound is our shared natural resource with recreational and economic benefit to our constituents," Widlitz said. "We have worked together to defeat harmful proposals such as Broadwater. Now we will focus on proactive policy initiatives that are beneficial to both business and the environment."

Never was the need for better organization and coordination around Sound issues more apparent than last September and beyond in the aftermath of Tropical Storm Irene, said Reed, state Sen. Leonard Fasano, R-North Haven, whose district includes hard-hit East Haven, and state Sen. Ed Meyer, D-Guilford, whose district also includes Branford and Madison.

Candelora said it's important to get organized with regard to supporting and protecting the Sound because, aside from strictly environmental concerns, the Sound contributes more than $8.5 billion annually to the state economy.

Maynard said the caucus "will facilitate better solutions to the wide variety of environmental and economic issues the Sound presents."

"Living along the shoreline means living with the reality that storm damage is real and already impacting our coast," said Meyer. "We must act now to protect property and preserve our beaches from rising sea levels and severe storms.

"Tropical Storm Irene took a heavy toll on shoreline residents last year," Meyer said. "With the formation of this Long Island Sound caucus, we are taking steps to address climate change and better prepare for future storms."

Daily said "it has always been clear to me that our generation is responsible for preservation of the Sound as an aesthetic treasure, an environmental obligation and as a key component of a regional economic powerhouse."

This week, the new task force heard presentations from two scientists – Robert Thieler of the U.S. Geological Survey and Jennifer Pagach of the Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection – on climate change and potential impacts to the Connecticut shoreline.

“People who live along the shoreline need to know we are being proactive about preparing for future storms,” Sen. Meyer said. “When you take rising sea levels and add in storms like Irene, you get a recipe for disaster. Planning ahead for future storms means acknowledging the reality of climate change and finding ways to adapt.”

Last summer, Tropical Storm Irene wreaked havoc on Connecticut’s coastline, causing flooding that damaged properties and further eroded beaches. The Shoreline Preservation Task Force will study the problem and use data and research to make recommendations for how prepare for future storms and preserve the existing shoreline.

"This is a serious issue and one that we cannot afford to ignore," said Rep. Widlitz. "We need to be prepared for whatever is in store in the future, as it affects our shorelines. This committee will follow through on the intent of the legislation I helped negotiate in 2008, helping our committees to mitigate the effects of climate change.”

"Some people in Branford are still recovering from the damage done by Irene this summer and we had to replace a road that is the only way in and out of a neighborhood for 450 families," said Rep. Reed. “We need to know as much as we can about what might be coming our way and how best to prepare to protect people and property.”

“I'm looking forward to working with fellow shoreline legislators to help develop policies that will best serve our communities,” said Rep. Kokoruda.

Studies show that water temperatures in Long Island Sound have been slowly increasing over the past few decades and scientists have observed decreases in cold-water fish. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has reported that East Coast sea levels have risen 5 to 6 inches more than the global average over the past century. This kind of data contributes to the complex equation of how climate change is impacting the Long Island Sound and the Connecticut shoreline.

Speakers at this week’s task force meeting talked about strategies that include mapping erosion risk, climate monitoring, planning for possible storm scenarios, learning from the past and adapting in the future. Pagach presented tidal gauge data from New London that seems to indicate accelerated sea-level rise in the Sound, but she warned the task force that further interpretation by experts is needed to definitively identify rates of change. Thieler told the task force members that the reality is that sea levels will continue to rise over the next few centuries.

“Climate change is happening. We cannot ignore the fact that erosion, rising sea levels, and more severe storms are putting our coastal areas at risk,” Sen. Meyer said. “But we can prepare and plan for these changes so that future generations are better equipped to weather severe.

Efforts are underway to develop state standards and enforcement mechanisms for backup power at cell towers following problems encountered in last year’s two historic storms that caused power outages lasting up to 12 days.

There is also proposed legislation to update the approval process for towers, and recommendations that would give enforcement power to the Connecticut Siting Council (CSC), which oversees cell towers.

All this comes at a time when Branford is dealing with an onslaught of tower proposals. Yesterday, the second tower in slightly more than two years received final approval. The CSC approved the development and management plans for a 109-foot tower, disguised as a rustic water tank, at 723 Leetes Island Rd. on the Medlyn Farm property. A 125-foot tower has already been built on Pine Orchard Road.

In addition, T-Mobile has an application pending for a 160-foot tower on Pleasant Point Road, but the proposal is on hold while the company looks at alternate suggestions from the town’s Cell Tower Advisory Committee. AT&T is still seeking coverage for the Short Beach area of Branford, and has looked at sites in Short Beach and also just across the town line at the volunteer fire station in East Haven. A meeting was recently held in East Haven and it is anticipated that AT&T may file an application soon.

The CSC has been delving into the cell company’s response to Tropical Storm Irene and the late October snowstorm that caused massive power outages and disruptions in communications. The CSC recently released information about the cell companies that they received after sending out storm-response questionnaires.

CSC Director Linda Roberts told the Eagle that although the council did not receive answers to all their questions, the information they learned was beneficial.

“It will strengthen our process going forward,” Roberts said. “The council will focus more on backup power.”

In addition, the governor’s Two Storm Panel is recommending the development of state standards for backup power at cell towers, and the creation of an enforcement arm for the CSC.

The Two Storm Panel’s final report stated: “Wireless telecommunications service providers were not prepared to serve residential and business customers during a power outage. Certain companies had limited backup generator capacity.”

There are currently no federal, state or CSC requirements for backup power at cell towers, and each company develops its own standards. Roberts said Federal Communications Commission, which supersedes all cell tower matters, attempted to mandate backup power in 2007, but their efforts failed. The Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, which represents cell companies, has fought government regulation of backup power.

LEGISLATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A cell tower bill introduced by State Reps. Lonnie Reed (D-Branford) and Pat Widlitz (D-Branford, Guilford) was unanimously approved by Energy and Technology Committee and has been sent to the House for consideration. They have been fighting for three years to update the way the CSC approves cell tower sites.

The proposed legislation requires cell companies to notify towns 90 days, instead of 60, before filing an application with the CSC. This gives towns more time to participate in the site selection process. It also orders the CSC to give more weight to towns’ suggestions.

The bill would fine cell companies that intentionally mislead the process by submitting false data. It urges the CSC to choose sites that serve as large a regional area as possible, and reemphasizes the need to keep towers out of residential neighborhoods and scenic areas wherever possible.

“We are convinced this approach will make the process much more interactive and that people will feel more heard,” Reed told the Eagle.

There is also a storm response bill that would require backup power systems that can run for at least 72 hours, and require more portable towers be available.

Reed reported yesterday that a bill that would fine utilities if they failed to meet benchmarks in restoring power was recently voted out of the Energy and Technology committee.

The Two Storm Panel’s report to the governor listed several findings and recommendations in regard to cell towers:

• “All communications systems should supply an accurate accounting of the effectiveness and “lasting use” of their systems in the event of a loss of power.
• “Back up generation and backhaul (the physical telephone line that connects cellular towers and transmits the calls) capabilities for cell towers is inconsistent. Different standards are used by different companies, and there is no state standard currently applicable to all cell towers.”
• “The Connecticut Siting Council should require continuity of service plans for any cellular tower to be erected. In addition, where possible, the Siting Council should issue clear and uniform standards for issues including, but not limited to, generators, battery backups, backhaul capacity, response times for existing cellular towers.”
• “Neither the PURA nor the Connecticut Siting Council has an effective enforcement capability in the structure of either agency.
• “An enforcement division should be created within PURA that will serve both PURA and the Connecticut Siting Council. This division will be tasked with reviewing open orders issued by both agencies; investigating potential violations of such orders; negotiating administrative penalties with violators; and, if necessary, referring violations to the office of the Attorney General for enforcement proceedings. “

The CSC has formed a Storm Panel Subcommittee that will review all the findings and make written recommendations.

SEEKING ANSWERS

In October, the CSC sent cell companies an in-depth questionnaire to gauge the impact of Tropical Storm Irene, then updated the questions to include the late-October snowstorm. Some cell companies attempted to shield responses to the questionnaire from the public, but the council in November unanimously denied the request for a protective order.

Following this month’s meeting, the CSC said Verizon Wireless answered the questionnaire for both storms; and MetroPCS New York gave responses for the tropical storm. Neither AT&T nor T-Mobile answered the questionnaire. AT&T provided copies of responses to a storm investigation by the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA); nor did T-Mobile provide a letter addressing both storms.

Responding to the questionnaire was voluntary.

Roberts said there is still no specific data regarding how many towers were affected by the storms, or the exact nature of backup systems.

The issue of backup power is crucial since cell towers rely on electricity to provide service. In addition, a telephone landline is required for a tower to be functional. More than 800,000 customers lost electricity in each storm, with outages lasting up to 12 days in some areas. Landline telephone service was also affected in wide areas of the state.

Roberts said of 28 tower sites that were most recently approved by the CSC, all had backup power provisions. Seven of those had battery backup and 21 relied on either diesel or propane powered generators. When a site is initially approved, the company must then submit a development and management plan for final approval. “At that point in time, the backup plan they’re proposing is documented,” Roberts said.

Roberts said data from the questionnaires and other responses were studied and compiled into a general report. “We’re looking for a broad scope with the answers we’re getting,” she said.

These are some of the conclusions the CSC has drawn from the information provided by the cell companies:

• External power at most of the affected sites did not come back on line for more than 72 hours during both storms.
• Cell sites apparently have some kind of backup power system, which usually switches on immediately when there is an external power outage.
• Sites with battery backup power came online immediately, but in a few cases the battery power ran out before a temporary generator was connected. That was rectified in 24 hours.
• There were a small number of backup gas generators that didn’t immediately turn on, but they were repaired or replaced within 24 hours.
• Verizon said towers that lost function did so because of the loss of the telephone landline.
• T-Mobile said sites that lost external electrical power had backup generators, and had enough fuel to provide power for the duration of the electrical outage.
• AT&T Mobility said all sites have battery backup power; the sites that lost electrical power immediately switched to backup power; and none of its sites went off-line due to failure of backup power. Additionally, AT&T said it deployed and fueled generators.
• Battery backup systems take up less space at a site, would not require on-site fuel storage, and are quieter than gas generators. However, gas generators typically provide longer operating time.

Officials from both Verizon Wireless and AT&T answered questions from the Two Storm Panel, that was enacted by Gov. Dannel Malloy.

Verizon officials told the panel that about 10 percent of their Connecticut sites have no backup generator because the landlord won’t permit it, or because an antenna is on a steeple or rooftop. They said backup generators will overcome electrical loss, but not the loss of the telephone landline which is necessary for operations. Verizon said most of their backup generators are powered by diesel, and some by propane, and they typically run two to three days before needing to be refueled.

AT&T told the Two Storm Panel that they have 675 sites in the state, but did not say how many were impacted by the storm. They said if a landlord doesn’t want a generator at a site, it can’t be placed there. When the panel asked about their standard for backup power, AT&T had no specific answer and said it is difficult to understand how long backup power will last.

Robert Stein, who chairs the CSC, told the Two Storm Panel that council considers backup power when it approves applications, but each carrier has its own standard as to the source of backup power and the length of time it will operate.

Earlier this month Laura Burban, director of Branford's Cosgrove Animal Shelter, testified about the need for new state legislation to permit towns and cities, if they choose, to charge prospective dog or cat owners the fees typically associated with vaccinating, spaying or neutering animals.

Last Friday the General Assembly's Planning and Development Committee approved the legislation by a vote of 19-1 and sent it to the House floor. If enacted, it will give municipalities a way to make sure that shelter pets are vaccinated and sterilized before they are adopted. The bill does not require municipalities to take this route but gives them an option that Burban says is necessary.

The current state voucher system places the responsibility on the pet owner and the pet owner often ignores it or finds the voucher system too expensive to use, even with discounts.

"I feel it is our responsibility as a governmental agency to set the standard for the public", Burban said. "This bill would enable shelters, but not mandate them to provide their animals with vaccinations and sterilizations by passing along the costs to potential adopters." Under the new bill, shelter animals would leave "healthy and completely altered."

State Reps. Lonnie Reed (D-Branford) and Pat Widlitz (D-Guilford and Branford) are co-sponsors of the bill, which will soon head to the House floor.

"It is a common sense bill; not a mandate," Reed said, "but what we call enabling legislation to allow other towns, should they choose, to operate the way our very successful Branford/North Branford Animal Shelter does by making sure that adoptive families receive a pet who has been vaccinated, sterilized and socialized."

The bill, she said, would not force any municipality to do anything new. It does, however, allow those animal shelter directors who want to be proactive to be proactive, Burban said. For example, "some animal shelters are not going to fund raise as I do," she said.

Rep. Reed said the new law would "present adoptive families with a fully ready-to-go pet." Under the current system, the adoptive parent gets a voucher designed to provide vet services at a reduced rate," Reed said.

But the voucher system has problems. Even a lobbyist for the ASPCA told the committee via letter that the voucher system needs to be changed but she sought other ways to do it.

Burban told the Eagle that she has studied statistics for the state's Animal Population Control Program (APCP) over a six-year period. She said she found that "between 36 and 40 percent of people adopting shelter dogs or cats never use the voucher."

In actual numbers, Burban said, this translates into about 10,019 animals not being fixed or vaccinated. In actual procreation numbers, Burban said one cat and her mate will produce twelve kittens in a year. That same cat and her mate and their new kittens will produce 67 in the second year, and by six years later they will have produced 66,088 and this number is taking into account kittens dying from natural causes in every litter. Dogs follow a very similar pattern. Within six years they produce 67,000 offspring as well. Many of these unwanted animals end up in shelters, some end up living wild and some end up dead on the street."

What Burban found, she said in an interview, is that while the voucher is used to reduce a veterinarian's fee, that fee may be too high for families to pay. As a result those families decide not to spay or neuter or vaccinate their adopted animal. Often pet adopters let the vouchers lapse. Nonetheless, the state collects $45.00 for each voucher. She said that while the APCP program is a great program, "it is not 100 percent fool proof."

As a result, Burban said, a significant number of dogs and cats leaving shelters across the state never get spayed or neutered or vaccinated against disease. Rep. Widlitz concurred.

Rep. Reed said Branford's animal shelter, which also services North Branford, provides vaccinations and spaying and neutering to all animals before adoption. They do so by asking clients for a donation. Many shelters accept some form of donation for the costs of insuring the health of the animal adopted out.

"We want the statute governing animal shelters to reflect that option. Branford/North Branford is doing what it takes to solve and not perpetuate the problem of unwanted pets. We should be a model for the state," Rep. Reed said in an interview.

If the bill is passed into law, it would provide the first update for animal shelters since 1964 when the fee to purchase a dog from a shelter was $5. The new language would say that in addition to the $5 fee, "any person who purchases a dog as a pet may be charged the cost the municipality incurred, if any, to spay or neuter and vaccinate."

The legislation (HB 5408) was championed and co-sponsored by Rep. Lonnie Reed (D-Branford). Widlitz is also a co-sponsor of the bill, which was given a public hearing Friday before the legislature’s Planning and Development Committee.

Burban told the committee that animal shelters are overburdened with unwanted pets and allowing municipalities the option to charge certain fees would benefit everyone.

“Allowing municipalities the option of passing the cost of these critical procedures onto a potential pet adopter will help relieve a financial burden on the municipalities, which are trying to end the cycle of unwanted animals burdening our animal shelters,” Reed said.

Widlitz said data shows that a significant percentage of dogs never get spayed or neutered.

“This legislation allows municipalities to be proactive in making sure that animals that leave their shelters are vaccinated as well as neutered and spayed,” Widlitz said.

“Congratulations to the Branford shelter for bringing this issue forward. They have an exemplary record of responsible policies concerning pet adoptions,” Widlitz said.

Rep. Pat Widlitz, Branford Animal Shelter Director Laura Burban and Rep. Lonnie Reed outside
the legislature’s Planning and Development Committee’s hearing.

A recent $25 billion settlement with the nation’s five biggest mortgage servicers — Bank of America, Citibank, JP Morgan Chase, GMAC/Ally and Wells Fargo – over foreclosure abuses, fraud and other suspect bank practices — will soon be felt in Branford and other towns and cities in Connecticut.

The settlement requires the banks to change the way they service distressed loans and holds them accountable for their actions. State attorneys general will now have the authority to monitor how federally regulated banks comply with the new servicing rules. They also have the ability to impose heavy fines on banks that fail to comply.

The joint federal and multi-state settlement requires the banks to change the way they service distressed loans and holds them accountable for their actions. State attorneys general will now have the authority to monitor how federally regulated banks comply with the new servicing rules. They also have the ability to impose heavy fines on banks that fail to comply. Attorney General George Jepsen was a member of the negotiating team that produced the settlement after 15 months of negotiations. All 50 states were involved.

Connecticut homeowners and the state are expected to receive $190 million as their share, but more than half of the total amount is going to homeowners in Florida and California, two of the hardest hit states. Homeowners will see little in monetary relief but the settlement will impose new regulations on banks.

In Branford, condominiums seem to make up about 50 percent of the foreclosure listings. Branford has a heavy inventory of condos. Whiteman said that when their values decline, it’s deeper and longer, and harder to regain.

State Rep. Patricia Widlitz (D-Guilford, Branford) praised the settlement in a recent press release. “Thanks to the efforts of our own attorney general and the 49 other attorneys general who negotiated the landmark settlement, homeowners now will be more protected from mortgage companies that try to employ unacceptable practices.” Widlitz is the House chair of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee.

For example, one of the unacceptable practices that came to light was robo-signing, the practice of a bank employee signing thousands of documents and affidavits without verifying the information.

Connecticut’s share in the settlement is divided as follows:

• State borrowers will receive an estimated $119 million in benefits from loan term modifications and other direct relief.

• The estimated 7,500 Connecticut borrowers who lost their home to foreclosure from Jan. 1, 2008 through Dec. 31, 2011, and suffered servicing abuse would qualify for an estimated $1,500 cash payment to individual borrowers.

• The value of refinanced loans to Connecticut’s underwater borrowers would be an estimated $36 million.

• The state will receive a direct payment estimated at $27 million to help pay for local foreclosure prevention programs, such as the Connecticut Department of Banking’s foreclosure prevention hotline, HUD-approved housing counselors, the Judicial Branch’s foreclosure mediation program, non-profit legal aid groups that help homeowners facing foreclosure, and loan modification programs supported by the Connecticut Housing Finance Authority.

The banks have three years to distribute the funds.

Widlitz said she hopes the state would use its funds for the intended purpose. “I realize it could be tempting for Connecticut to use the money it receives for other purposes, but it is my hope that the money is earmarked for borrowers and not diverted to other needs,” she said.

Brad Whiteman, associate broker at Coldwell Banker in Branford, shared his perspective on the effects of foreclosure in Branford last week. “They can now go forward and process foreclosures,” Whiteman said. “We’ll see a massive influx in the US and in Connecticut,” he predicted.

But he is not particularly optimistic about the way banks do business. He believes that banks are stuck in the old mode of an “US vs. Them” mentality.

“My personal feeling is that this [the $25 billion settlement] was a complete victory for the banks. The homeowners won’t end up seeing much support,” he said, adding that it’s a “slap on the wrist.”

Likewise, critics, including housing advocates, say the settlement does not go far enough in providing relief to homeowners and that banks must be held accountable for their misdeeds. The settlement excludes loans by Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, which hold about half of the nation’s mortgages.

On the surface, the foreclosure situation in Branford seems to be improving. According to RealtyTrac, in February 2011, 1 in every 1,376 homes in Branford received a notice of foreclosure filing. In January 2012, the number declined to 1 in every 2,318 homes.

Citing the state judicial branch website, Whiteman said that as of Feb. 20., there were 58 foreclosures in Branford, plus two pending foreclosures. Looking back to 2005, there were no foreclosures and no short sales. He said there are 149 properties listed for sale in Branford, though he’s not sure how many of them are short sales.

An indication of the decline of property values resulting from the economy and foreclosure can be seen through a home on Plant Road. It sold for $320,000 in May 2004, subsequently went through a foreclosure before being listed as a bank sale at $217,337 in April 2011, and finally selling for $179,000 in July 2011.

“Foreclosure is devastating to people,” said Whiteman. “We have to look at other forms of abundance, such as health, well being and other people – not money. Communities have to wake up to find the answers.”

Where To Go For Help

Widlitz said that if someone was a victim of any abuses by any of the banks, they should refer to the contacts below for help and more information.

Under the agreement, Connecticut homeowners and the state will receive more than $190 million, Attorney General George Jepsen told Widlitz and her colleagues on the legislature’s Banks Committee who were briefed recently on the settlement details.

“Thanks to the efforts of our own attorney general and the 49 other attorneys general who negotiated the landmark settlement, homeowners now will be more protected from mortgage companies that try to employ unacceptable practices,” said Rep. Widlitz, who is also the House chair of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee.

Under the agreement, Bank of America, Citibank, JP Morgan Chase, GMAC and Wells Fargo – the nation’s largest mortgage servicing companies – will pay a combined $25 billion because of their improper foreclosure practices.

As important as the financial relief is, the settlement requires the banks to change the way they service distressed loans and it holds the banks accountable for what have become familiar abuses. And for the first time, state attorneys general will have authority to monitor how federally regulated banks comply with the new servicing rules and to impose heavy penalties on those banks that fall short.

For Connecticut, the $190 million will be divided among homeowners and the state:

• Connecticut borrowers will receive an estimated $119 million in benefits from loan term modifications and other direct relief.
• The estimated 7,500 Connecticut borrowers who lost their home to foreclosure from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2011 and suffered servicing abuse would qualify for an estimated $1,500 in cash payments to individual borrowers.
• The value of refinanced loans to Connecticut’s underwater borrowers would be an estimated $36 million.
• The state will receive a direct payment estimated at $27 million to help pay for local foreclosure prevention programs, such as the Connecticut Department of Banking’s foreclosure prevention hotline, HUD- approved housing counselors, the Judicial Branch’s foreclosure mediation program, non-profit legal aid groups that help homeowners facing foreclosure, and loan modification programs supported by the Connecticut Housing Finance Authority.

“I realize it could be tempting for Connecticut to use the money it receives for other purposes, but it is my hope that the money is earmarked for borrowers and not diverted to other needs,” Widlitz said.

Widlitz said that if someone was a victim of any abuses by any of the banks, they should refer to the contacts below for help and more information.

Where to go for help:

• Bank of America: 877-488-7814
• Citi: 866-272-4749
• Chase: 866-372-6901
• GMAC (Ally): 800-766-4622
• Wells Fargo: 800-288-3212
• More information can be found www.ct.gov/ag

The state’s new business outreach program took its show on the road, setting up shop in Branford’s Community House on Church Street. Scores of people lined up to speak one-on-one with state specialists versed in the way to get funds, obtain permits, explore tax credits. The aim: to create jobs, businesses and a new economic spirit in the state.

This was a way of thinking that no one in the room had ever encountered before. “This is a part of our reinventing Connecticut tour,” Deputy Economic and Community Commissioner Ron Angelo said in an interview after the program ended. “We had over a dozen stops on that tour. Now that tour is not going to end. Now we are going to be out doing this sort of thing on a regular basis. It is about being pro-active not reactive anymore. It is about government acting at the speed of business and being responsive to business.”

The governor and the legislature, he said, will be helping start-ups all the way up to large corporations, both for profit and not-for-profit groups. “We have backed it up with capital, with investments,” he said.

The turnout for the gathering was high and included state Rep. Pat Widlitz (D-Guilford, Branford), co-chair of the powerful Finance and Bonding Committee.

Business people came from various shoreline towns. What amazed the audience, they said, was the new attitude of the once sleepy state Department of Economic and Community Development. The event drew a full house. It was hosted by the Branford Economic Development Commission, First Selectman Unk DaRos and Tery Elton, who oversees special events for the town. Branford High School videotaped the program and provided the coffee and pastries.

New Business Plan
Angelo outlined the ways in which the Malloy Administration has revamped the process of getting businesses moving in the state and gave high praise to Widlitz, Rep. Lonnie Reed (D-Branford) and state Sen. Ed Meyer for their leadership in bringing about a special legislative jobs session and jobs package last October. “If it wasn’t for their leadership, it would not have happened,” he said.

Widlitz said she was very pleased with the meeting. “Ron brought the feeling to Branford that the state of Connecticut is engaged. We have a vision. We are organized. Come talk to us. This is one-on-one. They are taking the show on the road.”

Reed said this plan was exactly what Connecticut needs. “We need to be proactive. Your future doesn’t find you; you find your future. And we find that there are a lot of business people who have great ideas but they are not sure how to pull it all together, how to create a business plan, market it, merchandise it, and find their market. To have this system coming to towns, with all these satellites being created, well, it is why this place was packed today.”

Angelo outlined the governor’s new job-growth package that includes $516 million in bonding for business and infrastructure investments, a new tax break aimed at small businesses, and a plan to streamline state regulations.

One key part of the plan, dubbed the “Small Business Express Package,” centers on up to $50 million for loans and matching grants to help small companies create jobs. This part of the package drew many of the 120 people to the morning sessions.

Referring to his power point presentation, Angelo outlined the broad basis of the plan, one he termed “proactive.” At one point he drew gasps from a disbelieving audience when he said: “Ninety percent of the permits are done in 60 days or less right now.”

One of his themes was that government had to respond to its citizens in a more businesslike way. If Connecticut is to be competitive, it has to get out there—-with funds, with energy, with initiative he said. Click here for the DECD website.

He emphasized technology, Main Street upgrades, refurbishing bridges and airport enterprise zones.

He conceded the state has done a terrible job in the past in marketing itself. “We are going to change that” He said under the small business express program, $100 million is available for small businesses. He stressed efficiency and speed, the use of on-line applications and an expedited review process. “We can do it and do it in 30 days.” He talked about loans ranging from $10,000 to $100,000 and with a four percent interest rate for up to five years.

Another part of the program centers on hiring new employees. Any business hiring a new employee will get $6,000 a year for every employee hired over three income years. If the person is handicapped, the number goes up to $9,000 a year. One man in the audience outlined his hiring dates and asked if he still qualified.

One person asked Angelo about the need to expand Tweed Airport, especially as it relates to the New Haven community. “What are your plans for Tweed?” Angelo said he had been involved “a little bit” in the Tweed project, but added, “I can’t tell you about the long term plans for Tweed. There are expansion plans. Shoot me an e-mail,” he added, before moving to the next topic.

Another businesswoman asked what restrictions if any were there on companies incorporated in Delaware but doing business in Connecticut? He said there were none.

One of the reasons the state came up with this plan, he said, is that “businesses were having trouble accessing capital through banks.”

Joe Gordon, the chair of the Town’s Economic Development Commission, told the story of an accidental product that came into being in this state and conceivably might happen to somebody else in the room.

Paul Sperry, an engineer, slipped and fell when he alighted from his boat one day. But his cat, (some stories say it was his dog) landed just fine. Why did he slip and his cat didn’t? He turned the cat’s paw over and discovered the tiny grooves and cracks that give cat’s paws traction. From this observation came the first boat shoe, the original Sperry Top-sider, first introduced in 1935.

Rep. Reed, who has her own media business, said this type of state promotion is essential for the state’s future. Afterwards she and Gordon chatted about what they believe will be the phenomenal future of Jackson Labs and the bio sciences in the state. “It is the future,” she and Gordon both said. Earlier Gordon publicly praised Reed and Widlitz for their role in helping to bring Jackson Labs from Maine to Connecticut.

Many people exchanged business cards. Reed reported that the event provided a way for people to meet each other. “I was talking to a lady who does equipment for her tire company. And some other gentlemen, who trains wounded veterans, said to her: ‘is that something a wounded veteran could do? She said several employees were in wheel chairs. And so they were exchanging cards and they are going to create jobs for wounded vets.”

The room soon became full, with men and women seeking advice and guidance. A line formed at the door.

The Roses for Autism vocational program is growing almost as fast as the flowers in its greenhouse.

Having been opened for just over two years at Pinchbeck's Rose Farm on the Boston Post Road, the program is expanding its production facility and creating new retail, office and training space.

Business remains steady at the agricultural operation, which grows and sells roses while providing employment and job training to people on the autism spectrum.

Though construction on the 1,500-square-foot building expansion began in December, a ground-breaking ceremony was held Wednesday morning and attended by staff, board members, State Rep. Patricia Widlitz and representatives of Ability Beyond Disability, which oversees Roses for Autism.

"The goal is to make Roses for Autism a nationally acclaimed resource for roses and, more importantly, the best training program for people on the autism spectrum so that we have a model to help people get employed … and make contributions to society," said Ability Beyond Disability President and CEO Tom Fanning.

The $1.5 million project, to be finished in mid-March, is using $750,000 in state funding, private donations and some pro-bono work by architect Tom Gribbin of Noyes Vogt Architects in Chester, said David Cappiello, vice president of development and communications for Ability Beyond Disability.

He said Widlitz, D-Guilford, helped secure the state funding.

The farm employs about 10 people on the autism spectrum, and many more have come and gone onto jobs at other farms and businesses, according to Joan Volpe, vice president of services for Ability Beyond Disability.

The program sprouted roots in 2009 after Jim Lyman, a parent of a child with autism, began wondering what opportunities his son might have.

Pinchbeck's Rose Farm had ceased operations the year before, so Lyman and friend Tom Pinchbeck discussed using the farm as an agricultural training site for people with autism, and then began working with Ability Beyond Disability on the idea.

"It's nice to see the program come together," said Lyman, who offers input on program plans.

The new office, retail and training space will connect to the existing production building, which has also served as a small shop. Program leaders want a better space for those who visit, said Julie Hipp, manager of Roses for Autism.

Employees receive training in agriculture and growing roses, retail operations and customer service and ecommerce.

Right now, they're gearing up for Valentine's Day orders. While they sell roses locally, they also ship them across the country and provide arrangements for corporate and university events.

“STEAP Grants help towns improve quality of life, spur economic development and stimulate the local economy,” Governor Malloy said. “Especially during times when municipal budgets are stretched thin, these grants help make needed projects become a reality.”

Guilford: $500,000 for Jacobs Beach enhancements

The Town of Guilford will receive a $500,000 grant to construct improvements at Jacobs Beach, including making the drop-off areas safer for children attending summer camps and for seniors who need assistance entering and exiting the beach. There is also a plan to construct a small boardwalk, create two kiosks, renovate the bathhouse and make improvements to shaded areas

“This is a significant grant and I’m very happy for the residents of Guilford,” State Representative Pat Widlitz (D-Guilford, Branford) said. “Jacobs Beach is one of the town’s most utilized recreational resources and this grant will enhance the enjoyment of the beach for people of all ages. My thanks goes to the Governor for his support of this great project for the people of Guilford.”

“Jacobs Beach is Guilford’s finest park, and this grant will make it even more attractive to residents,” State Senator Ed Meyer (D-Guilford), Senate Chairman of the legislature’s Environment Committee, said.

The Town of Madison will receive a $400,000 grant to make improvements to the Boston Post Road, which includes moving overhead utilities underground. The grant will also allow for streetscape renovations, such as median, crosswalk, sidewalk, curbing, drainage, landscape, street lights and foliage. These improvements come as part of phase 3 of the Madison Downtown Center Project.

“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.”

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.

“I’m especially 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.”

"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."

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.

On paper, this was the year Connecticut would begin reaping taxes on Internet sales -- $18.8 million over 2011 and 2012, to be exact.

But online shoppers accustomed to the traditionally lax enforcement have nothing to worry about this holiday season or for the foreseeable future. State lawmakers, despite having passed online tax legislation in the spring, are waiting on Washington, D.C., to figure out the best way for states to collect the money.

"It's a tactical change, not a substantive change," Kevin Sullivan, commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Revenue Services, said.

Rep. Patricia Widlitz, D-Guilford, a co-chairman of the Legislature's Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee, on Friday said she had not discussed the new developments surrounding the Internet sales tax with Sullivan.

"Perhaps our efforts are better focused on the federal level at this point," she said.

Asked about the $18.8 million lawmakers had counted on in Internet sales taxes, Widlitz said she will have to sit down with state budget officials to discuss the matter.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled retailers are only responsible for collecting sales taxes in states where they have a physical presence. Shoppers are technically supposed to report on their tax returns purchases from out-of-state companies -- Seattle-based Amazon.com is the oft-cited example -- but that does not happen often

Bricks-and-mortar retailers complain this puts them at an unfair advantage.

So last spring, Connecticut lawmakers tried to get tough.

They declared any business with ties to the state should be collecting sales taxes, starting with Amazon, and counted on raising $18.8 million in the new two-year budget.

Amazon has an associates program that pays advertising fees to anyone who promotes the retailer. So, for example, a Connecticut food blog that recommends cook books to visitors would link them to Amazon.com for titles.

Amazon -- as it has when other states tried a similar maneuver -- balked and in June ended its associate relationships in Connecticut.

Sullivan at the time pledged to continue to put pressure on the company, even though he had warned legislators early on not to count on the funds in the new state budget.

Sullivan said the situation has changed due to recent developments in Washington, D.C.

In early November, a bipartisan group of U.S. senators introduced the Marketplace Fairness Act to give states the option of collecting sales taxes from out-of-state sellers. And Amazon.com, Sullivan said, is on board.

"Amazon has broken ranks in a big way with several other reluctant companies like Overstock.com and eBay," he said.

Sullivan acknowledged nothing is likely to pass prior to the 2012 elections but said the bipartisan nature of the legislation plus Amazon.com's support is a positive step.

Amazon.com in a press release said the company considered the proposal "a win-win resolution."

Sullivan attributed the company's change of heart to a desire to expand its business model and eventually build more distribution sites throughout the country to expedite shipping.

Once that happens, Sullivan said, Amazon will have to pay sales taxes, and then it will be the one facing a competitive disadvantage if the status quo prevails.

Sullivan did not rule out continuing to pressure other large online retailers to begin collecting taxes. But it is a slow process and without federal intervention those efforts will likely wind up being litigated, Sullivan said.

In the meantime, Sullivan said, his agency will take steps to try and improve collection of the online sales tax from Connecticut residents by making it clearer in tax literature they owe the money.

But, he acknowledged, unless a taxpayer finds themselves audited for other reasons, the average person need not worry.

"We probably will never audit somebody on that basis," Sullivan said.

“This investment is solidly linked to Connecticut’s tradition of supporting innovation and emerging industries,” said Rep. Widlitz, House chair of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee. “In an economy where jobs are precious, our commitment to Jackson labs will yield thousands of jobs in the field of bioscience.”

The legislation approved by the General Assembly creates the Connecticut Bioscience Collaboration program within Connecticut Innovations (CI) to support the establishment of a bioscience cluster anchored by the Jackson Laboratory facility at the UConn Health Center in Farmington. The State of Connecticut will invest $291 million and Jackson Laboratory will raise the balance of $860 million for the project.

According to the state Department of Economic and Community Development (DECD), the Jackson Laboratory project is expected to create over 660 positions at Jackson Laboratory in Farmington within 20 years. DECD estimates more than 4,000 bioscience jobs would be generated through spin-off companies, and another 2,000 would be added to local services and area retail stores – a total of 6,600 jobs.

“According to Price-Waterhouse-Coopers, bioscience is a field that will see incredible growth for the foreseeable future,” Rep. Widlitz said. “By attracting a company like Jackson Laboratory, Connecticut will have a strong presence in this important and growing field.”

Jackson Labs is a world renowned, non-profit genetics research company based in Maine. 

The legislature also approved a comprehensive jobs bill (HB 6801) that will boost Connecticut’s ability to grow and retain jobs.  The goal of the legislation is to jump-start job creation and foster long-term economic growth. Governor Dannel Malloy signed the bill into law Thursday during a ceremony at the State Capitol.

The state Bond Commission is expected to approve $250,000 for the non-profit Growing Possibilities, Inc. which operates Roses for Autism at Pinchbeck’s Rose Farm. Started in 2009, Roses for Autism provides training and employment for individuals on the autism spectrum.

“There is a severe lack of employment training for people on the autism spectrum and Roses for Autism offers a real path of opportunity,” said Rep. Widlitz. “Roses for Autism is about helping people help themselves to become more independent and this grant will further allow people to benefit from this important and compassionate mission.”

Proceeds from the over one million roses sold annually go toward supporting vocational training and job opportunities for people with autism. To support Roses for Autism, roses can be purchased at Pinchbeck’s Farm at 929 Boston Post Road in Guilford, as well as online at www.rosesforautism.com or by calling (203) 453-2186.

Also expecting approval on Friday’s agenda is a navigational direction improvement project for the shores of Guilford.   Town Marina Basin and the Inner Channel will be dredged with help from a state grant for $198,750. The project is expected to dredge 11,173 yards of marine sediments from the marina access channel, and another 1,380 cubic yards from the marina basin, in order to restore deepwater navigation and berthing within the town marina.

“Guilford enjoys both recreational and commercial activities at its dock and harbor, and this dredging grant will make a great difference in those attractions,” said Sen. Meyer.

“This new legislation not only will help our towns save money but also remove hazardous waste from the environment,” Widlitz said after Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signed the legislation into law.

“There are 7.4 million gallons of paint sold in Connecticut each year and 10 percent of that goes unused. Thankfully, we now have a cost-effective program for disposing the 740,000 left-over gallons in a safe way that will not harm our environment,” said Widlitz, who negotiated the bill and led its passage in the House.

Widlitz said 90 percent of Connecticut homeowners who responded to a state survey claimed they have unwanted paint in their households and 20 percent of those have more than 10 containers of paint. More alarming, half of the respondents said they have never used a household waste collection program to get rid of the paint.

The new law (PA 11-24) is a result of an initiative by the American Coatings Association allowing a non-profit organization representing the industry the ability to collect a nominal fee to be used for the recovery and recycling of architectural paint.

Following approval of regulations by the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, the program is expected to be running by July 1, 2013.

In 2008, it was calculated the cost of disposing leftover and unused paint in Connecticut at hazardous waste collection locations was $620,000. It is estimated the recovery cost involved in this new program will be a fraction of that number, specifically 75 cents a gallon or $1.60 for 5 gallons. Latex-based paint not brought to hazardous waste collection sites results in increased tipping fees for municipalities when containers are just placed in the trash after drying out.

Types of paint products that can be covered under the program include:

• Oil based paint
• Latex based paint
• Deck coating
• Waterproof sealers
• Primers
• Varnish
• Stains
• Shellac

Under the program, recycling drop-off locations will be established at certain paint retail centers and possibly at other businesses.

Lori Vitagliano, hazardous waste coordinator for the Regional Water Authority, state Rep. Pat Widlitz, Cheryl Reedy, director of Housatonic Resources Recovery Authority, and Tom Metzner of the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection watch as Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signs the paint recovery legislation into law.

The state Bond Commission approved $500,000 for the non-profit Growing Possibilities, Inc. which operates Roses for Autism at Pinchbeck’s Rose Farm. Started in 2009, Roses for Autism provides training and employment for individuals on the autism spectrum.

“There is a severe lack of employment training for people on the autism spectrum and Roses for Autism offers a real path of opportunity,” said Widlitz, who also thanked Reps. Betty Boukus of Plainville and Cathy Abercrombie of Meriden for their support. “Roses for Autism is about helping people help themselves to become more independent and this grant will allow more people to benefit from this important and compassionate mission.”

Widlitz, who serves as House Chair of the Legislature’s Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee and a voting member on the Bond Commission, worked closely with the state departments of Economic Development and Agriculture to help secure the funding.

"This investment is not only good for the Guilford community, and good for local institutions like Pinchbeck's Rose Farm, it also creates tremendous opportunities for people on the autism spectrum to gain valuable work experience," said Meyer.

Proceeds from the over one million roses sold annually go toward supporting vocational training and job opportunities for people with autism. To support Roses for Autism, roses can be purchased at Pinchbeck’s Farm at 929 Boston Post Road in Guilford, as well as online at www.rosesforautism.com or by calling (203) 453-2186.

Of the twenty or so employees currently working at the rose farm, approximately 65 percent are on the autism spectrum. It is estimated that one in four people either have a family member or friend impacted by autism.

The legislators also announced the State Bond Commission's approval of $60.5 million for the acquisition of 25 single M-8 rail cars for use on the New Haven Line, part of an ongoing investment that will allow for full retirement of the aging M-4 and M-6 rail car fleets and avoid substantial rehabilitation costs.

"Our rail lines are critical to the economy of southern Connecticut, and these new cars reflect the state's continued commitment to improving train service here," said Rep. Widlitz. "Our communities count on these trains and this investment will help ensure that rail service is more dependable and comfortable."

"Those people who ride Shore Line East are totally dependent on it to get to work, not only in New York City but also in various parts of Connecticut. So I am delighted that we are making these very necessary investments in our mass transit system," Rep. Reed said. "I have always been a believer that investing in mass transit is investing in economic development. I'd like to see more economic development along Connecticut's shoreline, and providing modern, reliable and comfortable mass transit is one way to both spur that development and accommodate its workforce."

The total estimated cost of the locomotive refurbishment is $20 million: the federal government is paying $16 million, and the state had previously approved $2.3 million in bonding. The total estimated cost of the 25 rail cars is $93.1 million: Metro-North is paying $32.6 million, and Connecticut is bonding for $60.5 million.

“While Connecticut has taken massive strides to improve water quality recently, the tide has not yet turned,” said Leah Schmalz, director of legal and legislative affairs for Save the Sound. “The number of beach closures and advisory days in Connecticut rose significantly last year and we tumbled to 24th in the nation for the number of bacteria tests exceeding national beach standards. The writing on the wall is clear: we cannot rely on the whims of weather cycles to ensure our beaches stay open, we must stay vigilant and be proactive.  If we want to enjoy our coastline, eat local seafood, and promote tourism along the shore, rain or shine, we must curb pollution at the source—investment in the state’s Clean Water Fund is solution number one.  Thankfully the Governor and General Assembly committed significant resources for the next two years, but sustained and consistent funding in years to come will decide whether the citizens of Connecticut will have the clean water they deserve."

The great majority, 66 percent, of beach closures and posted advisories reported in 2010 were due to stormwater contamination, a condition that can be mitigated through investment in sewer infrastructure upgrades and stormwater management techniques like green infrastructure and landscaping. Sewage leaks or spills, wildlife and unknown sources of contamination account for the remaining 34 percent of beach closures and advisory days.

“This report serves as a stark reminder that we must provide communities in Connecticut with the resources and tools they need to protect our precious natural resources— especially the Long Island Sound,” said Senator Blumenthal. “Limiting the damaging effects of stormwater runoff and pollution is essential to preserve our beaches and wildlife so that they can be there for us and future generations.”

"During the past 20 years, our municipalities and the state upgraded old sewage treatment systems and installed new ones. Mother Nature, however, delivered record-breaking amounts of rain and snow this past year, taxing all our storm and sewage systems and causing localized and statewide damage. The results left our beaches in bad shape and the waters polluted to the point that public health was put at risk," said Representative Roy. "I look forward to working with the Department of Environmental Protection and the strong environmental organizations within Connecticut to again repair and replenish our natural water resources to provide residents with clean, safe recreational opportunities."

"We are proud to announce that this year the Connecticut legislature has dedicated significant funds in our bond package to support clean water projects,” said Representative Widlitz. “Clean water is essential to protecting public health, providing safe recreation and fostering a thriving economy."

“Connecticut’s beaches are a treasured natural resource, centers for family recreation, and a great attraction for tourists in southeast Connecticut and across our state. Unfortunately, last year we saw an alarming increase in reports of poor water quality and beach closures,” said Senator Maynard. “We must do more to protect our beaches, and reduce the pollution in urban and suburban runoff water that makes its way down to the coast.”

“I believe Long Island Sound to be the signature natural resource in our state,” said Representative Moukawsher. “The continual degradation of the Sound and marine species from storm water runoff and sewage is of extreme concern. I join with the Save the Sound in support of a comprehensive plan of action to address storm water runoff, sewage and the harm to marine species.”

“On the eve of July 4, Connecticut residents heading to Long Island Sound deserve to find healthy beaches and clean water,” said Sandy Breslin, director of governmental affairs for Audubon Connecticut. “Fortunately, we know what to do to keep this promise. We call on Congress to reauthorize and fund the Long Island Sound Restoration and Stewardship Acts. Our State is poised to make the historic investments in clean water infrastructure and strengthen protections preventing pollution from stormwater runoff. These investments create jobs and boost our economy. And each of us can play a role at home, school, or work by reducing the unnecessary use of fertilizers and pesticides, safely disposing of our trash and respecting or restoring natural vegetation along our rivers, lakes and streams that flow into the Sound – Mother Nature’s filtration system – so every Connecticut family can safely enjoy a day at the beach.”

The report showed that in 2010, 11 percent of all reported beach monitoring samples in Connecticut exceeded the state’s daily maximum bacterial standards. New London County had the highest exceedance rate, 15 percent, following by Fairfield County, 11 percent, New Haven County, 10 percent, and Middlesex County, 10 percent. The beaches with the highest exceedance rates included:

NEW LONDON COUNTY
Kiddie’s Beach- 54%
Green Harbor Beach- 45%

NEW HAVEN COUNTY
Branford Point Beach- 28%
Anchor Beach (Merwin Point)- 22%
Pent Road Beach- 20%

FAIRFIELD COUNTY
Shady Beach- 24%
Long Beach (Marnick’s)- 24%
Long Beach (Proper)- 22%

MIDDLESEX COUNTY
Town Beach (Clinton)- 21%

The full Connecticut portion of the NRDC report is attached.

Rep. Widlitz, House chairwoman of the Finance Committee, inserted language into the Finance budget bill allowing the Association to establish a special taxing district. Ferry service had been discontinued for economic reasons, but this bill restores the ability of Thimble Island residents to provide their own ferry service at no impact to Branford taxpayers.

“We are happy to help our constituents restore this vital local service to our shoreline community,” said Rep. Widlitz. “The Thimble’s are a unique asset and home to generations of Branford residents.”

“Enabling Thimble Islanders to provide ferry service again allows homeowners and their families and guests and also the people who visit the McKinney Conservation Preserve to once again have convenient access to this treasured island community,” said Rep. Reed. “It was a pleasure to be able to help.”

“This bill will restore ferry service to the Thimble Islands for the convenience of the island residents and their guests," said state Sen. Ed Meyer.

Anticipating a deficit in the 2011 budget, the General Assembly last year approved legislation authorizing the issuance of Economic Recovery Revenue Bonds. The bonds were to be paid off from revenues generated by surcharges on electricity bills, which would have been extended past their expiration date this year.

But because of an improving economy and increased revenues, it is now projected that the state has a $680 million operating surplus. Consequently, the borrowing and extension of the surcharge are no longer necessary.

“The provisions of this legislation (HB 6652) close the door on using energy efficiency or Competitive Transmission Assessment funds to balance the state’s budget,” said Rep. Patricia Widlitz (D-Guilford, Branford), House chair of the legislature’s Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee. Connecticut’s energy efficiency programs are among the best in the nation and should be strengthened – not compromised, she added.

“This really is a win-win situation,” said House Speaker Christopher G. Donovan. “Ratepayers win by having the surcharge removed from their bills, and the state wins because we don't need to borrow additional funds.”

HARTFORD — State lawmakers are moving to regulate chemicals sold as bath salts in response to a dangerous new and legal drug trend.

There is a growing trend of people smoking, snorting or injecting legally sold bath salts to get high. The effects are the same as a cocaine or ecstasy high.

“You just can’t keep up with the new things on the market that are designed to get our young people into trouble,” said Rep. Patricia Widlitz, D-Guilford.

“Now, this is not the bath salts that you buy at the local store and give to your grandmother on Christmas. This is stuff that contains very, very harmful chemicals,” said House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk.

The House voted Friday to designate two chemical ingredients of bath salts — mephedrone and MDPV — as controlled substances under state law.

The “salts” are made of fine powder, rather than the dissolving crystals found in beauty supply stores, and are much more expensive. The powder contains MDPV, one of the chemicals in methamphetamines, and mephedrone, another amphetamine.

“The devastating effect that this drug can have on individuals is one that we all should seek to avoid,” said Rep. Gerald Fox, D-Stamford, the House chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

The House amended a bill that seeks to prevent deaths from overdoses of alcohol or drugs to include the proposed ban on mephedrone and MDPV. The underlying legislation proposes to shield anyone who summons medical assistance for overdose cases from prosecution for possessing drugs or drug paraphernalia.

Penalties for drug possession vary considerably depending on the drug and quantity involved. Fines range from $1,000 to $250,000.

Convictions can carry up to 25 years in prison.

“There are 7.4 million gallons of paint sold in Connecticut each year. 10% of that total is leftover or unused,” said State Representative Pat Widlitz (D-Guilford, Branford), who negotiated the bill and lead the effort to pass it on the House floor. “This program will save our towns money, cost less than the current hazardous waste collection process and insure the proper disposal and recycling of unused product in an environmentally appropriate manner.”

In 2008, it was calculated the cost of disposing leftover and unused paint in Connecticut at hazardous waste collection locations was $620,000. It is estimated the recovery cost involved in this new program will be a fraction of that number, specifically $.75/gallon and $1.60/5 gallon. Latex based paint not brought to hazardous waste collection sites results in increased tipping fees for municipalities when containers are just placed in the trash after drying out.

Types of paint products that can be covered under the program include:

• Oil based paint
• Latex based paint
• Deck coating
• Waterproof sealers
• Primers
• Varnish
• Stains
• Shellac

Under the program, recycling drop-off locations will be established at certain paint retail centers and with the potential for future businesses established to recycle or properly dispose of paint products.

“This is another step in the effort to rid Connecticut of toxic products in our environment,” said State Representative Richard Roy (D-Milford), House Chairman of the Environment Committee. “Similar to the successful electronics recycling programs now gaining popularity, states like Oregon, California and now Connecticut are leading by example.”

“This common sense approach to recycling paint is great for the environment, for town budgets and for consumers who will find it more convenient to safely and legally dispose of all those cans of leftover product that seem to pile up in our homes and garages,” said State Representative Lonnie Reed (D-Branford). “Representative Pat Widlitz deserves our gratitude for her extensive negotiations with the paint industry to create a bill that earned our unanimous support.”

Following approval of regulations by the DEP, the program is expected to be running by July 1, 2013. The bill heads to the Governor for his expected signature.

Under the new budget, Guilford will receive an increase of $156,808 in municipal aid for fiscal year 2012 and an increase of $189,531 for 2013 when compared to the $3,876,137 the town was appropriated in 2011. Branford will receive an increase of $203,959 in 2012 and an increase of $242,008 in 2013 when compared to the $3,083,744 the town received in 2011.

As a result of intense negotiations with legislators, the final budget approved by the General Assembly and signed into law includes taxes that are actually lower than what Governor Dannel P. Malloy originally proposed. The governor’s proposed gas tax increase was eliminated and the $500 property tax credit that the governor wanted to eliminate was ultimately restored to $300 in the final budget.

“This is a very tough, but fair budget that reduces state spending, consolidates government services and asks everyone to share in the sacrifice needed to put our state back on solid, financial footing,” said Rep. Widlitz, who is also a member of the State Bond Commission. “We worked hard, especially in my committee, to craft a budget that protects the safety net, middle class and towns.”

Under the biennial budget, more than a dozen state agencies will merge or be consolidated in the name of efficiency, even as the vital functions of those agencies are preserved.

Speaker of the House Christopher G. Donovan (D-Meriden) said, “We have made significant spending reductions, consolidated 30 percent of our state agencies and maintained important investments that will help grow businesses and protect families. After 3 years of economic hardship, our state’s finances are stabilized and Connecticut is moving forward on the road to economic recovery.”

“We are turning a corner, putting our fiscal deficits behind us and moving forward with the business of creating jobs and growing our state’s economy,” said House Majority Leader Brendan Sharkey (D-Hamden). “Unlike the budgets in New York and New Jersey, we are protecting funding to cities and towns. Schools, town services and local property taxes will not be impacted. We’ve made real deep cuts, reduced the debt, fully funded our pension obligations and restored the rainy day fund. Making tough decisions is what the people of Connecticut expect us to do.”

The Malloy administration will continue its negotiations with state employee unions to come up with the labor concession package that is the final piece of this budget.

“We are so proud to be part of the effort to make the Soundview Family Y the outstanding community resource it is today,” said Rep. Widlitz, who as a member of the State Bond Commission was instrumental in securing the funding. Widlitz made the comment after the commission met in Hartford and voted to approve the $400,000.

“It is especially important in these economically challenging times to have affordable places for families to go for recreation, exercise, supervised child care and activities, and places for teens to have fun. The Y provides activities for people of all ages. From the day it opened last summer it has been a hub of activity for our community, said Widlitz, who is House chair of the legislature’s Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee.

“This is not only an important investment in affordable health and fitness for our citizens of all ages, it also supports a smart, regional approach to meeting community needs,” Rep. Reed said. “Seventy-five hundred people from five participating towns have already joined the Soundview Family Y. That more than exceeds the most optimistic membership predictions and makes it a successful model for encouraging much more regional cooperation.”

“I am so pleased that we are fulfilling our $1 million pledge to this great YMCA, which serves so much of the shoreline region,” said Sen. Meyer (D-Guilford), who is also a member of the Soundview Y. The State Bond Commission approved $600,000 in 2008.

The Soundview facility has two swimming pools, swim lessons and swim teams, a teen, senior and family center, sports programs, aerobics classes, a spinning room, cardio and weights room and three locker rooms.

Soundview serves residents of Branford, East Haven, Guilford, Madison and North Branford.

The group is expected to speak on the state budget compromise with the Governor and its potential impact on business in the state.

WHAT: Branford Chamber of Commerce breakfast

WHERE: Days Inn, 375 East Main St., Branford

WHEN: Friday, May 6, 2011 at 7:30 a.m.

In an attempt to capitalize on the explosion of Internet shopping, the state is taking its first steps into the controversial world of taxing online sales.

A key legislative committee, with the support of Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, has approved an "Amazon tax" that is expected to generate a projected $9.4 million a year from Internet sales.

If approved by the full House of Representatives and the Senate, the tax would be Connecticut's first ever tax on online sales. Amazon, the well-known online retailer, is still fighting the issue in court in New York, which in 2008 became the first state in the nation to create such a tax.

While the Malloy administration was initially hesitant about the idea, insiders said that the Amazon tax ended up in the final tax package because of the support from the two co-chairs of the tax-writing finance committee, Sen. Eileen Daily, D-Westbrook, and Rep. Patricia Widlitz, D-Guilford.

"I think the Amazon tax is an important stake in the ground," Malloy said Monday at the state Capitol. "We need to have a national conversation, and I'm more than happy to participate in that, about changing our policies with respect to sales tax. We have given a definitive advantage to certain types of retailers, and that is adversely impacting employment in a place like the state of Connecticut. I'm for leveling that playing field."

The Malloy administration, through its tax commissioner, Kevin B. Sullivan, had initially taken a cautious view about taxing Internet sales and last month asked the legislature to postpone any action this year. But the administration changed its position after Malloy and other governors spoke with U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, who has emerged as one of the most powerful legislators in Washington.

"I've had a series of discussions that lead me to believe that we are going to see a much more robust national discussion, and if that's going to happen, then we should be at that table," Malloy said. "And this is an important step at being at that table. … This is one area where most Republican governors and most Democratic governors actually agree that we've got to do something."

The Internet tax has a series of complications that have made some officials question how much money could be raised in the first year. The legislature's nonpartisan fiscal office places the number at $9.4 million in a $19 billion budget — a small percentage to start in the same way that New York projected $50 million in revenue in a $122 billion budget when its tax was first adopted in 2008.

Timothy Phelan, president of the Connecticut Retail Merchants Association, was pleased by the tax committee's vote last week because he has been fighting for the measure for the past several years.

"If you're a jewelry store, if you're a home-and-garden shop, you've been waiting for a long time for someone to hear your voice crying in the wilderness," Phelan said Monday. "This gives the local retailer acknowledgment that this is unfair. We're very happy that the governor's office is for it."

Phelan said that Amazon has sued only New York, and is treating that state as a test case. At least five states currently are taxing online sales: New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Arkansas and North Carolina.

"The question whether this is constitutional or unconstitutional is still unsettled," Phelan said.

Sullivan told lawmakers last month that the issue was extraordinarily complex and asked them to defer action.

That didn't happen, but Sullivan said he doubts the state will see any online sales tax revenue in the next two years.

"I get where the legislature is coming from," Sullivan said Monday. "Obviously, it was a priority of theirs in their negotiations with the governor. We will do our best to implement it, but the chances of seeing any revenue in the next two years is slim."

Not all online retailers skip paying Connecticut sales tax. If a cyber-retailer has a presence in the state — be it a physical store, a large advertising profile or a significant market share — it often will collect the tax.

L.L. Bean, for example, had been considered a "remote seller" that did not have to charge sales tax until it opened a store in South Windsor. Now, since it has a physical presence in the state, the company charges sales tax. In the same way, Cabela's had been an online retailer only until it opened a large store near Rentschler Field in East Hartford.

Amazon and some other online-only retailers argue that they have no presence in Connecticut — "we're simply up here in the cloud somewhere," is how Sullivan characterized their argument.

"It's clearly a form of tax evasion," said Sullivan, a former longtime state senator who is the state's top tax official.

The state argues that Amazon's relationships with its local affiliates constitute such a presence. Several owners of those affiliated businesses testified earlier this year that Amazon will simply sever their relationship if the state starts collecting sales tax. In the online world, an affiliate is a representative of an online seller, which is often shown by a link on the affiliate's web site.

Ultimately, Sullivan said he doesn't understand why Amazon and other online-only retailers are fighting so hard against the tax proposal. People choose to shop online for a variety of reasons — convenience, greater selection and overall cost among them. Avoiding the sales tax is just one piece of the equation. Unless a consumer is buying a costly item or in bulk, sales tax often isn't significant enough to tip the balance.

"What's the big whoop here, Amazon? Do you really think you're going to lose business here?" Sullivan asked.

Officials at Amazon could not be reached for comment Monday night.

When asked if there is any room for changes in the tax package or if the proposals are finalized, Malloy said, "It ain't over until it's over, but it's pretty over.'

The lawmakers said the overall budget package, following the governor’s lead, includes no borrowing and no unsustainable, one-time revenues. Today’s budget bill also restores—after the governor proposed to eliminate—the property tax credit applied by qualifying homeowners against their state income tax liability.

“What I find most encouraging about this budget package is the endorsement it received from the Connecticut Business and Industry Association, because the priority of CBIA are policies that will grow jobs and revitalize Connecticut’s economy,” Senator Daily said. “To that end we reversed several of the governor’s suggestions regarding new applications of the state’s sales tax solely because of the potential negative economic impact of those new taxes.”

Senator Daily also said the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit, to mirror the federal model and for the first time in Connecticut, will assist low-income wage earners with everyday expenses and infuse the local economy with capital likely to stay in circulation close to home.

“This budget bill includes another positive innovation to the benefit of municipal governments and by extension, local property tax payers, namely, the return of sales tax revenues to local government entities to help them underwrite the cost of local projects,” Rep. Widlitz said. “We expect this will provide a welcome boost to local economies that will promote regional efficiencies as well.”

The lawmakers also point out how today’s changes to the state’s income tax schedule create three new brackets to more accurately reflect the federal model; business taxes were also adjusted to address the state’s current economic circumstance.

HARTFORD — Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, after listening to complaints at his town meetings on the budget, has proposed putting back a property tax credit, although it will be lower than what was in place last year.

He has suggested making up the difference by tweaking the tax rates on higher incomes, but keeping his proposed top rate at 6.7 percent in order to be competitive with nearby states, a 0.2 percent hike over the current rate for joint filers with incomes over $1 million.

Malloy's latest plan is to offer a $300 property tax credit, down from the $500 in place last year, which he said would benefit "the vast majority of middle-income earners," without dramatically burdening the rest of the taxpayers.

"This is an important step toward finding a better balance," Malloy said, while it continues to keep his basic budget framework of $1.5 billion in new taxes, cuts of $780 million and concessions of $2 billion over two years from state workers.

State Rep. Patricia Widlitz, D-Guilford/Branford, co-chairwoman of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee, said she was happy with the governor's decision to revive at least a portion of the property tax credit. She said the most consistent criticism lawmakers heard from their constituents centered on the elimination of the tax credit which helps to alleviate some of the burden of local property taxes.

Widlitz said the committee has been negotiating for weeks with Ben Barnes, the governor's budget chief, and the final tax package may change again, but the committee is close to an agreement. She said discussions on revising his expansion of items subject to the sales tax are ongoing.

Malloy several times has also talked about the burden on some towns of eliminating the tax on machinery and this is expected to be revised with the tax likely phased out over time.

The governor said there was speculation that he was not listening to the criticism he heard around his budget, which has to close a $3.5 billion deficit, but "nothing could be further from the truth." He said getting out around the state takes him out of the "bubble" that governors often find themselves in.

He said the argument around the property tax credit resonated with him more than complaints that the wealthiest, who benefitted from the Bush tax cuts, could absorb a higher tax rate to pay for programs and save some of the concessions he is seeking from workers.

Jamey Bell of the advocacy group, Connecticut Voices for Children, praised the governor's revisions as helping lower and middle class families, but she said he should go further. "Raising income tax rates higher than the governor's proposed rate on the state's wealthiest residents would help us to better meet growing needs in the state and protect the public investments we need to create jobs and build our economy," she said.

The proposed income tax and property tax credit changes would mean: a $300 savings for single filers earning $30,000 to $50,000, while those making over $1 million would pay $1,000 more than under his original proposal.

The General Assembly's tax-writing committee once again is trying to force online retail giants to collect state sales taxes by targeting their Connecticut-based affiliates.

The Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee voted 38-14 on Thursday to adopt a measure commonly referred to as the "Amazon Law" and patterned after legislation enacted in New York three years ago.

But both advocates and opponents of the Connecticut bill conceded that regardless of whether it is enacted here or not, some businesses will be harmed, and that the only equitable solution lies with the federal government.

"We have to stand up to this and close this loophole," added Rep. Patricia Widlitz, D-Guilford, co-chairwoman of the committee and another supporter of the bill. "I feel very strongly that we need to take a stand."

The "loophole" Widlitz referred to involves the 6 percent sales tax Connecticut levies on most transactions, and the fact that most online retailers do not collect and forward the tax to the state. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1992 that a state cannot force businesses to collect sales taxes unless they have a physical presence within that state.

Consumers still are obligated to report their online purchases and pay any sales tax owed through their annual income tax filings, but lawmakers concede that relatively few households actually do so.

While the sales tax raised just under $3.1 billion last fiscal year, less than $8.3 million of that involved online sales later reported and paid through consumers' income tax filings, according to the Department of Revenue Services.

In all, states lose a total of $7 billion a year in sales tax revenue, according to an analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonprofit fiscal and public policy group based in Washington, D.C. Amazon.com is one of the nation's largest online retailer with thousands of affiliates nationwide, the center says.

Advocates of the bill contend neighborhood book stores and other small businesses, which must force their customers to pay sales tax, simply cannot compete with Amazon.com and other major online retailers.

Suzanne Staubach, manager of the University of Connecticut's Co-Op Bookstore on its main campus in Storrs, recently told lawmakers the story of a mother who read a child's storybook to her young son in the store, but didn't purchase it. "He loved it. He wanted to keep it," Staubach testified. "But I heard her say, 'Mommy will order it on the computer for you, honey.'"

The bill adopted in committee Thursday hinges on sales affiliates, local companies that receive a small commission for redirecting customers to the retailer's web site. Any firm with more than $2,000 in annual sales generated through its Connecticut affiliates effectively has a "nexus" or physical presence in the state, according to the bill, and therefore must collect and report sales tax.

Amazon.com did not respond Thursday to an invitation to comment. The online retailer is challenging the New York law in court, but has stopped doing business with thousands of affiliates both in that state and in others, such as Colorado and Rhode Island, where similar measures were adopted.

Amazon sent the Connecticut legislature a letter last year threatening to do the same here if a similar statute is enacted. And though the Finance panel adopted a similar bill last year, the full legislature opted not to act on it.

"They're kind of dictating to us right now. They're really muscling us around," said Sen. Tony Guglielmo, R-Stafford, a supporter of the measure. "They've got to be having an effect on all of the brick-and-mortar stores here in Connecticut."

But others argued that confronting Amazon and other retailers head-on is not the best solution.

"We heard from companies in Connecticut that said 'Amazon will shut us down,'" said Rep. Sean J. Williams of Watertown, ranking House Republican on the Finance committee, who said he's convinced adopting such a law now "is basically throwing up a Berlin Wall" between Amazon-affiliated companies and the Connecticut residents who need the jobs they offer.

"There is an inherent inequity in the law and I'm not happy to be in this situation at all," added Williams, who voted against the bill but said he sympathizes with small businesses being harmed by the status quo.

Rebecca Madigan, executive director of the southern California-based Performance Marketing Association, testified that nearly 2,800 Connecticut companies are affiliated with online retailers such as Amazon, Google, Yahoo and eBay, and would likely be dropped if such legislation were enacted.

"The state will gain no new sales tax revenue and will devastate 2,800 businesses in the process," she said.

Williams, Widlitz and Guglielmo all said the ultimate solution rests with Congress, which has authority to impose a nationwide mandate on all online retailers to collect and remit sales taxes.

Bonnie Stewart, vice president and tax specialist for the state's primary business lobby, the Connecticut Business and Industry Association, echoed that position, noting that the CBIA has taken no position on the bill.

"We just don't have enough information," she said, adding it is clear, though, that some businesses face harm if the bill is adopted, and others are being harmed without it.

 “Rep. Widlitz’s state legislative experience will allow her to represent Connecticut well as she undertakes this new challenge,” Speaker Donovan said. “I am confident Pat’s work on this committee will benefit not only our state, but also this important organization.”

Widlitz is the House Chair of the Connecticut General Assembly’s Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee, which oversees all matters relating to state revenue.

“I am pleased Speaker Donovan has appointed me to serve on this important committee of the Council of State Governments,” Widlitz said. “With so many fiscal challenges facing government officials, both on the state level and nationally, this is an opportunity to exchange ideas and issues of mutual concern with legislative colleagues and policy experts from across the country.”

Established in 1933, the Council of State Governments is a non-partisan, non-profit organization that provides information, research, and training to state officials in all 50 states and U.S. territories to promote region-wide initiatives, facilitate inter-branch cooperation, advocate on state-federal issues, and educate policymakers and the public on regional priorities.

Widlitz is also a member of the Banks and Public Health committees. She has served the 98th Assembly District, which consists of portions of Branford and Guilford, since 1995.

Tom Pinchbeck and Rep. Patricia Widlitz showcase a variety of roses as Tom Fanning (second from right)
holds an official state citation and Jim Lyman (right) looks on.

Roses for Autism, located at Pinchbeck’s Rose Farm in Guilford, provides training and employment for individuals on the autism spectrum. Started in 2009, Roses for Autism is the first business endeavor for Growing Possibilities, a nonprofit social enterprise founded by Ability Beyond Disability that is dedicated to growing independence in the business world for individuals with autism and other disabilities.

Widlitz said the Connecticut General Assembly citation was given to Roses for Autism in recognition of “The vision you brought to fruition by creating this innovative program that provides countless opportunities for people with autism and other disabilities, the chance to learn new skills while gaining their independence through meaningful employment in the business world.”

“We commend you for opening the door and breaking down barriers for individuals who are challenged each day,” Widlitz said.

Pinchbeck's Rose Farm had been a Guilford institution since 1929 and with 150,000 square feet of greenhouse space they were once the largest rose farm in the United States. But state-side businesses have found it increasingly difficult to compete with blooms imported from South America. By 2008, Tom Pinchbeck, third generation owner of the farm, was going to have to close their doors.

Then along came Jim Lyman, who, with a son on the autism spectrum whom he wanted to see live a rewarding life, and a background in agriculture, had an idea how to put the two together. From this was born Roses for Autism, an innovative program that provides skilled labor for agriculture and the opportunity for those on the spectrum to learn the necessary skills to function in the workforce.

In May of 2009 the organization Roses for Autism took over the daily operations of the farm. Today, of the twenty or so employees currently working there, approximately 65 percent are on the spectrum.

With Tom Pinchbeck still the head grower at Roses for Autism, once again one of the two 50,000 square foot greenhouses is fully operational for growing. The 32,000 rose bushes planted there will produce close to a million blooms.

In addition to the roses being available for purchase at the farm at 929 Boston Post Road, Guilford, Widlitz said people now may buy them at www.rosesforautism.com or call (203) 453-2186.

“Buying roses from the Pinchbeck farm is a wonderful way for the community to make a contribution to this important endeavor,” Widlitz said.

Widlitz presented the citation as part of the kickoff Monday to the 7th Annual Autism Advocacy Day at the State Capitol.

Autism, a condition that affects as many as one in every 110 children in the United States, is a general term used to describe a group of complex developmental brain disorders known as Pervasive Developmental Disorders (PDD). The other pervasive developmental disorders are PDD-NOS (Pervasive Developmental Disorder – Not Otherwise Specified), Asperger's Syndrome, Rett Syndrome and Childhood Disintegrative Disorder. Many parents and professionals refer to this group as Autism Spectrum Disorders.

HARTFORD — Connecticut, like many cash-strapped states, is contemplating a law to tax online retailers as a way to bring in revenue while providing parity with "bricks-and-mortar" businesses.

But Connecticut's top tax official on Monday urged lawmakers to defer action on such a measure, saying that many details still need to be worked out.

"We are supportive of the policy reasons for this legislation," Kevin Sullivan, commissioner of the state Department of Revenue Services, told the legislature's finance committee. "But [we] want to suggest to you that it is far easier said than done ... if we take the time to do it right, we can probably make it work in the state of Connecticut."

States throughout the nation are looking eagerly at the billions of dollars in potential sales taxes generated through online sales. Earlier this month, Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn signed a law that requires online retailers that work through affiliates based in that state to start collecting sales tax.

"It's very frustrating for us to watch our businesses that have an established bricks-and-mortar presence in the state have an unlevel playing field with our inability to collect sales tax from the websites from businesses such as Amazon," said Rep. Patricia Widlitz, co-chairwoman of the finance, revenue and bonding committee.

But retailers such as Amazon.com and Overstock.com have launched vigorous legal challenges against efforts to compel them to collect sales tax. Sullivan said he believes that the courts ultimately will decide in favor of the states. "The problem is, when will we know that?" he asked.

He urged Connecticut lawmakers to "keep the pressure on and the world may be a little clearer by the time we get around to it a year from now."

As noted by Sullivan, current law requires buyers to pay sales tax on many online purchases, even though in reality, most people do not. Moreover, many online sellers who have a significant presence in the state already collect Connecticut sales tax.

Several local businesses affiliated with e-commerce sites such as Amazon and Overstock said they fear that those companies would simply stop working with them should such a law pass in Connecticut. That's already happened in Rhode Island, North Carolina and other states, and Amazon has notified its affiliates in Illinois that it intends to stop working with them next month as well.

"While this legislation might seem like a fair way to collect Connecticut sales tax and help bridge the revenue gap, you must consider what an out-of-state retailers' response will be: They simply will not do business with affiliates that reside in the state of Connecticut," Tom Caporaso, CEO of a Wethersfield-based marketing group that is affiliated with online retailers, predicted in written testimony to the committee.

Some state officials hope that the federal government will step in and resolve the issue on a national level, instead of relying on a patchwork of state regulations. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy said he and other governors have spoken with House Speaker John Boehner about the matter.

Malloy, speaking at a morning press conference on another matter, said that Connecticut needs to be ready to jump when either Congress or the courts provide the framework for states to begin taxing online purchases.

"Under the most recent court decisions, it's difficult to move full throttle," Malloy said. "But I would like to be in a position that if there are court decisions that come with a different result or if the Congress takes action, that we would be in a position to jump on it."

Regarding his conversation with Boehner, Malloy said he "demonstrated a willingness to see this issue taken up sooner rather than later."

Widlitz, D-Guilford, said that states often lead the way on groundbreaking legislation.

"We're kind of tempted to try to push the envelope here," she said.

In all, the State Bond Commission authorized $60 million for Shore Line East upgrades from Old Saybrook to Branford, including $16.5 million for new, north-side high-level platforms at the Branford station, $7.3 million for platform extensions at the Guilford station, and $11 million to be shared between Guilford and Old Saybrook for the electrification of railway sidings.

“As a long-time proponent of Shore Line East, I applaud the Governor's commitment to commuter rail along the shoreline", said Rep. Widlitz, who is a member of the bond commission. “These upgrades, along with the phase in of the M-8 passenger cars over the next three years, will greatly enhance Shore Line East service.”

Rep. Widlitz, who serves as House chair of the General Assembly’s Finance Committee, voted in favor of this item during last Thursday’s State Bond Commission meeting.

“Shoreline East is a critical link, not only for Branford, but for thousands of shoreline commuters heading to jobs in Connecticut cities and towns and New York City as well,” said Rep. Reed. “These trains are packed every day and this additional funding not only enhances our mass transit system, it also ensures construction jobs and helps attract businesses that depend on a mobile workforce.”

Bonding for the upgrades was originally approved by the General Assembly in 2006 as part of Public Act 136, “An Act Concerning the Roadmap for Connecticut’s Economic Future,” which included provisions for parking and station improvements on the New Haven line and its branches and for Shore Line East service, including at least four stations east of New Haven.

The high level platform construction on the north sides of the train stations is a critical next step toward the ultimate goal of providing regular bi-directional service between New Haven and New London.   Ridership on the Shoreline East line has increased 4.6% in 2010 compared to 2009.

“These upgrades will result in more convenience, better service and improved safety for Shore Line East riders,” Sen. Meyer said. “Governor Malloy is making a very wise investment here that not only helps employees and their employers, but which is expected to create nearly 1,300 construction jobs.”

Widlitz said the proposed legislation is an important environmental initiative of the CT Product Stewardship Council, which will increase the recovery of post consumer paint while saving our municipalities significant amounts of money, and provide better service to Connecticut’s residents and businesses.

“It requires the producers of architectural paint sold at retail in Connecticut to jointly establish a statewide paint stewardship program through a non-profit organization created by the producers,” she said.

“The non-profit organization will create and finance a plan that will provide for convenient and available state-wide collection of post-consumer paint, promote the reuse and recycling of “unused” paint, and ensure that such paint is managed in an environmentally sound way,” Widlitz said. “All of this with the support of the American Coatings Association, the paint producers’ national association and most important – at no cost to the state.”

Joining with other legislators, parents, students and advocates for the CT Prevention Network, Widlitz spoke out about the dangers of the synthetic substances that have become increasingly popular, particularly among students and young adults during a press conference Monday at the Legislative Office Building in Hartford.

“In addition to banning these substances, education is very important. We need to get the word out to the public and especially parents that these products are dangerous,” said Widlitz, who is sponsoring legislation banning the sale and possession of synthetic cannabinoids.

The products consist of plant material that has been coated with research chemicals that mimic THC, the active ingredient in marijuana, and are sold at retail outlets, convenience stores, gas stations and on the Internet. The chemicals have not been approved for human consumption by the FDA and there is no government oversight of the manufacturing process. The brands K2, Spice, Blaze and Red X Dawn are sold as incense to mask their intended purpose, officials of the CT Prevention Network said.

There are 15 states that have passed legislation to prohibit the sale and possession of synthetic cannabis.

Widlitz serves the 98th Assembly District, which consists of portions of Branford and Guilford. She is the House chairwoman of the Finance, Revenue & Bonding Committee. She is also a member of the Banks and Public Health committees.

In the position, Widlitz will work with the Senate co-chair at developing the committee’s agenda and playing a leading role in crafting the state budget.

“Understanding the importance of this role, I am honored to have been named co-chair of this key committee,” Widlitz said.  “I am ready to work with my colleagues to craft sound solutions as we face a number of challenges dealing with the state of the economy.”

She was appointed to the position by Speaker of the House Christopher G. Donovan (D-Meriden), who emphasized the importance of the role in building confidence in the economy.

“Pat brings a wealth of knowledge and talent to this chairmanship, and I am confident that I can rely on her judgment as we continue to work to create jobs and encourage economic growth,” Donovan said.

Widlitz has served the 98th Assembly District, which consists of portions of Branford and Guilford, since 1995.  In addition to her chairmanship, she will also serve as a member of the Banks and Public Health committees during the legislative session, which convened Jan. 5 and is scheduled to adjourn June 8.