"After ten years in the legislature, I have decided to leave due to family considerations,” Rep. Zalaski said. “This will also give someone else an opportunity to run for my office and serve the great people of Southington.”

Rep. Zalaski was first elected to the legislature in 2003 and in addition to serving as House Chair of the Labor and Public Employees Committee, he is a member of the Commerce and Finance, Revenue and Bonding committees.

“I want to take this opportunity to thank the people of Southington for giving me the honor of representing and serving them in the General Assembly,” Rep. Zalaski said. "While I'm leaving the legislature I plan to continue to work on the issues that are important to me.”

Rep. Zalaski has fought to increase the minimum wage, provide health care coverage for people without health insurance, and sought to make the lives of working people he represented better.

“Serving in the legislature with so many committed colleagues has been a humbling experience,” Rep. Zalaski said. “I will always be grateful to the residents of the 81st Assembly District for the trust and support they have given me over the past ten years.”

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

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

The other legislators who are participating in forming the caucus are State Representatives Jeffrey Berger (D-73rd District) and Vince Candelora (R-86th District) and State Senators Gary LeBeau (D-3rd District) and Anthony Guglielmo (R-35th District.

“As House Chairman of the Labor and Public Employees Committee, I am very pleased that the formation of this caucus is a bipartisan effort because it’s important we work together to create good paying manufacturing jobs in our state,” Rep. Zalaski said.

The legislators have scheduled a press conference to announce the details about the new caucus on Wednesday, May 2nd at 10:00 a.m. in Room 1B, Legislative Office Building.

Local pharmacies say a state agreement with union workers signed last year is hurting their businesses. They're hoping a proposed bill changes the prescription drug program for state workers.

Last year's agreement with the State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition included the Connecticut State Employees Maintenance Drug Program, projected to save $20 million per year. Under the plan, state employees must order 90-day prescriptions of maintenance drugs by mail or at pharmacies which participate in the program.

The list of pharmacies in the program, available on the Office of the State Comptroler's website, www.osc.ct.gov, includes primarily CVS pharmacies and grocery store pharmacies.

Caremark, the state's pharmacy benefits manager, is owned by CVS Pharmacies.

Independent pharmacy owners say if they join the network, they'll lose money on most prescriptions since they can't buy at the wholesale rates given to CVS. They're faced with losing the business of state employees looking to fill prescriptions.

The Labor and Public Employees Committee raised a concept bill Tuesday that seeks to achieve that goal. Rep. Zalaski is House Chair of the committee.

Last year, the State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition (SEBAC) negotiated an agreement with Governor Malloy’s administration requiring prescriptions to be filled by CVS pharmacies or through mail order leaving out many local and independent pharmacies.

“I have heard from our local pharmacies that have been left out of the program and I am sensitive to their concerns,” Rep. Zalaski said. “Once we complete the language of our bill, we will schedule a public hearing.”

Rep. Zalaski added that many employees have complained about having to drop their local pharmacies in order to continue their prescription coverage under the new SEBAC contract.

“We have discussed the problem with the Governor and it is my hope that we will resolve this issue to meet the needs of employees and the loss of business by local pharmacies.” Rep. Zalaski said.

“I understand that UConn wants to hire additional faculty, but I’m not sure the full cost of that should fall on student tuition and fee increases,” Rep. Zalaski said. “I am worried we will be shutting out middle class and low-income students with these hikes.”

Rep. Zalaski noted that according to published reports a 5.8 percent increase in tuition and fees would mean the cost for an undergraduate student with room and board would be $22,430.

“That’s a lot of money for a lot of kids,” Rep. Zalaski warned. “I know the state budget is tight, but we should consider other options like increasing the amount of money the state gives UConn for its operating budget,”

Rep. Zalaski hopes the General Assembly’s Higher Education Committee would discuss the matter with UConn’s Board of Trustees before they act to approve the increase.

“Remember, this is the same Board of Trustees which approved $4 million for a consultant’s report on how to save money at UConn, a report that could have been compiled by business graduate students at a lot less money,” Rep. Zaalski said.

Hartford - For those who can't forget waiting in the long lines at gas stations following the Autumn Nor'easter, one possible solution is being discussed, but it is not being well-received among gasoline retailers.

Things are pretty calm at one gas station just off I-91 in Hartford, but just after the Autumn Nor'easter the back up was about as bad as the worst traffic jam on Interstate 95.

With power out to most of the Northern part of the state hundreds of cars converged on the two open gas stations in Hartford. It was so bad in fact that Hartford police dispatched six cops to keep order.

With hundreds of gas stations closed because of a lack of power, it was a scene repeated around the state.

"I had a lot of people in Southington on Route 10, lines backed up," said Rep. Zeke Zelaski, of Bristol, "and many people were complaining they couldn't get gasoline for their generators."

On Wednesday, the committee investigating the storm response heard from the gasoline station owners association on why a proposal to mandate that they have generators is a bad idea.

"We aren't talking about an $800 generator to run a service station," said Mike Fox, Gasoline Retailers Association. "You're talking between 30 and $35,000, and 1,500 and $2,500 a year to maintain it. It just doesn't make economic sense to do it."

With just a nickel mark-up on the price of gasoline, most station owners are already operating very close to the edge.

"It's a public safety issue as to those long lines waiting, especially along Route 10 on Queen Street," said Zelaski. "I think that...I don't think it's too much to ask bigger gas stations to do this."

"It was put in place in Florida where you have 14 to 25 storms per year knocking out power," said Fox. "Here, what are we having? Three or four? So this is an over-reaching again, not addressing the real problem."

Fox points to the decreased tree trimming in recent years by CL&P as the real problem. A problem the committee has spent a lot of time discussing.

Recommendations on this and other storm-related issues are due to the Governor by January 1st.

"I appreciate the Connecticut League of Conservation Voters for this recognition,” Rep. Zalaski said. “While the economy and job creation must continue to be priority number one, our votes on the environment continue to be among the most important votes we cast as legislators. We must continue to work collectively to protect our environment, not only for all of us, but for future generations.”

The annual environmental scorecard grades state lawmakers based on how they vote on significant environmental legislation. This year the scorecard grades legislators' votes on twelve bills that came up during the 2011 legislative session.

Formed in 1998, the bipartisan CTLCV works on laws that affect Connecticut's air, water, wildlife, open space, transportation, energy choices, and health.

Democratic legislative leaders are considering a pre-Christmas special session to soften the financial blow some people suffered during the recent electrical outage, which lasted as many as 10 nights in hard-hit areas.

Among the possible changes being studied are onetime tax credits for a portion of the price paid for hotel stays and tougher laws on price-gouging during weather emergencies.

But lawmakers are waiting first for various investigations to be completed, including one by the independent Witt Associates that is scheduled to be finished by Dec. 1.

As a result, no session will be held in the next three weeks, but legislation could be ready before Christmas, said Douglas Whiting, a spokesman for House Speaker Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden.

"Something needs to be done. Something will be done," Whiting said Monday in an interview. "At this point, it's just a question of timing."

Among the ideas being considered is a onetime credit on the state income tax to cover the hotel occupancy tax paid by residents who sought shelter for multiple days following the pre-Halloween snowstorm or Tropical Storm Irene. If a family paid $200 per night for a hotel room, they would not receive the full $200 but could get a credit for the amount they paid in occupancy tax.

The hotel tax was increased on July 1 to 15 percent, up from the previous 12 percent, as part of an overall package of tax increases to balance the state's two-year budget.A person who paid $200 per night for a room could be entitled to an income tax credit of $30 when taxes are filed next year. At $1,000 for an extended stay, the tax and the credit could be $150, depending on how the final legislation is written.

Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney, a New Haven Democrat, said legislators will need to study exactly how the credit would work and whether a maximum cap would be necessary — in the same way that the state's popular property tax credit is capped at various levels based on income.

"It would be difficult to quantify what would be a fair level of recompense," Looney said Monday, adding that some families paid for highly expensive rooms and others paid more moderate rates.

In a related issue, Looney said legislators are considering expanding the state's price-gouging law, created in 1986 in response to price-gouging after Hurricane Gloria struck in September 1985. That law, he said, could be extended to room rates in order to prevent hotels and motels from charging excessive rates to people who lost their electrical power.

Besides hotel rooms, the law could be extended to cover private tree-cutting services; in some cases prices have increased sharply because of heavy demand.

Legislators are also concerned about retailers jacking up prices on portable generators and other items.
Trying to put restrictions on freelance commerce could be trickier. In one case following the October snowstorm, a truck that brought in generators from out of state pulled into a gas station near Simsbury High School and began selling them at high prices when the town still had no power.

Enacting legislation to prevent that would be difficult, Looney said. "You're not dealing with the regular retail chain of business," he said.

Lawmakers also are talking about requiring that generators be installed at gasoline stations and at elderly housing complexes, under a proposal by Rep. Bruce "Zeke" Zalaski, a Southington Democrat who co-chairs the legislature's labor committee.

"While my constituents and too many Connecticut residents waited for CL&P to show up, they needed gas for their vehicles and portable generators — and they found that too many gas stations were closed because they had no power," Zalaski said. "In Southington, for example, many gas stations were closed as hundreds of customers were in need of gasoline, and could not get it while causing traffic jams and creating problems for local police. Generators would have enabled the gas stations to remain open and serve the public. This is a serious public safety issue in all our communities."

He added that the generators are needed to help the elderly when temperatures drop in their homes.

"If these units had generators, seniors would not be forced to go to local shelters, which can be a traumatic experience for many," he said.

While many legislators want to move quickly, six full weeks remain before many lawmakers and staff members head out of town for the holidays.

"If it's not ready until early or mid-January, then we'll wait until the regular session" in early February, Whiting said.

The price-gouging legislation would be modeled on the current law that was written after Hurricane Gloria. Earlier this year, the state Senate voted to expand that law because of sky-high prices that were charged to remove snow from roofs during a winter of record snowfalls. The 31-4 vote in the Senate sent the bill to the state House of Representatives, but no action was taken there.

Some homeowners acted quickly this past winter, and they paid high prices to get snow removed immediately. Senators said some quotes were as high as $5,000 for a small roof, but some contractors said they were forced to pay high wages to get workers to walk on slippery roofs.

The bill would have banned "unconscionably excessive" pricing during, and possibly in the aftermath of, a weather emergency that results in a formal severe weather event declaration by the governor. Whether a price was "unconscionably excessive" would be determined by the state's consumer protection commissioner or a court — based on the common price of the goods and services in question before the emergency, and the prices charged by other providers in the same area during that emergency.

But Sen. Rob Kane of Watertown and three other Republican senators said during the Senate debate this year that it would be difficult to police the problem statewide. Sen. Len Suzio, a Meriden Republican, said he couldn't support the bill even though he applauded its intent. He said its standards, such as "unconscionably excessive," were too vague and subjective.

Looney said the bill would have completed the job that the legislature began after Hurricane Gloria. The earlier bill prohibited price gouging only for goods and did not include services, Looney said.

The one-two weather punch that produced more than 1.5 million power outages across Connecticut in just over two months also has generated a bumper crop of ideas.

Legislators, private interest groups and even Gov. Dannel P. Malloy have unveiled proposals in recent days and weeks about how the state can better avoid or at least mitigate the problems caused by last weekend's winter storm,Tropical Storm Irene from late August, or both.

Some of these deal with basic day-to-day needs, such as ensuring at least one gasoline station remains open in every community, or requiring every cellular tower to have its own backup generator.

Others go a little deeper.

Two House Democratic leaders, Speaker Christopher G. Donovan of Meriden and Energy and Technology Committee Co-chairwoman Vickie O. Nardello of Prospect called Wednesday for state government to set new, more detailed standards for mass outage response, regular reviews, and fines for noncompliance.

And a new study panel is questioning whether the projected $200 million to $400 million damage bill for these two storms combined might be better spent to strengthen Connecticut's infrastructure against further tempests.

"We need to be prepared to look at some important questions," Joseph McGee, chairman of Malloy's study panel reviewing storm-related issues, said Thursday. "It's becoming clear that certain issues are going to have to be addressed."

Irene, which hit Connecticut on Aug. 27-28, was only a few days old--with hundreds of thousands of power outages still to be resolved--legislators and utility officials already were talking about the need to revisit state laws regarding utility line buffer zones and the tree-trimming policies needed to preserve them.

But while tree-trimming grabbed plenty of headlines, McGee said several groups have come forward to his panel arguing this is only one of several preventative steps Connecticut needs to get better at.

Though state and local governments, utilities and even the nonprofit social services community generally have strong training programs, there appears to be insufficient coordination between these parties, McGee said.

The panel is currently studying a model used in Florida, but many states run a full-scale weather event simulation, with all key parties in the public and private sectors participating, McGee said. "When they get a chance to meet face-to-face, the response is better," he said. "It's clearly emerging as a best practice."

The Connecticut Academy of Sciences elevated the issue of preparedness to a whole new level, McGee said, when it questioned not only the state's utility network's ability to withstand severe storms, but also the safety of its transportation infrastructure and shorelines. Rising sea levels not only increase the risk of flooding, but also tend to intensify storms traveling near the shoreline, elevating damage potential from winds, rain and snowfall.

And while damage estimates from Irene and last weekend's snow storm are very preliminary, McGee added that his panel is just beginning to assess whether costly repairs could be mitigated in the future by spending more on protection now.

"Hardening and strengthening the utility structure makes a lot of sense" rather than just paying $400 million or more to return Connecticut to the same network that was badly battered by two storms in two months, he said.

Other proposals circulating at the Capitol on Thursday were based less on scientific research and more on practicality--or politics--depending on who was describing them.

Sen. Andrew W. Roraback, R-Goshen, said he would introduce legislation requiring all cellular towers to be equipped with backup generators. Utility officials testified after Irene that this would be cost prohibitive.

Rep. Bruce "Zeke" Zalaski, D-Southington, issued a statement pledging to introduce legislation during the regular 2012 legislative session, which begins in February, requiring that all gasoline stations and housing complexes for the elderly have generators.

"In Southington ... many gas stations were closed as hundreds of customers were in need of gasoline, and could not get it while causing traffic jams and creating problems for local police," Zalaski said. "Generators would have enabled the gas stations to remain open and serve the public. This is a serious public safety issue in all our communities."

But Michael J. Fox, executive director of the Stamford-based Gasoline and Automotive Service Dealers of America, said that Zalaski is "a good friend, but this is the dumbest idea I've ever seen a politician come up with," calling it "political pandering" in response to a storm that produced over 880,000 power outages.

Fox, whose association represents about 450 gas stations across Connecticut, said a generator large enough to serve such a facility costs $20,000 to $25,000 "and is almost the size of a car." The purchase price, coupled with year-round maintenance expenses, would make a generator cost-prohibitive for many businesses--unless they could build the full cost into the price of gasoline.

"Has Michael talked to people in his own town?" Zalaski said, adding he believes the cost of a generator is less than Fox estimates. "People are irate."

Rep. Matthew Lesser, D-Middletown, tried to solve the problem with a carrot instead of a stick.

Lesser's proposal calls for the state to auction off one generator in each community, with stations bidding against each other in hopes of securing the machine at a bargain price.

"If you lose the bid and your competitor gas station gets the generator, you'll go buy one yourself-or else you'll lose a lot of business the next time there's a power failure," said Lesser.

But Fox said Lesser's argument is founded on the misconception that everyone could earn big profits with a generator in a crisis--even if most competing stations have one.

"If having a generator provided an economic advantage to any business, they would have them," he said.

The Independent Connecticut Petroleum Association, which represents about 1,000 Connecticut gasoline stations, was not as quick to dismiss Zalaski and Lesser's ideas.

"We spoke with both today and are going to work with both and see what we can come up with that makes both economic and public safety sense," ICPA President Eugene A. Guilford Jr. said. "Twice in ten weeks our state has been hit hard by loss of utility power and there are certain critical facilities that we need for basic and emergency needs while what we rely upon every day gets restored. Fuel is among those critical needs, so thoughtful people need to find a thoughtful solution."

Sen. Kevin Witkos, R-Canton, suggested Thursday that Malloy issue an executive order suspending a regulation governing propane fuel. Witkos specifically wants to allow residents leasing propane tanks to purchase fuel refills from parties other than the tank's owner.

"In the aftermath of this weekend's devastating snowstorm and subsequent power outages, I have heard from constituents who cannot find companies to fill their propane tanks," Witkos said. "Since most propane tanks are leased from the distributor, my constituents' access to the fuel necessary to heat their homes is severely limited."

Many of the ideas may have to wait for next year's legislative session, but Witkos got a quick response: Malloy issued the order Thursday evening.

Malloy also called Thursday for state utility regulators to revisit a 2008 ruling that set regular maintenance staffing requirements for Connecticut Light & Power Co., the state's largest electric utility.

"Obviously I think the (Public Utility Regulatory Authority) is going to have to take a look at that issue," the governor said.

State Representative Matt Lesser is planning to introduce legislation next year that will ensure that in the event of a power outage, every town will have at least one working gas station.

"This isn't about convenience," Lesser said. "This is about public safety."

Lesser, who represents Durham, Middlefield, and Middletown in the Connecticut General Assembly, cited long lines and confusion immediately after the autumn nor'easter and Hurricane Irene. When gas stations lose power, they are no longer able to pump gas.

"Everywhere I went after the storm, people asked me if I knew where an open gas station was," Lesser said. "Without gas, they couldn't get food, emergency supplies, power their own generators or do much of anything. People were waiting for hours in Cromwell or traveling to the shoreline just on the rumor of a gas station."

Lesser's proposal would provide an auction mechanism where gas stations in each town could bid against each other for an emergency generator.

"If you lose the bid and your competitor gas station gets the generator, you'll go buy one yourself-or else you'll lose a lot of business the next time there's a power failure," said Lesser. "This is just part of a bigger conversation about ensuring that we have critical infrastructure in place during the next disaster."

State Rep. Zeke Zalaski, a Democrat from Southington, said Thursday that many of his constituents in need of gas for vehicles and generators were unable to find stations with the power to sell fuel. He said the few that were open had long lines and created traffic jams.

Zalaski's bill would also require generators at senior housing complexes.

“Because of so much suffering during this storm, it is time to require gas stations and senior housing units to have generators,” Rep. Zalaski said. “I am planning to submit legislation to make that happen and request that the appropriate legislative committees hold public hearings once this crisis passes.”

“While my constituents and too many Connecticut residents waited for CL&P to show up, they needed gas for their vehicles and portable generators and they found that too many gas stations were closed because they had no power,” Rep. Zalaski said. “In Southington, for example, many gas stations were closed as hundreds of customers were in need of gasoline, and could not get it while causing traffic jams and creating problems for local police. Generators would have enabled the gas stations to remain open and serve the public. This is a serious public safety issue in all our communities.”

“Our senior population is especially vulnerable during these storms and generators in senior housing units are needed to keep them safe,” Rep. Zalaski continued. “Also, if these units had generators, seniors would not be forced to go to local shelters which can be a traumatic experience for many.”

The Energy & Technology, Public Safety, Labor and Public Employees, and Planning & Development committees will hold an informational hearing in the coming weeks to address the following issues:

• Preparation and response by the utility companies, including United Illuminating and Connecticut Light & Power
• Performance of telephone and telecommunications companies
• Communication between utilities and municipal leaders
• Effectiveness of municipal reverse 9-1-1 systems and other communication methods

“Irene was one of the most powerful storms to ever hit Connecticut,” said Senate President Donald E. Williams, Jr., “and many Connecticut residents, public workers, and companies stepped up to make a real difference. We also know that tens of thousands of families and businesses were left in the dark for many days – and now they’re looking for answers. It’s time to understand what happened and how Connecticut can be better positioned to deal with the next emergency.”

“Connecticut has an opportunity to learn from this storm, identify what was done effectively and what needs to be improved,” said Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney (D-New Haven / Hamden). “My constituents want to know why it took so long to get the power back on in certain areas. Probing questions need to be asked and I’m confident the legislative hearing is the appropriate venue to get answers.” 

“I am pleased that almost all Connecticut residents now have their power restored,” said House Speaker Christopher G. Donovan (D-Meriden). “Too many, however, suffered without power for too long. That posed more than just inconvenience for them – it jeopardized their health, safety and livelihoods. We are hearing from folks across the state that we can do better than this, and we’re looking to explore ways that we can be better prepared next time. That’s why it is appropriate at this time to convene legislative hearings.”

House Majority Leader Brendan Sharkey (D-Hamden) said, “In meeting with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano yesterday, she confirmed to me that Connecticut had the highest percentage of homes without power of all states affected by Hurricane Irene.  With such a heavy burden, to me the question remains whether our local utilities are working together to bring the necessary resources to bear throughout the state, not just within their own coverage areas.”

Comments from committee chairs are included below:

House Chairwoman of the Energy and Technology Committee Rep. Vicki Nardello (D-Prospect) said, “If you got your power back within a couple days you probably were very happy with the restoration effort, but for those who had to wait close to a week or more we need to understand what happened and why. Many people who had to wait the longest also depend on electricity to run their well water pumps and that can become a health issue very quickly. We are fortunate these record outages weren’t the result of a winter storm and the time is now to figure out what can be done better.”

“This hearing will help us to determine what went well and what went wrong in the aftermath of Irene. We will examine how to avoid or address outages more quickly after future disasters, and how to provide better information to electric customers left waiting in the dark," said Senator John Fonfara (D-Hartford), Senate Chair of the Energy & Technology Committee.

“We should consider the hearing an opportunity to examine what was done right by our state during Hurricane Irene  and what we can do better,” Rep. Stephen Dargan (D-West Haven), House Chair, Public Safety and Security Committee,  said. “Testimony from local officials and local emergency responders will be very helpful for future planning.”

“First responders were called upon to mobilize and deliver public safety services without interruption hour after hour for days at a time, and this hearing will provide a welcome opportunity to assess that response," Senator Joan V. Hartley (D-Waterbury), Senate Chair of the legislature's Public Safety and Security Committee, said. "In terms of law enforcement, fire and rescue operations, and emergency medical response Irene presented an extraordinary sequence of events and now offers the chance to prepare for the future.”

“It is important that we assess what went right and what went wrong with the restoration efforts by the utility companies so everyone is better prepared when the next storm strikes,” said Rep. Linda Gentile (D-Ansonia and Derby), House Chair of the Legislature’s Planning & Development Committee.

“Obviously the utility issue commanded most of the attention, since people were going without power for days on end," said Senator Cassano, who is Senate Chairman of the Planning and Development Committee. "But there were clearly other issues, such as caring for people with disabilities or who are on oxygen or bedridden. That was extremely taxing to municipalities, and a better way has to be found to identify and care for these people during a natural disaster.”

“All aspects of our state’s response to the storm need to be examined,” Rep. Zeke Zalaski (D-Southington), House Chair of the Labor and Public Employees Committee, said. “Our citizens need to know more about CL&P’s less than stellar response since they have already warned us about raising our rates.”

"In every facet of the response to Irene in every corner of Connecticut manpower issues came into play," Senator Edith G. Prague (D-Columbia), Senate Chair of the legislature's Labor and Public Employees Committee, said. "Going forward we have to ensure there will be adequate response capabilities in public safety personnel and for utilities restoration and infrastructure repair, just to name a few.”

The two lawmakers announced last week that the Governor had placed their request for funds on the commission’s agenda

The funds are to provide a grant-in-aid to the Town of Southington, on behalf of Meridian Development Partners Southington LLC, to finance demolition and environmental assessment and remediation activities at the former Ideal Forging manufacturing facility.

In a joint statement, Representatives Zalaski and Aresimowicz said, “This is an important development for Southington and the town’s economic future. The funding will help pay for clean-up costs at Greenway Commons which will help revitalize downtown Southington and create construction jobs and more jobs when the project is completed. Again, we want to thank Governor Malloy for making this happen.”

SOUTHINGTON — An ambitious plan to turn an abandoned, dilapidated factory complex into condominiums and stores is set to receive a $3 million grant from the state.

Two of the buildings on the site have already been torn down. The grant will pay for more demolition and cleaning up hazadous waste on the site, said Howard Schlesinger, a member of Meridian Development Partners, which is developing the project..

State Reps. Zeke Zalaski, D-Southington, and Joseph Aresimowicz, D-Berlin, said Friday they expect the grant will be approved by the State Bond Commission when it meets July 29.

"This is good news for the project and for Southington's economic future," they said in a joint statement.

The plan calls for redeveloping 14 acres downtown that was the former site of the Ideal Forge factory with as many as 262 condominiums and stores. Town land-use boards approved the project in 2007 and local officials are eager to see it completed.

Schlesinger said the two largest buildings on the site have been demolished and the debris should be cleared before the end of the month.

He said the grant is needed to continue work at the site: Up next is an assessment of the environmental contamination and a cleanup plan. Several buildings remain at the site that would be demolished once the environmental assessment is completed, although Schlesinger said some buildings may stay.

"We are seriously looking at making use of existing structures in the new development," he said.

Schlesinger credited local officials for sticking with the project in spite of delays and pushing the state for funding.

"They never stopped believing that this was going to happen," he said.

Local legislators have pursued state support for the project for several years, but until now nothing has materialized. Aresimowicz and Zalaski, along with Schlesinger, credited Gov. Dannel P. Malloy for being open to urban redevelopment that cleans up polluted brownfields.

"This is an opportunity for everyone to win," said Town Manager Garry Brumback. "This site is in deep distress and the project has long-term benefits for the town and the state. This is $3 million that is well spent."

Progress had been hamstrung by a lack of funding. Work on the site began in late May when a contractor started demolishing the two large buildings. Meridian was able to get started because it received a $1.5 million low-interest loan from the state Department of Economic and Community Development.

Ideal Forge closed in 2003 and the buildings it occupied have been vacant ever since. A factory has been on the site since the 19th century.

State Rep. Bruce “Zeke” Zalaski (D-Southington) and state Rep. Joseph Aresimowicz (D-Berlin/Southington) announced July 22 that a $3 million grant-in-aid for remediation at the Ideal Forging site in Southington is expected to be approved at the next meeting of the state Bond Commission.

The item is on the agenda of the state Bond Commission which is scheduled to meet on Friday, July 29, in Room 1E, Legislative Office Building, at 10:30 a.m.

The funds are to provide a grant-in-aid to the Town of Southington, on behalf of Meridian Development Partners Southington, to finance demolition and environmental assessment and remediation activities at the former Ideal Forging manufacturing facility.

In a joint statement, Zalaski and Aresimowicz said, “We are very pleased that the funding request has been placed on the state Bond Commission’s agenda for action. This is good news for the project and for Southington’s economic future. We also want to thank Governor Malloy for listening to our request for funding and for his support.”

The two lawmakers wrote to the governor in May to formally request the funding for the Town of Southington to help pay for Brownfield clean-up costs at Greenway Commons. They wrote that the project is “shovel ready” and promotes economic and community development in Southington.

Rep. Zalaski was the legislator who introduced the bill in the House and led the floor fight for over 11 hours before final passage of the measure.

“I was pleased with the results announced in the recent Quinnipiac poll that Connecticut voters strongly supported this bill by a margin of 72-25 percentage,” Rep. Zalaski said. “This shows that as far as this issue is concerned, the public is far ahead of the critics and the naysayers who predicted doom and gloom if paid sick leave became law.”

Rep. Zalaski noted that while no Republican voted for the bill in the House, according to the Quinnipiac poll, Republican voters back paid sick leave by 50-44 percent.

Rep. Zalaski again called the bill “a reasonable compromise” that requires employers with 50 or more employees to offer paid sick leave, but the measure excludes manufacturers, certain non-profit groups and does not require paid sick leave for temporary or non-hourly workers.

One by one, Republicans stood Friday to take turns denouncing the nation's first state mandate on private employers to offer paid sick days, but they could only delay, not stop, final passage. At 3:01 a.m. today, the House passed the bill, 76 to 65.

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, the first Democratic governor in 20 years, praised the action by House Democrats and reiterated a promise made during his campaign: He will quickly sign the bill into law, giving organized labor a win that has eluded them in 49 other states.

"Throughout my campaign and now during my time as governor, I've been clear about my commitment to the concept of paid sick leave, and I'm pleased that a reasonable compromise has passed both the Senate and the House," Malloy said. "As I've said before, this is good public policy and specifically, good public health."

The bill proposed years ago in Connecticut and adopted by a handful of cities, notably San Francisco, had covered far more workers and industries, but it was repeatedly narrowed to pick up votes. In the end, the bill focused primarily, though not exclusively, on service workers.

"Why would you want to eat food from a sick restaurant cook? Or have your children taken care of by a sick day care worker? The simple answer is--you wouldn't. And now, you won't have to," Malloy said.

But even the narrowed bill remained a potent symbol to businesses of an overreaching state government in a weak economy, even to some companies that already provde paid time off in excess of the sick leave bill. And that prompted Republicans to threaten to talk for days.

"We don't want to make this a game or a marathon," said House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk. "But given what has gone on, this bill has become the most important of the session."

Cafero complained about tax increases passed weeks ago, the state's stubbornly high unemployment, and its inability to generate jobs over the past 22 years. Passage, he said, would convey hostility to business.

In the end, the GOP settled for a little more than 11 hours. The bill passed with no Republican votes in the House and one in the Senate, John Kissel of Enfield.

The House debate was one-sided. One of the oldest guidelines in the House is when you have the votes, you vote; when you don't have the votes, you talk. So, the Republicans talked, and talked, and talked - about two dozen of them by 1 a.m. and nearly 30 by 2:45 a.m., when Cafero began his summation.

"We're hanging on by a thread," Cafero said, describing the plea of many small businesses.

House Majority Leader J. Brendan Sharkey, D-Hamden, said the state need not choose between helping workers or business. He blamed proponents on both sides for engaging in hyperbole.

"We can do both. We can encourage and support our business in this state, and we can help protect our workers," Sharkey said. "Let's stop the hyperbole. Let's stop the exaggeration."

The audience grew sparse during the debate.

"Is anybody alive out there?" yelled Rep. Richard Smith, R-New Fairfield, as he stood to address the chamber at 1:15 a.m.

It was left to Rep. Zeke Zalaski, D-Southington, the burly co-chairman of the Labor and Public Employees Committee, to periodically stand and try to answer questions posed by the GOP.

The bill requires companies with 50 or more employees to give one hour of sick time for every 40 hours of work, up to a maximum of five days a year. It is effective Jan. 1.

An employer can count vacation time, personal days and any other paid time off against the requirement. Seasonal and temporary workers are not covered, nor are manufacturers or YMCAs and YWCAs -- exemptions sought as conditions for support by several Democratic senators.

Cafero seized on the exemptions as evidence that the bill was bad public policy: If the mandate was such a good idea, why were so many employers exempted? It was a theme throughout the debate.

"We have butchers and bakers. Are candlestick makers covered?" asked Rep. Noreen S. Kokoruda, R-Madison. Or would they be exempted as manufacturers?

"That is an excellent question," Zalaski replied. "Maybe you should read the bill and see if candlestick makers are on the list."

Malloy made the rounds Friday, visiting some House Democrats as a caucus was breaking up. It was light conversation, not heavy lobbying.

"I was trying to buck everybody up because clearly they are going to be here a long time," Malloy said, as he made his way back to his office on the other side of the Capitol. "I wanted them to know that even if I'm not here, I'll be feeling their pain."

But the march to passage was anticlimactic. As Friday dissolved into Saturday, lobbyists stopped trying to lobby on paid sick days as the ranks of the uncommitted thinned and then disappeared.

A trio of lobbyists from the Connecticut Business and Industry Association congregated near the GOP caucus room. They appreciated the GOP efforts to draw attention to paid sick days with the long debate.

Joseph Brennan, CBIA's vice president of legislative affairs, said Malloy and Democratic legislators had indicated at the beginning of the session that they were dedicated to improving the state's business climate. Instead, he said, they adopted a record tax increase and pushed anti-business bills, such as paid sick days and a captive audience bill that would have barred employers from forcing employees from attending political meetings.

"I think there is a certain amount of frustration," Brennan said. "When is enough enough?"

Asked how long he would remain, Brennan, smiled and replied, "Until midnight Wednesday."

That is the legislature's deadline for adjourning the annual session.

Proponents of the bill, including representatives of the Working Families Party and the Service Employees International Union, sat on benches outside the House, munching on trail mix.

"For Connecticut residents who believe in common sense and common decency, today is a proud day," said Jon Green, executive director of Connecticut Working Families. "Especially in difficult times, no one should have to choose between their job and their health, or between being a good employee and a good parent."

A betting pool was organized at midday Friday on how long the debate would last. One optimist picked eight hours; he was out of the running at 11:42 p.m. Friday. At the other extreme, someone picked 25 hours--the limit allowed by the pool's organizers.

Hugh McQuaid photo
Rep. Zeke Zalaski, D-Southington

At 3 a.m. Saturday, Connecticut was on its way to becoming the first state to mandate paid sick leave to employees of some private companies. The bill passed the House 76 to 65 with 16 Democrats joining Republican colleagues in voting against the measure.

Republicans spent more than 11 hours objecting to paid sick leave, which they argued sends a message that Connecticut is not open for business.

In his closing remarks, Majority Leader Brendan Sharkey, D-Hamden, said Connecticut always has been at the forefront of progressive legislation such as paid sick leave. He said Connecticut was the first state to pass a Family Medical Leave Act and the federal government followed a few years later.

Sharkey said the sky didn’t fall after Connecticut passed that legislation, which opponents at the time argued would be bad for business. He said he doesn’t buy the hyperbole that this will make Connecticut a business unfriendly state.

“We don’t make this stuff up,“ Joseph Brennan, vice president of government relations for the Connecticut Business and Industry Association, said. “We respond to what we hear from our members. It’s not a case of hyperbole.”

Regardless, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy said he will sign the legislation, which he made part of his campaign platform.

“I’ve said before, this is good public policy and specifically, good public health,“ Malloy said in a statement. “Why would you want to eat food from a sick restaurant cook? Or have your children taken care of by a sick day care worker? The simple answer is – you wouldn’t. And now, you won’t have to.”

The bill was raised in four previous years, but failed to receive a vote in one chamber or the other depending on the year.

This year, in order to win support for the legislation, it was diluted to apply only to service workers, such as retail clerks, waitresses, chefs, and home health care workers at companies with more than 50 employees. Manufacturers and YMCA’s were exempted from the bill.

More than 100 amendments were filed on the legislation, but none were called during debate late Friday and early Saturday. Opponents were ready to continue the debate as long as possible, but supporters were confident they had the votes to make sure Connecticut becomes the first state in the nation to require some paid sick leave.

“I just want to say how proud I am of Connecticut for saying to the nation that we care about our working families,“ House Speaker Chris Donovan said Friday evening.

“We’ll be here as long as it takes,“ Donovan said. “I believe the measure we have here is the right thing to do.”

Until now, only San Francisco and Washington D.C. have mandated paid sick leave. Connecticut will become the first state to do so when Malloy signs the legislation.

“Contrary to the claims of some opponents, San Francisco’s Paid Sick Leave Ordinance hasn’t damaged the city’s reputation as a global hub for business and a destination for entrepreneurship,” said Jon Green, Executive Director of Connecticut Working Families.

The bill passed the Senate by one vote after six hours of debate and with precious little time left in the legislative session the Democrat-controlled House was looking to get it to Malloy’s desk before the clock ran out.

Harold Camping predicted the end of the world would come on May 21st, 2011…Yet here we are.

Similarly, big business lobbyists at the State Capitol want us to believe that Armageddon is coming sometime around May 2012. What’s so special about May 2012? It marks the month, according to legislation just passed by the House of Representatives, when low-wage service workers might be eligible to take a paid day off if they are too sick to come to work, or their child has a doctor’s appointment.

Just as the end of the world did not come last month, the lobbyists’ doomsday predictions are equally unlikely. Paid sick leave is a common sense policy that provides some security to our state’s workers and makes us all a little healthier. And, according to an open letter by Connecticut economists, the cost to employers is minimal.

But the benefit of this policy isn’t in statistics and studies—it’s about people. A waitress who wakes up with flu symptoms can do something she’s never done before: tell her boss she is too sick to work, knowing that when she recovers in a day or two she’ll still have her job. A school bus driver with a migraine can decide that it’s better to take medicine and rest, rather than get behind the wheel of a bus filled with children. When a grocery store worker gets a call that her daughter is sick at school, rather than do what she has always done in the past – cry, beg, plead with the school nurse to keep her child at school until after her shift ends – she can let her supervisor know that she needs to be home with her daughter. She can say, “I need a sick day today.”

Who needs Armageddon? The end of the world will come in the form of paid sick leave. What nonsense!

In reality, we all might have to pay a few cents more to ensure that our school buses are driven by healthy employees, or wait in line a few minutes more at the grocery store. But will Wal-Mart go bankrupt? Will our businesses close up shop?

We don't have to guess. San Francisco passed the nation's first paid sick leave law in 2007. According to testimony from the chief administrator of San Francisco’s paid sick leave ordinance, no employers have left the city as a result.

Even businesses agree: the head of the restaurant association in San Francisco called the sick leave ordinance “the best public policy for the lowest price.” And the global accounting firm PriceWaterhouseCoopers recently named San Francisco the third best city in the world for attracting business and entrepreneurs. “San Francisco is known for having more progressive social policies like paid sick leave, but it really held its own as a business center that attracts entrepreneurs,” they said.

That hardly sounds like the wasteland lobbyists want us to imagine.

The bill now heads to Governor Malloy who has promised to sign the bill into law.

The bill provides paid sick leave to service workers and excludes manufacturers and certain non-profit organizations. The bill does not require covered employers to provide paid sick leave to day or temporary workers or non-hourly employees such as salaried employees.

“This is an historic achievement because Connecticut is the first state in the nation to pass such legislation,” Rep. Zalaski said. “We have sent a message that Connecticut values its workers and people should not be forced to work when they are sick.”

Rep. Zalaski, who is House Chair of the Labor and Public Employees Committee and a chief proponent of the bill, led the floor debate over the bill for more than 11 hours fighting off several amendments proposed by opponents.

Under the bill, service employees would earn one hour of paid sick time for every 40 hours worked. The number of permitted sick days is capped at five per year.

The earliest service workers can begin accruing sick leave is January 1, 2012. The workers must have worked for the employer for at least 680 hours and worked an average of at least 10 hours a week for the employer in the most recently completed calendar quarter.

“It’s an historic moment,” House Speaker Christopher Donovan (D-Meriden) said. “This is the right thing to do. People who work get sick and they deserve to be protected.”

“Paid sick days are good for both workers and businesses because we have created a better, healthier and safer environment for people who work and live in Connecticut,” Rep. Zalaski said. “Now, I look forward to Governor Malloy’s signature on the bill.”

Legislators said Friday that Attorney General George Jepsen, a staunch ally of labor, effectively has killed a legislative priority of the Connecticut AFL-CIO by advising them that federal labor law appears to pre-empt the state from passing a "captive audience" bill.

The House of Representatives passed the controversial bill two weeks ago, 78 to 65, after an 11-hour debate in which the key sponsor, Rep. Zeke Zalaski, D-Southington, relied on a letter from Jepsen assuring him that the bill was legally sound.

An unhappy Zalaski said that Jepsen visited him earlier this week to inform him that additional legal research by his staff concluded that the state cannot bar employers from requiring employees to attend a meeting called to discuss religious or political matters.

"I just said, 'You couldn't tell me that before I did the bill?' " Zalaski said. "Come on, I gave it 11 hours."

Sen. Edith G. Prague, D-Columbia, the co-chairman of the Labor and Public Employees Committee, said that the Senate will not take up the bill in light of Jepsen's warning that the bill might not be legally defensible.

"That's it," she said. "We're not doing the bill."

But Senate President Pro Tempore Donald E. Williams Jr., D-Brooklyn, said the Democratic majority had not made "a hard or final decision" on whether Jepen's advice was reason to give up on the legislation, although the he acknowledged that prospects remain tenuous with a number of undecided votes.

Jepsen said the earlier letter on which Zalaski relied was not a formal legal opinion.

"My letter, dated May 5, was simply an affirmation of a prior, informal policy position and advice given in 2007 by former Attorney General Richard Blumenthal," Jepsen said in a statement released by his office.

"I am aware that substantial and serious legal questions about preemption have been raised concerning the positions taken in both the May 5, 2011 and (Blumenthal's) March 14, 2007 letters," he said. "My office is reviewing these legal issues.  It would be inappropriate for me to comment further publicly about it at this time."

Jepsen initially declined comment Friday, because his office might have to defend passage of the bill. But after Prague said the measure was dead, Jepsen his office had been approached before the House debate and affirmed Blumenthal's earlier view that the bill was legally sound.

The Connecticut Business and Industry Association circulated its own legal opinion that National Labor Relations Act pre-empts the state from addressing the issue. Jepsen ordered his staff to conduct a deeper review.

"I'm never afraid to take a second look," Jepsen said

Still, he declined to share exactly what he told legislators after that additional review.

Jepsen's position defuses a difficult political situation for the Senate and Gov. Dannel P. Malloy. With the passage of a paid sick days bill, the business community had stepped up its opposition to the captive-audience bill, calling it a blow to Connecticut's image among employers.

John Olsen, the president of the Connecticut AFL-CIO, said the statewide federation of unions would continue to press for passage in the Senate, saying a legal opinion is statement of what might happen in the fact of a court challenge, not a certainty.

"We believe the bill, from all kinds of standpoints, is defensible," Olsen said.

HARTFORD — As a private sector union president, state Rep. Zeke Zalaski, D-Southington, knows a well-bargained concessions package when he sees one. And after reviewing details of the labor deal negotiators for the state's nearly 45,000 public employees struck Friday with Democratic Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, Zalaski suggested they ratify it quickly.

"My members would jump through hoops to get that agreement," said Zalaski, referring to United Auto Workers Local 712, which represents his fellow employees at Bristol-based Associated Spring manufacturing.

Zalaski was among the dozens of legislators at the Capitol Tuesday trying to digest summaries of the deal in between committee meetings and votes in the House of Representatives. Malloy and the State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition announced a successful conclusion to months of closed-door negotiations Friday, but waited until Tuesday to release and discuss the terms. A union summary intended for online morning release was leaked to the media Monday.

"It's a good resolution," said Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney, D-New Haven. "Without it, we would have an implosion of our budget process."

The two-year budget legislative Democrats passed and Malloy signed earlier this month counted on, following assurances from the governor, $2 billion worth of union givebacks. The administration bargained concessions it claims are worth $1.6 billion spread over the 2012 and 2013 fiscal years, and $21.5 billion in savings over 20 years.

Union negotiator Dan Livingston, during an afternoon news conference, said the toughest concession, in terms of money coming directly out of workers' pockets, is a two-year wage freeze worth $138.8 million in 2012 and $309.5 million in 2013. In return, Malloy agreed to 3 percent raises in each of the following three years and a four-year, no-layoff guarantee for current SEBAC employees.

In the final weeks of labor talks, the governor had said he was prepared to lay off as many as 4,742 employees without a deal.

Asked how the SEBAC concessions compared to the private sector, Livingston said workers "who weren't fortunate enough to have someone speak for them" have likely given up more.

But Zalaski said even as a member of a union, he has not received a raise for five years.

"Nine percent in five years is pretty good," Zalaski said.

Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield, and House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk, could not understand how Malloy will keep promises to downsize government if workers cannot be laid off for four years.

"Who gets that?" Cafero said.

But the administration Monday anticipated an additional 1,000 employees will retire due to changes in health care and pensions included in the concessions that take effect in September. They've assumed $130 million in related savings.

"That seems like a pretty good clip," said Rep. William Tong, D-Stamford. "But we have to be careful we don't lose the most productive people in state government who know what they're doing."

Livingston was unsure of the basis for the 1,000 retirements, adding the deal was not structured to scare away workers. "We don't think our people are going to be frightened out by this package," he said.

The deal will also provide more flexibility in transferring workers. According to union negotiators, the current requirement that a comparable position be offered within a 20-mile radius has been expanded to a 30-mile radius.

"I want to see him have flexibility to really restructure government," said Rep. Kim Fawcett, D-Fairfield, who voted against the Democrats' budget. "I hope this deal allows him to do that."

Rep. Bob Godfrey, D-Danbury, praised what he considered a true commitment to streamlining government through a combination of attrition and the anticipated $270 million in savings assumed from future changes in how government operates. Under the arrangement, joint information technology and labor management committees will identify efficiencies and reduce what unions have long complained is the state's overreliance on consultants and contractors.

By avoiding layoffs, Godfrey said, "We maintain our respect for the people who work for the state and, in return, a respect for the people in my district who use their services."

But Rep. Tony Hwang, R-Fairfield, said the administration is relying on a union "suggestion box." Livingston countered SEBAC put about 370 real cost-cutting ideas on the table that over time could save even more.

Hwang was also concerned the agreement calculates $205 million in savings over two years by shifting employees to so-called value-based health care initiatives intended to promote wellness and cut medical costs.

"How real is that going to be?" Hwang said.

David Walker, the former U.S. comptroller general under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, said the agreement between Malloy and the unions has its pluses and minuses. Walker is also a columnist for Hearst newspapers.

"On the positive side, they reached a timely agreement in a nonconfrontational manner," Walker said. He gave high marks to structural changes in the pension plan and in employees' health insurance plans that he said would pave the way for a more stable financial future.

Walker was critical of Malloy's decision to extend the agreement with the unions until 2022, saying it might lock the state into a deal that would look worse if the economy sours again. He also said the Malloy administration made only tepid changes to an "incredibly generous" retiree health plan, noting that the state has a $29 billion unfunded liability.

"It clearly exceeds what major employers provide to retirees," Walker said.

Finally, Walker said, the agreement to allow overtime pay to be used in calculating workers' pensions ensures the continuation of "extremely abusive" cases of employees earning pensions close to or above their actual salaries.

More Information

The plan Highlights of some of the two-year savings in the plan:

• Imposes two-year wage freeze, $448 million

• Increases the number of retirees and leaves many jobs unfilled, $130 million

• Changes the early retirement reduction factor from 3 percent to 6 percent for each year before retiree eligible to take normal retirement, with associated health care savings, $67.4 million

• Increases normal retirement age for current employees who retire after July 1, 2022. Accordingly, retirement age increases from age 60 with 24 years of service or 62 with 10 years to age 63 with 25 years of service or 65 with 10 years, $44 million

• Boosts pharmacy co-pays and require mail prescriptions for maintenance drugs, $43 million

• Shifts employees to so-called value-based health and dental care plan under which individuals and their families agree to follow all plan and physician recommended physicals, disease management protocols and diagnostic testing, $205 million

• Achieves savings through as-yet-unspecified ideas proposed by employees to lower procurement costs and make agency operations more efficient, $180 million.

HB 5460, “An Act Concerning Captive Audience Meetings” brought out by Rep. Zalaski now heads to the state Senate following a lengthy debate.

The bill defines political matters as including political party affiliation or the decision to join or not join a political, social, or community group or activity, or labor organization.

The bill covers all private-sector and public employers.

“This legislation protects workers from employers who may be abusive or who are trying to take an unfair advantage over employees,” Rep. Zalaski said. “Employers should not be forcing their personal views on issues like religion and politics. Employers should not be trying to influence their workers on which candidates to vote for.”

The bill allows employees who have been discharged or otherwise penalized to seek a remedy through a Superior Court civil action brought within 90 days of the alleged violation. The court may award an employee all appropriate relief, including rehiring or reinstatement to his or her former job as well as award a prevailing employee triple monetary damages and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.

The bill exempts casual conversations between employees and between employees and employers, provided participation in the conversations is not required and they occur in the normal course of the work day.

HARTFORD — Lawmakers in the House of Representatives, after a debate topping 10 hours, voted 78-65 to approve a bill that would bar employers from requiring their workers to attend meetings to discuss religion, politics or union organizing.

The proposal, dubbed the "captive audience bill," was a talker: The debate began just after 2 p.m. and continued well into the night. Republicans offered numerous amendments — all of them unsuccessful — in their effort to kill the measure outright or slowly discuss it to death.

Supporters say a law is needed to protect the rights of workers and prevent them from being coerced into attending meetings. Union leaders say "captive audience" meetings are used to intimidate workers, squelch union activity, and even influence elections and shape public policy.

Rep. Bruce "Zeke" Zalaski, D-Southington, said he always thought employers could tell workers what to do on work time. "After 33 years in the same factory, I almost believed what they used to tell me," he said.

But when he began researching the bill, Zalaski said, he came to the conclusion that "workers should have rights, even in the workplace."

Republicans sought to characterize the measure as anti-business.

"When you get a company that either wants to move into Connecticut or expand in Connecticut, when they look at the political message, the political temperament in the state … what do you think this says?" asked House Republican Leader Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk. "You know what it says? Take your business elsewhere."

Rep. Themis Klarides, R-Derby, called the bill poorly worded and vague. "I'm not saying it's not valid," she said. "We have vague terms from hello to goodbye and at the end of the day, we don't have a solution to the problem."

The bill covers all private-sector, state and municipal employers, though religious and political organizations are exempt. It also would permit casual conversations about religion or politics among workers as long as participation in such discussions is not required.

The bill now moves to the Senate. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy would sign the bill should it reach his desk, said his spokeswoman, Colleen Flanagan.

Oregon passed captive-audience legislation in 2009. Wisconsin approved a similar bill, although the law was declared unconstitutional last year.

A bill that prohibits employers from requiring their workers to attend meetings concerning views on politics and religion passed the House 78 to 65 after 11 hours of debate—an hour longer than the debate on the state budget.

Hugh McQuaid photo
Rep. Bruce “Zeke” Zalaski, D-Southington, the proponent of the bill

Rep. Bruce “Zeke” Zalaski, D-Southington, said the measure will protect employees from discipline should they decide not to attend such a meeting where politics and religion are discussed.

“Nothing in this proposed legislation limits what an employer can say or who they can say it to,” Zalaski said.

But Republicans maintained it sends the wrong message to businesses in the state and offered up a number of hypothetical scenarios and amendments to prove their point.

Rep. John Rigby, R-Winsted, said that all of the testimony offered at the public hearing proved that businesses and organizations throughout the state were against the legislation.

The message the legislation sends to the business community in the state was a source of concern for many lawmakers, who saw it as another bill that would make Connecticut less attractive to businesses looking to relocate.

“What do you think this says? It says take your business elsewhere,” said House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk, said. “We can’t say we are open to business and continue to do this.”

The so-called captive audience bill has been a perennial offering from the legislature’s Democratic majority and is supported by various labor unions in the state. Union leadership said it’s used as a tool by some employers to intimidate and threaten workers considering joining a union.

Eric Bailey, spokesman for AFT-CT said late Wednesday that the tactic was employed by William H. Backus Hospital in Norwich, to discourage nurses from voting to unionize. But this time those tactics didn’t work. The group of nurses voted 210-175 to support a union.

“Having a contract will give us a voice in the hospital so that we can be stronger advocates for our patients,” said Lisa Currier, an registered nurse in the operating room. “That’s why I voted in favor of a union.”

The election Wednesday was administered by the National Labor Relations Board. It means the nurses can now start negotiating their first contract with the hospital.

Cafero opined that Democrats were finally bringing the bill to the floor Wednesday because they have a governor who is likely to sign it.

But that didn’t explain the length of the debate over a bill that’s not considered a major public policy issue.

House Majority Leader Brendan Sharkey, D-Hamden, admitted sometime Thursday morning that the debate had gone to an “extreme.”

“It’s obvious every question has been asked,” Sharkey said.

Sources say there was a misunderstanding between Cafero and Zalaski. Republicans thought the bill was never expected to come up for a vote. However, Democrats maintained no such agreement offered and the misunderstanding lent itself to the long Republican filibuster.

Plans to debate in-state tuition for undocumented students was next on the agenda, but at the last minute Democrats decided against forcing what was likely going to be an even longer debate. They adjourned around 1 a.m. Thursday morning amongst chant of “more bills.”

Southington State Rep. Rob Sampson stood on the floor of the Connecticut House of Representatives Tuesday evening pleading for legislators to consider a proposal that would include no tax increases – a request supported by the town’s State Sen. Joe Markley.

Their efforts fell on deaf ears.

With the support of Southington’s democratic legislators Bruce “Zeke” Zalaski and Joseph Aresimowicz, a Democratic controlled house passed a $40.1 billion state budget by a vote of 83-67 that was approved by Gov. Dannel Malloy Wednesday.

After long budget discussions the past few weeks, Southington’s legislators remain split on the best way to address state needs and balance a budget that already includes a $3.5 billion deficit.

“The budget passed is one that brings $22 million a year to Southington for ECS funding, roads and manufacturing,” said Zalaski. “It’s great to say you won’t raise taxes as the Republicans have, but in the end you need to consider a variety of taxes and cuts to eliminate a $3.5 million debt.”

The biennium budget, which includes total spending of $19.8 billion for the 2011-12 fiscal year, and $20.3 billion for the 2012-13 fiscal year, plugs a $3.5 billion estimated budget in the coming fiscal year through spending cuts and tax and revenue increases.

But with the ability to eliminate the deficit comes an increase in sales tax from 6 percent to 6.35 percent – 0.1 percent of that tax will be returned to the municipality in which it was collected – and the addition of tax to products including services from pet grooming to creation.

The increases also include a $0.03 per gallon increase in the cost of diesel fuel for the purpose of funding infrastructure improvements along Connecticut’s roads.

The taxes aren’t popular, Aresimowicz said, but they were necessary in order to meet state demands without putting added pressure on municipalities and Connecticut homeowners.

“In serving as a state representative, I’ve voted against budgets in the past because they weren’t sustainable,” Aresimowicz said. “This was sustainable, it was responsible and it maintained level funding for municipalities so that we are taking responsibility as a state and not simply pushing the taxes onto towns and cities so that we could say we were offering a no tax increase.”

Democrats have stated that they were against a “No Tax Increase” proposal presented by Republicans because it eliminated funding to municipalities, but Sampson said in a press release Wednesday that it simply wasn’t true.

Instead savings would have come in cutting unnecessary state payroll and more than $46 million in spending by consolidating state agencies, he said.

The Republican proposal also would have capped the state’s “gross receipts” tax on gasoline, which taxes based on a percentage and increases with the price of gas, Sampson said.

“Considering the financial struggles faced by residents every day, the ‘shared sacrifice’ tax hikes included in this budget are irresponsible—particularly when majority legislators have ignored every idea that doesn’t require the to state reach into somebody’s wallet again,” Sampson said.

Markley, who was in legislative meetings throughout most of the day Wednesday, could not be reached for comment.

Aresimowicz said when it comes down to it, however, the goal was not to do what was popular but what was right and he is pleased with the overall budget that was passed.

“Everyone always says they are going through the budget line by line, but there’s more to it than that,” Aresimowicz said. “Behind each line are stories from residents and families in the state and being responsible includes taking those stories into consideration.”

When the General Assembly convened in January, Connecticut's Governor Dannel Malloy and the legislature faced an enormous challenge – a budget deficit of $3.5 billion and an economy still trying to recover from the nation's worst recession since the Great Depression.

Unlike previous administrations that failed to address the state's economic problems, our new governor proposed a tough and balanced budget that called for all of us to share in the sacrifice necessary to restore our state to fiscal soundness.

While not perfect, we were able to work with Governor Malloy to make changes in his budget that reduced taxes that the Governor had originally proposed, restored the Property Tax Credit of $300 for Southington's residents, increased the income tax on the highest income levels, eliminated the proposed gas tax increase of 3 cents per gallon, eliminated tax proposals on coupons, hair cuts, car washes and more.

These changes provide additional protection for our middle class and the budget passed by the General Assembly and signed by Governor Malloy does not include borrowing.

Alternative budget proposals were not responsible and would have been devastating to not only Connecticut, but to Southington.

The good news for Southington is that our town will receive more state aid and education funding than in previous years. Under the budget that we supported, Southington is projected to receive $372,125 more than the $22,529,009 it was allocated by the state in 2011. In 2012, Southington is expected to receive $22,901,134 and $22,983,715 in 2013, an increase of 454,706.

This increased funding for Southington should go along way towards lessening the need for any local property tax hikes for our homeowners and local businesses.

Unlike, budgets that were recently passed in New York and New Jersey, our state budget protects our cities and towns and does not pass the burden on to local property taxpayers. As we all know, the property tax is the most regressive of all taxes.

There is no question that we had to make some tough and understandably unpopular decisions. The state budget is honest and balanced. We have worked with Governor Malloy to create a budget that will move Connecticut forward, a budget that is responsible and a budget that puts us on the road to recovery.

“Thanks to the great work of teachers and staff at Southington High School, this is an opportunity for parents and students to learn first hand about job opportunities for students who are not planning to attend college,” Rep. Zalaski said.“Representatives of local companies will be present to explain and discuss potential future employment in manufacturing and construction.”

Rep. Zalaski is House Chair of the legislature’s Labor and Public Employee’s Committee.

“This is a great opportunity for students to meet employers and prepare to get a job with local and regional manufacturers and construction companies,” Rep. Zalaski said.

Manufacturers participating in the expo are Gibbs Wire and Steel, Southington Tool and Manufacturing Corporation, Associated Spring Company and Apex Machine Tool.

Various representatives of the construction trades will also be on hand ranging from carpentry, electrical, ironworker, masonry, plumbing, fire protection and sheet metal.

HARTFORD — Believing Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's proposed budget places an unfair burden on the middle class, 65 of his fellow Democrats from the House of Representatives have signed a letter urging their party leaders to hike income taxes on the wealthy.

"The governor's budget is far better than those we have seen in recent years, but there are a few elements that will need to be changed," reads the document, submitted late last week to House Speaker Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden, and Majority Leader Brendan Sharkey, D-Hamden, and obtained Monday by Hearst Connecticut Media Group.

There are 99 Democrats in the 151-member House, where 76 votes are needed to pass a budget.

Specifically, the signees want Malloy to consider raising Connecticut's top income tax rate from 6.5 percent to "at least" 7 percent, rather than the 6.7 percent he proposed in February as part of his plan to plug a $3.2 billion deficit.

"We strongly believe that the upper income brackets in the governor's proposal did not go far enough," the Democrats wrote.

James Finley, of the Connecticut Conference for Municipalities, has lobbied in Hartford for 30 years and said the letter is the first glimpse at behind-the-scenes divisions among the majority party over their new governor's first budget.

"That's sort of the first leak," Finley said. "It's a curious tactic at a very sensitive time during budget negotiations."

The Legislature's Finance and Appropriations committees could vote this week on a Democratic budget.

State Rep. Patricia Widlitz, D-Guilford, who co-chairs the Finance Committee, said she was unaware a letter had been circulated. Widlitz on Monday said she believed Democrats were close to an agreement with Malloy and there has been give and take.

Asked about upping the top income tax rate to 7 percent, Widlitz said, "It's something that certainly has been discussed. I personally would prefer to work within the parameters of the governor's budget."

Donovan in a brief interview said he welcomed the suggestions from caucus members and was considering them in the context of some alterations Malloy proposed Thursday, restoring a popular middle class property tax credit.

The governor initially called for elimination of the $500 tax credit -- something the Democrats in their letter urged be protected. Last week Malloy announced he would support a $300 credit funded through some adjustments in how much top earners pay without going above his 6.7 percent cap.

Malloy advisor Roy Occhiogrosso said Monday he had not seen a copy of the letter. He said Malloy's decision came in response to complaints he heard while discussing his budget at forums across the state.

"Without question, the additional taxes he was asking of the middle class was the issue he heard about more than anything else," Occhiogrosso said.

Rep. Zeke Zalaski, D-Southington, who helped circulate the letter, said Monday restoring the tax credit was a good start. But Zalaski, a Finance Committee member, said he will not vote for Malloy's budget without additional changes.

"I would like to see him go a bit further," Zalaski said, arguing the governor's sales tax increases will also hit the middle class hard. "I've had a lot (of constituents) saying they think that's just nickel and diming them."

State Rep. Charles "Don" Clemons Jr., D-Bridgeport, who sits on the Appropriations Committee and signed the letter, said, "I like the fact (the governor) is making somewhat of an attempt with the tax credit. But going to the 7 percent income tax and restoring the $500 credit would be an immense relief."

But Occhiogrosso said Malloy is committed to the 6.7 percent number in order to remain competitive with neighboring states.

Among those House Democrats who did not sign the letter are lower Fairfield County lawmakers such as state Rep. Kimberly Fawcett, D-Fairfield, who continually complain the state solves its fiscal woes by targeting high earners in their districts.

"I didn't realize it was going to have such broad support," Fawcett said. "I was disappointed when I saw it because it's not reflective of the message I'm trying to bring leadership in Hartford. With that many signatures it tells you they have the votes to pass a tax package."

Standing, from left, are state Rep. Bruce “Zeke” Zalaski, state ombudsman Nancy Shaffer, state Sen. Joe Markley, and Michelina Denorfia, a resident of The Summit. Sitting, from left, are several residents of The Summit, Nellie Danks, Roberta Davies and Marie Pyne. Julie Sopchak

Nine dollars, to most people, might not seem like a lot of money nowadays. But to a senior citizen living in a nursing home who receives a $69 monthly allowance through Title 19, that $9 has to go a long way.

That is the reason why Summit Makes Individual Lives Exceptional, a group at The Summit in Plantsville, organized to protest a new bill proposed by Gov. Dannel P. Malloy that would shorten the Medicaid Title 19 monthly Personal Needs Allowance from $69 to $60.

Already, that $69 pays for cable, beauty supplies, phone, clothes and other personal items.

Summit Administrator Sue Krassler read a speech to a crowd gathered in the facility’s lounge area that was written by the members of SMILE.

“Nine dollars may not seem like much to most of us,” the speech read. “But it actually is 10 percent of our monthly income, which would tremendously affect us.

“We feel the governor’s priorities do not include senior citizens. Maybe the governor needs to be educated that even though we live in an extended care facility, we are vital members of the community.”

The speech stressed the citizens’ power of vote, and after it was finished, an open forum was held where people expressed their distaste of such a bill and also brainstormed ways that they could effectively reach their legislators.

Even though Malloy and Wyman were not present for the meeting, local legislators state Rep. Bruce “Zeke” Zalaski and state Sen. Joe Markley were, and they heard the message loud and clear.

“If you’re going to cut government expenses, it should be expenses of government itself, not of the services it provides,” said Markley, who was involved with the initiation of the CT Home Care Program for Elders.

Zalaski said the best way to make a legislator think is to send a handwritten letter, something tangible the legislator can hold and know that another human made it personally.

“What means the most to legislators is personal letters,” he said. “I don’t think legislators understand how far $69 can go. When it comes to bargaining the budget, it really comes down to the leadership that does it.”

Other ideas came up as well, like taking a large group photo and sending it in, so legislators can see the faces of the people they’re affecting, as well as a petition signed by everyone against the proposal.

The members of SMILE said they were disappointed that Malloy and Lt. Gov. Nancy Wyman could not attend the meeting the morning of March 31, but an invitation was extended to both to come again.

“We understand about budgets and money,” said one SMILE member. “Just let us know you care.”

The University of Connecticut Board of Trustees' decision Wednesday to study the soaring salaries of UConn administrators came none too soon, said state Rep. Zeke Zalaski, D-Southington, co-chairman of legislature's Labor and Public Employees Committee.

Zalaski cited a March 13 Government Watch column in the Courant that reported that UConn's two top police officials - Chief Robert Hudd and Major Ronald Blicher - were paid $246,961 and $193,616 last year, much higher than the salaries of many of their counterparts in big-city police departments and at other universities. The column also said that Hudd and Blicher each got at least a $28,000 pay raise from 2009 to 2010.

"It's about time," Zalaski said of the UConn Board of Trustees' action. The trustees decided to form a study committee on administrators' pay after their chairman, Lawrence McHugh, said the UConn president's office had approved hefty pay raises for administrators while keeping the trustees "in the dark."

Zalaski added: "While many state employees have agreed to pay freezes and furlough days, these individuals reportedly got $28,000 pay raises last year. Nothing personal against them, but those raises make no sense while elected officials are battling a huge state budget deficit."

HARTFORD - The Labor and Public Employees Committee voted 6-5 Thursday to pass a bill that would require businesses with 50 or more employees to provide one hour of paid sick leave for every 40 hours worked, with a maximum of 40 hours per calendar year, after the employee completes the first 680 hours.

Under the proposal, paid sick leave will be allowed for illness, injury, mental illness, preventative care, family violence and sexual assault, and employers cannot retaliate against employees who take legitimate paid sick leave.

State Rep. Zeke Zalaski, D-Southington, who co-chairs the committee, said he believes this is the year paid sick leave will be signed into law. Gov. Dannel P. Malloy has said he would support the idea.

The Labor and Public Employees Committee heard testimony on the bill during a hearing at the Capitol Tuesday. Zalaski, a supporter of the bill and House chairman of the committee, believes that a promise by Malloy to sign the bill if it passes the General Assembly "will make it easier for any reluctant legislator to sign on."

"I believe the time for paid sick leave is now," Rep. Zalaski said. "Not only is it the right thing to do for workers who don't have paid sick, but it will be good for businesses."

Zalaski pointed out that the bill applies only to businesses with 50 or more employees "so that small mom and pop restaurants and other businesses that have few workers are not affected by the legislation."

House Speaker Chris Donovan, D-Meriden, said most businesses with 50 or more employees already offer paid sick leave.

State Rep. John Rigby, R-Norfolk, spoke up Thursday for business owners who claimed the legislation would cost them about $100,000 a year, and the cost would end up affecting their employees.

A survey conducted in San Francisco by the Institute for Women's Policy Research on the effects of the city's paid sick leave ordinance found that close to 30 percent of employees in the bottom fifth of earners reported layoffs or reduced hours at their place of work after passage of the mandate.

Rep. Zalaski, a supporter of the bill and House Chair of the committee, believes that a promise by Governor Malloy to sign the bill if it passes the General Assembly “will make it easier for any reluctant legislator to sign on.”

“I believe the time for paid sick leave is now,” Rep. Zalaski said. “Not only is it the right thing to do for workers who don’t have paid sick, but it will be good for businesses.”

Rep. Zalaski pointed out that the bill applies only to businesses with 50 or more employees “so that small mom and pop restaurants and other businesses that have few workers are not affected by the legislation.”

In addition, the proposed paid sick leave bill includes the following:

• Employees will accrue one hour of sick leave for every forty hours worked, up to 40 hours per year.
• Employees must work 680 hours before they get sick leave
• Paid sick leave will be allowed for illness, injury, mental illness, preventative care, family violence and sexual assault.
• Employers cannot retaliate against employees who take legitimate paid sick leave.

“While we have heard most of the arguments for and against the bill, I want to thank everyone who participated in our public hearing.” Rep. Zalaski said. “We can become the first state in the country to provide this benefit to working people. Let’s seize the moment.”

With an ally in the governor's office and a too-close-to-call vote count in the Senate, the Working Families Party resumed its push Tuesday for a first-in-the-nation state law requiring private employers to offer up to five paid sick days.

The election of Gov. Dannel P. Malloy is a boost to a bill that passed the Senate in 2008 and the House in 2009, but one legislator's second thoughts and recent changes in membership leave the bill short of a majority in the Senate.

"It's not a layup," said Jon Green, the executive director of the Working Families Party. "We have to work to persuade every legislator we can."

Joseph J. Brennan, the senior vice president of the Connecticut Business and Industry Association, the leading opponent, had a similar view: The fate of the bill is uncertain, despite the election of Malloy.

The Labor and Public Employees Committee held a public hearing today on the latest version of a concept that's been embraced by the cities of San Francisco, Milwaukee and Washington D.C., but not Congress or any state legislature.

For that reason, the prospect of passage in Connecticut has given outsized political importance to what some opponents and proponents concede is a bill with a relatively modest reach.

The bill requires private companies with 50 or more employees to give their workers paid sick time, which would be accrued at the rate of one hour for every 40 hours worked, up to an annual maximum of five days.

One major change from the original legislation proposed years ago: Any paid time off, including vacations and personal days, could count as sick time, limiting the bill's impact to employees of companies that now offer few or no benefits.

"I think that makes it much more amenable," said Sen. Beth Bye, D-West Hartford, a potential swing vote.

"I'm sure it's going to pass," said Rep. Zeke Zalaski, D-Southington, co-chairman of the labor committee, who attended a press conference in support of the bill Tuesday.

Zalaski said the latest union contract at the factory where he works offers no sick time, but the bill would not cover him or his co-workers, since they are given paid personal days and vacation time.

House Speaker Christopher G. Donovan, D-Meriden, said in testimony submitted to the labor committee that he believes the legislation can strike a balance "between protecting working families without placing onerous burdens on employers."

CBIA said the bill still would be a major blow to a state with a reputation for a poor business environment, according to some industry rankings. For supporters, passage would be a high-profile victory in a year when labor is in retreat.

"This is not the time to be the first in the nation with a bill like this," Brennan said.

The Senate passed the bill, 20 to 16, in 2008. But two Democrats who voted yes, Thomas A. Colapietro of Bristol and Thomas P. Gaffey of Meriden, have since been succeeded by Republican opponents, Jason Welch and Len Suzio.

Those losses would create an 18 to 18 tie. With the Malloy administration in support, a tie would be broken in favor of passage by Lt. Gov. Nancy S. Wyman, who presides over the Senate and can vote to break ties.

But two other votes also are doubt.

Bye succeeded Democrat Jonathan Harris last fall. He voted yes in 2008, but Bye voted against the bill as a House member in 2009. If she holds her position, the bill would fail, 19 to 17.

Sen. Edward Meyer, D-Guilford, voted for the bill in 2008, but his change of heart in 2009 was one reason why they Senate never took up the measure after it was passed by the House, 88 to 58.

To obtain an 18-to-18 tie, the proponents need both Bye and Meyer, assuming other votes do not change.

Meyer and Bye each said they believe the concept is good public policy, but they remain concerned about the impact on businesses in a difficult economy.

"I haven't made up my mind about it this year yet," said Meyer, who is reviewing the bill's impact on employers in his district. "I think this bill is good policy if our economy is strong and these companies are fine."

"In principle, I agree with it. I just want to make sure it doesn't hurt our business climate," Bye said. "We do need to make our state open for business."

Their reluctance is emblematic of one of the biggest hurdles for proponents: Convincing legislators who think the measure is reasonable or laudatory public policy that passage would not hurt businesses---or the state's reputation.

"It's become this sacred ground," Bye said of the bill.

"I am not a yes vote yet. I was three years ago. We were in strong economic times," Meyer said. "I thought it was something that was a fair employment practice. I think it kept sickness out of the work place, which is a good thing."

Proponents are using a survey by the Institute for Women's Policy Research, which concluded that the San Francisco economy was not harmed by passage of the paid-sick day ordinance four years ago.

To counter the survey, CBIA is relying on Michael Saltsman, a research fellow at the Employment Policies Institute, who says that many low-wage employees in San Francisco saw their hours cut after passage of the ordinance.

"That's exactly what we would expect in a state like Connecticut," he said.

Cheryl Folston, a livery driver who worked for years with no paid time off, driving special-needs children, said the policy is inhumane and dangerous.

"It nearly cost me my life," she said.

Folston said she was diagnosed with a heart tumor last summer, only after she lost her job in a layoff. Folston said she doubts she would have sought medical attention if she still was driving--not if the cost was a day's pay.

 The bill, one of the major legislative proposals under consideration in the current General Assembly session, would require employers with fifty or more employees to provide sick leave to certain employees for use for the employee’s sickness, the employee’s child’s, parent’s or spouse’s sickness, or to deal with sexual assault or family violence issues.

 “I am urging public support for this legislation,” Rep. Zalaski said. “I am encouraged that we will be able to approve paid sick leave legislation this year that will be signed into law by the Governor, who has indicated support for paid sick leave.”

The public hearing will be held on Tuesday, March 1 at 3:00 p.m. in Room 2A, Legislative Office Building. The first hour of the hearing is reserved for Legislators, Constitutional Officers, State Agency Heads and Chief Elected Municipal Elected Officials.

HARTFORD  (WTNH) - Thousands of people are unemployed in the state while hundreds of thousands are working, but living paycheck to paycheck. News that the Governor was coming after that hard earned cash didn't go over well.

"The numbers for the Income Tax proposal assume that the date of those income tax changes will be January 1, 2011," says Ben Barnes, State Budget Director.

What the Governor's Budget Chief told lawmakers is that if Malloy's Income Tax hikes go into effect on Jul. 1, they will be retro-active to January 1st.

"About thirteen percent falls those taxpayers with Adjusted Gross Income below $50,000," says Barnes.

That is still a big chunk. Single filers and Couples with Adjusted Gross Yearly income of $50,000 will see their income tax go up $500. Couples who make $100,000 a year will also see a $500 hike.

"It's a big hit to people that make under the $100,000 as a couple," says Zeke Zalaski (D) of Plantsville. "Could mean whether you pay or buy that next tank of oil or not."

For singles that make $100,000 a year, the tax hike is $600. For couples making $200,000, the tax hike is $900.

"Thirty-eight percent, approximately, of the new taxes, fall on taxpayers with Adjusted Gross Incomes over $250,000," says Barnes.

For single filers making a million dollars a year, the increased income tax bill is just about $6,000. For couples making a million dollars, the tax hike is nearly $10,000.

The Governor says that only 20 percent of the increased tax burden comes from businesses, but not all lawmakers are buying that.

"That's not true because there's a lot of Mom and Pops out there who's tax returns flow to their personal, and they're going to end up paying higher taxes as well," says Robert Kane (R) of Watertown.

Editor's Note: The $500 income tax increase for the lower brackets reflects Malloy's proposed elimination of the $500 Property Tax Credit that has been on the books for several years.

For more information on the Governors Income Tax proposal visit : www.ct.gov/opm/lib/opm/budget/2012_2013_biennial_budget/section_0_introduction.pdf.

SOUTHINGTON - Board of Education members and state leaders held a roundtable discussion Friday morning at Plantsville School that focused on funding, mandates and economic development.

Rep. Bruce P. "Zeke" Zalaski, Sen. Joe Markley and Rep. Rob Sampson attended the legislative breakfast, which provided for board members a forum in which to speak freely about topics they believe should be addressed in Hartford. It also gave the leaders an opportunity to learn which initiatives the board feels strongly about and react to its comments.

Several board members said that they know their town and its schools the best, and are not in favor of some of the state's mandates. They specifically pointed to a proposed rule change that would make students earn more credits in high school in order to graduate. Such a mandate would create the need for more teachers and more classrooms, and therefore more money. Board member Pat Johnson said at least 16 more teachers would need to be hired, and because the change would affect everyone in the state, board member Kathy Rickard said, there would be a shortage of teachers.

The reform is a great vision, but it should be incentive based, not mandate based, according to Thiery.

"The Board of Education knows what's best; if they (the state) tells us to do things they better give us money to do so," Rickard said.

Zalaski said not all towns have faith in their educational system as he does and because some big city school systems don't run as smoothly as Southington, many of the mandates are needed. He said he would be sure to speak with State Education Commissioner Andy Fleischmann about the concerns the board was bringing to his attention.

Board members also expressed concern about Project Choice and the amount of money spent on Southington children going to magnet schools.

Board of Education Chairman Brian Goralski explained to leaders the importance of Education Cost Sharing money and the need for those funds to at least be equal to what came into the district last year in order for the school system to function properly.

"Bottom line is, if the money's not there, taxes will go up," Goralski said.

Markley said it's clear to him the ECS money will be there.

Concerns about keeping businesses in Southington were also addressed. Rickard asked Zalaski if a suggestion could be made to the state about awarding projects to only Connecticut companies. Zalaski said if that were to happen, he'd have to tell Connecticut companies they can't do business out of state.

"I liked the casual nature of the meeting," Goralski said about the morning's event.

"It provides a lot of insight," board member David Derynoski said. "We get a feel for what's going on in Hartford and it opens up communication."

SOUTHINGTON - Lt. Gov. Nancy Wyman was in town early Monday morning for the Greater Southington Chamber of Commerce's celebrity breakfast at the Manor Inn.

As members finished their scrambled eggs and home fries and concluded their mingling, Wyman made her way to the front of the room.

"It is interesting that on this kind of day the sponsor of this event is a collision place," Wyman said, referring to the blustery conditions and the event's sponsor, All-Pro Collision Repair, 971 S. Main St.

Wyman spoke to the audience about her ongoing budget work with Gov. Dannel P. Malloy. She concentrated on the positives, such as job growth and state revenue. The state's budget will be presented to the public on Feb. 16, but Wyman was able to give a few insights into what Connecticut residents can except to hear in the coming weeks.

"We're not going to borrow money for operating expenses," Wyman said. "You won't see a budget this year that increases. It'll be the same amount as last year, if not less."

Aware of grants that were given to the state in previous years for education, Wyman said she and the governor are attempting to allocate the same amount of money, $200 million, for Education Cost Sharing. Wyman said the money for education grants needs to at least be the same as last year.

Board of Finance member John P. Moise said he was pleased when he heard the news about the ECS money being there. He was confident this money would come through for the town's school system.

Wyman is aware of the $3.5 billion deficit on the state's hands, but said tax revenue is increasing and the stock market is on the rise. A possible tax on individuals staying in hotels may also be implemented, bringing additional revenue.

Jobs are also of high importance to the state. Wyman said two Connecticut business manufacturers were already given money due to their expansion and hiring of employees.

Angelina Santa Maria, a chamber member who serves on the legislative committee, said she was very happy with Wyman's speech and appearance at the event. Santa Maria said Wyman touched on all the subjects she wanted to hear about and as a fellow woman, is proud of what she's accomplished.

Tuesday's event was the chamber's first celebrity Breakfast of 2011, and Wyman's first area appearance since being inaugurated as lieutenant governor.

State Rep. Bruce P. "Zeke" Zalaski said he's known Wyman for more than 20 years and when he approached her, she was willing to make the appearance. He said Wyman wants to reach out to small business men and women and the event was a good fit for her.

The State Bond Commission will meet for the first time under Democratic Gov. Dannel P. Malloy on Thursday to authorize the borrowing of hundreds of millions of dollars for more than two dozen projects earmarked by legislators. Some Republicans, however, are saying many of the items on the list set a precedent that could mean disaster for the state’s already precarious financial situation.

State Sen. Leonard A. Fasano, R-North Haven, who represents Wallingford and East Haven, said that given the state’s $3.7 billion deficit and even larger long-term bond debt, the administration should be “laser focused” in its approach to borrowing — something he did not see reflected in Thursday’s agenda.

“I’m concerned the new administration’s definition of risk and what the state can afford are two different things,” he said in a statement.

The projects on the commission’s agenda include $81.6 million for new rail cars and $18.9 million for highway paving and safety improvements, but also several smaller items such as the $2.7 million relocation of a softball field at Eastern Connecticut State University and $7 million to replace a system for computerized tracking of the state’s inmate population.

Transit-oriented projects, including improvements around the Meriden train station, and replacement of restrooms at Wharton Brook State Park are among the items on Thursday’s agenda of the State Bond Commission. Above: A train moves out of the Meriden station Monday. Below: Restrooms at the park in Wallingford are closed for the season.

Items with local impact include $5 million in borrowing for transit-oriented development projects that would include $250,000 to $1 million for improvements to the area around Meriden’s train station. Other items would allocate $500,000 to replace restrooms at Wharton Brook State Park in Wallingford and $108,000 to Cheshire for a well abandonment study and water main extensions for three Moss Farm Road properties.

Fasano said he agreed with the decision to fund infrastructure projects that would help create jobs, but questioned other items such as the ECSU field and water projects such as the one in Cheshire.

“Are these investments in which we will get a good return? I don’t believe some of these items achieve the goal of not spending more than we make,” he said.

State Rep. Al Adinolfi, R-Cheshire, said he wouldn’t be “prejudicial” about projects, even if they might benefit his constituents.

“I think we have to be very selective about the things we choose,” he said. “We’re in debt enough ... if there is anything we can put on the back burner for a while, we certainly should.” Fasano, the second-ranking Republican in the Senate, also suggested that Malloy may have placed some of the earmarks on the agenda as favors to legislators. One item would fund improvements at Central Connecticut State University in New Britain, the home of former state Sen. Donald DeFronzo, who was appointed by Malloy to lead the Department of Administrative Services.

Former Gov. M. Jodi Rell, a Republican, also drew criticism for projects on her last State Bond Commission agenda, including the rail cars and a host of local earmarks. The commission didn’t approve the rail cars, but it did approve more than $20 million worth of other capital projects, including $250,000 for a playground in Rell’s hometown of Brookfield. State Rep. Joe Aresimowicz, D-Berlin, who serves on the legislature’s Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee, said that while he recognized the need for restraint and selectiveness in funding projects, he believed every project on the agenda to be worthwhile.

“All of these projects have been vetted through the procedure, and they’re needed for one reason or another,” he said, citing a $5 million request for two new buildings at the Hartford County Fire School, crucial to volunteer fire departments. Aresimowicz, who represents part of Southington, said the committee trimmed numerous earmarks from the agenda last year, and the more than $400 million in requests was much lower than in previous sessions. All items are expected to be approved, and will be added to the state’s existing bond debt of about $19.4 billion.

The state’s bond rating was reduced from AA+ to AA by Fitch Ratings Services last year, although the rating had just been upgraded to AA+ two months earlier. Fitch cited the state’s repeated efforts to close its deficit through borrowing as reason for the downgrade.

Malloy has predicted the agenda’s road construction projects would create more than 1,200 jobs while improving safety, and that other items would retain jobs.

“We have an opportunity to create jobs now and do these projects at lower costs than if we shelve them for another five years and watch project and labor costs rise,” he said in a statement released Monday. State Rep. Bruce “Zeke” Zalaski, D-Southington, who also serves on the finance and bonding committee, said everything on the agenda was a worthwhile investment.

“I know the situation that our state is in, and I know we do need fiscal restraint,” he said. “We also have to keep the economy going, and do things that we have to get done.”

SOUTHINGTON - With the new General Assembly session approaching, local delegates are eager to get to work after receiving their committee assignments last week.

State Rep. Joseph Aresimowicz, a Democrat representing Southington and Berlin, was named deputy House speaker by Speaker Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden. He also will be on four committees; returning to the Finance, Revenue & Bonding Committee and the Veterans Committee and joining the Select Committee on Housing and the Insurance & Real Estate Committee.

"As the deputy speaker, I will be doing a lot of the reviewing of the bills. I'm really looking forward to it," Aresimowicz said Monday, sounding optimistic despite the challenges ahead. "It will be a tough year. Once we are elected, we have to try to put politics aside to represent the towns we represent. I'm hoping we all can work together. It's a new Southington four. I think the more committees all of us are on the better."

He has served on several different committees over the years, learning a lot about how they all work. He enjoys the opportunity and is looking forward to the coming session, though it will probably mean more work for him than in previous terms.

State Sen.-elect Joseph Markley, a Republican, will be returning to Hartford after a 25-year hiatus, and has been assigned to some of the same committees he was on before. His seat on the Appropriations Committee is new but he will return to the Program Review, Regulations Review and Human Services committees. He will be the ranking member of the Human Services Committee.

He expects to find that a lot has changed since his first term and he has been doing a lot of reacquainting since winning the election. Markley wants to retain his connection to the people while working in Hartford, especially when heading into the budget season.

"Both the general public and the people involved in government, they all have a story to tell. Seeing how to fit that jigsaw puzzle together is the challenge," Markley said. "That is the kind of thing, being in the legislature, you can do. Get people talking to each other to work through the problems."

Rep. Bruce "Zeke" Zalaski, a Southington Democrat, will chair the General Assembly's Labor and Public Employees Committee in addition to serving on the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee and the Commerce Committee.

He said the Commerce Committee work will have much to do, trying to continue work done last session to improve the state's jobs situation.

"I think most of us know creating jobs is going to be one of the biggest things in the state of Connecticut," Zalaski said. "A lot of things we did last term are just starting to kick in. I'm hoping this year it really kicks in and maybe we can add to it."

Political freshman Robert Sampson, a Republican, said that, as a new lawmaker, he wasn't sure about what he would get but he ended up being on all the committees he requested. He will serve on the Appropriations Committee, Judiciary Committee and Insurance and Realty Committee.

"I'm very, very pleased," Sampson said. "I want to be involved where I can have some impact."

With Democrat Dan Malloy sitting in the governor's seat, all four delegates say the dynamics of state government will see a big change, but were not sure just how that dynamic will change.

Aresimowicz said just have a new face, regardless of party, will be a major change. He hopes the new governor will encourage more harmonious relations between the legislature and governor.

"Overall, I am pretty hopeful," Aresimowicz said. "The size of the deficit we have is going to force a lot of us to look at how we do business in the state to make sure we don't run into deficits like this in the future. I think we can get a lot done."