Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You think local rule by default means accountability? How. Most elections are unopposed. There's no school building authority in ct either.
CT runs like a confederation of towns rather than a state. CT isn't innovating, it copies.
First mass gets rid of slavery, then ct
First mass legalized same sex marriage, then ct
First mass legalized Marijuana and then ct
First mass has mandated health care, then CT.
First mass gets rid of blue laws, CT does ten years later
Mass has educational reform in 1993, CT still tries
Mass has public housing reforms in 2015 CT... Nah
Are there floppy disks in the state house? Books on 8 trak?
This is your opinion. We get it you love Massachusetts but I do not agree that Connecticut should or has blindly followed what Massachusetts does. There is no doubt that Massachusetts is and pretty much always has been a progressive state and that Connecticut is more cautious when adopting progressive things. I would much rather Connecticut keep its cautious approach to change and pick and choose what it implements.
The LAST thing Connecticut needs is a school building authority. As I have stated before, it is rare that a large state run authorities meet the specialized needs of the community. Just look at state housing authorities (even in Massachusetts) and their long track record of providing poor design and quality in favor of saving money. Sorry but the answer is NO. Again local rule and involvement gives communities the best buildings that meets their needs within the budget the community sets. Jay
This is your opinion. We get it you love Massachusetts but I do not agree that Connecticut should or has blindly followed what Massachusetts does. There is no doubt that Massachusetts is and pretty much always has been a progressive state and that Connecticut is more cautious when adopting progressive things. I would much rather Connecticut keep its cautious approach to change and pick and choose what it implements.
The LAST thing Connecticut needs is a school building authority. As I have stated before, it is rare that a large state run authorities meet the specialized needs of the community. Just look at state housing authorities (even in Massachusetts) and their long track record of providing poor design and quality in favor of saving money. Sorry but the answer is NO. Again local rule and involvement gives communities the best buildings that meets their needs within the budget the community sets. Jay
My opinion? The fact of the matter is no matter where you are throughout the United States most local elections are people running unopposed. I'm not going to get into some Republican or Democratic issue. When the issues are local it's issue-based and should not be party-based. That by itself is also another issue in Connecticut where you have people with jobs that are reserved for political parties like Tom Clark's. If you look at other states they don't openly say all the time at their Democrat or Republican.
What are you talkin about when you say specialized needs of the community? You do understand that buildings as identity are governed by the building code, the house of code and the fire code. These are all state issued. If a local community wants to have more stringent standards that's fine but they can't have lower standards in the state.
The cautious approach simply shows that it's timid and simply doesn't really have the Integrity of putting skin in the game. Example in 2002 in Massachusetts got rid of blue laws for the sale of alcohol on Sundays Connecticut didn't follow through with that for another 10 years. There were no real negative repercussions of selling alcohol on Sundays.
You haven't sighted actual specifics of why you think the way it is. For example of a Housing Authority receives Federal funding of course they're going to have a say in terms of the spending of it. You can't have this both ways. You can't say that you want Connecticut to have all this local control and then the second you do grab state or federal dollars that somehow they should ignore it? You have to realize much of the state is still relying on the federal government. Without the defense department how much of Connecticut would be shut down. If electric boat wasn't selling boats the u.s. Navy who they sell them to exactly? If the F-35 shut down production there's no other entity that can buy those jet engines. You need to have approval from the state department and Department of Defense and probably the president himself in order to export it. Without US military spending Connecticut would lose easily tens of thousands of jobs.
The other irony within your argument is that in Prior discussions when I brought up public purchasing the responses to look at the capital region Council on governments group purchasing. Well obviously if you want local control why do you have to go to group purchasing? The pure and simple answer is regardless of wealth if there's not enough volume the contractors are not going to respond.
I want CT to do well and to develop but if we keep on having people act as if everything has to be done locally and there's really nothing there to lead it then it's going to continue to lose population and business. Is Lamont a good Governor? Obviously he's better than Malloy but almost anybody would be better than him.
70% the US economy is based on consumer spending. If retail has declined and Health Care is pretty much everywhere then what industries are going to guide the area in the future? It's pretty hard to have a strong State based on a few a rich towns that think they're the most popular kids at school. State and local governments can create incentives for growth and development but if it's not allowed to happen because they think that sounds can just do the best well that doesn't always work. Even in some of the most affluent communities in Massachusetts the community preservation act has done tremendous work.
Basically what I'm getting at is that the needs to be some sustainability. Children will grow up they go to high school may be a higher ed but what's going to keep them here. If they graduate in another area what's going to take them to come back this year and what's their waiting for. If they're not going to hire Ed is there enough for vocational training or is there enough in business support to start a business?
This is your opinion. We get it you love Massachusetts but I do not agree that Connecticut should or has blindly followed what Massachusetts does. There is no doubt that Massachusetts is and pretty much always has been a progressive state and that Connecticut is more cautious when adopting progressive things. I would much rather Connecticut keep its cautious approach to change and pick and choose what it implements.
The LAST thing Connecticut needs is a school building authority. As I have stated before, it is rare that a large state run authorities meet the specialized needs of the community. Just look at state housing authorities (even in Massachusetts) and their long track record of providing poor design and quality in favor of saving money. Sorry but the answer is NO. Again local rule and involvement gives communities the best buildings that meets their needs within the budget the community sets. Jay
Exactly and CT does certainly have some good "firsts" as well. One being allowing free phone calls for those incarcerated, which is a good step to actually rehabilitating people and the legislature just recently passed a five-year urban investment initiative that's targeted and will improve investment and quality of life in our cities. This is the exact opposite of what you see in many states where they try to take all the money from urban hubs, but not reinvest anything substantial back into it.
It's a pastime for some MA boosters to bash CT. To me, it's just a sign of the inferiority complex some MA folks have towards NY/NYC and they're just using CT bashing as a proxy.
Exactly and CT does certainly have some good "firsts" as well. One being allowing free phone calls for those incarcerated, which is a good step to actually rehabilitating people and the legislature just recently passed a five-year urban investment initiative that's targeted and will improve investment and quality of life in our cities. This is the exact opposite of what you see in many states where they try to take all the money from urban hubs, but not reinvest anything substantial back into it.
It's a pastime for some MA boosters to bash CT. To me, it's just a sign of the inferiority complex some MA folks have towards NY/NYC and they're just using CT bashing as a proxy.
Exactly and CT does certainly have some good "firsts" as well. One being allowing free phone calls for those incarcerated, which is a good step to actually rehabilitating people and the legislature just recently passed a five-year urban investment initiative that's targeted and will improve investment and quality of life in our cities. This is the exact opposite of what you see in many states where they try to take all the money from urban hubs, but not reinvest anything substantial back into it.
It's a pastime for some MA boosters to bash CT. To me, it's just a sign of the inferiority complex some MA folks have towards NY/NYC and they're just using CT bashing as a proxy.
Free phone calls for those in prison doesn't exactly line up with slavery, same sex marriage, healthcare etc. I've heard the argument and agree but mass is already doing a bit of it as well https://www.wbur.org/radioboston/202...e-incarcerated
it's not a pasttime nor a inferiority complex. I grew up in Mass and bought a house in CT. I bought it to be closer to my girlfriend and frankly it was cheap. Springfield Ma cost much more than Windham and Tolland county. I love NYC and NY (I like Lake George and Hudson..Albany is really weird). Canada can be argued to be a hybrid between the USA and UK. CT is kinda a hybrid of Mass and NY.
My opinion? The fact of the matter is no matter where you are throughout the United States most local elections are people running unopposed. I'm not going to get into some Republican or Democratic issue. When the issues are local it's issue-based and should not be party-based. That by itself is also another issue in Connecticut where you have people with jobs that are reserved for political parties like Tom Clark's. If you look at other states they don't openly say all the time at their Democrat or Republican.
What are you talkin about when you say specialized needs of the community? You do understand that buildings as identity are governed by the building code, the house of code and the fire code. These are all state issued. If a local community wants to have more stringent standards that's fine but they can't have lower standards in the state.
The cautious approach simply shows that it's timid and simply doesn't really have the Integrity of putting skin in the game. Example in 2002 in Massachusetts got rid of blue laws for the sale of alcohol on Sundays Connecticut didn't follow through with that for another 10 years. There were no real negative repercussions of selling alcohol on Sundays.
You haven't sighted actual specifics of why you think the way it is. For example of a Housing Authority receives Federal funding of course they're going to have a say in terms of the spending of it. You can't have this both ways. You can't say that you want Connecticut to have all this local control and then the second you do grab state or federal dollars that somehow they should ignore it? You have to realize much of the state is still relying on the federal government. Without the defense department how much of Connecticut would be shut down. If electric boat wasn't selling boats the u.s. Navy who they sell them to exactly? If the F-35 shut down production there's no other entity that can buy those jet engines. You need to have approval from the state department and Department of Defense and probably the president himself in order to export it. Without US military spending Connecticut would lose easily tens of thousands of jobs.
The other irony within your argument is that in Prior discussions when I brought up public purchasing the responses to look at the capital region Council on governments group purchasing. Well obviously if you want local control why do you have to go to group purchasing? The pure and simple answer is regardless of wealth if there's not enough volume the contractors are not going to respond.
I want CT to do well and to develop but if we keep on having people act as if everything has to be done locally and there's really nothing there to lead it then it's going to continue to lose population and business. Is Lamont a good Governor? Obviously he's better than Malloy but almost anybody would be better than him.
70% the US economy is based on consumer spending. If retail has declined and Health Care is pretty much everywhere then what industries are going to guide the area in the future? It's pretty hard to have a strong State based on a few a rich towns that think they're the most popular kids at school. State and local governments can create incentives for growth and development but if it's not allowed to happen because they think that sounds can just do the best well that doesn't always work. Even in some of the most affluent communities in Massachusetts the community preservation act has done tremendous work.
Basically what I'm getting at is that the needs to be some sustainability. Children will grow up they go to high school may be a higher ed but what's going to keep them here. If they graduate in another area what's going to take them to come back this year and what's their waiting for. If they're not going to hire Ed is there enough for vocational training or is there enough in business support to start a business?
Most local elections are people running unopposed??? What are you talking about? Most elections here in Connecticut have at least two candidates, sometimes more. In fact I can’t think of one election that I’ve voted in where there was only one candidate. i never missed voting and I’ve been voting a long time. Maybe that happens in Massachusetts but I doubt it.
Yes, it’s your opinion and your opinion only. You moved to our state and have not stopped complaining about it. That’s fine but you need to realize that Massachusetts is not the beat all, end all of the world and that there are reasons our state is the way it is. It may be different from Massachusetts but that is not wrong, it’s just different. To think otherwise is pretty obnoxious and conceited.
You obviously have never been involved in planning and building of any project. Of course the local community has specialized needs. Building codes have nothing to do with building layouts, size, number of rooms and their uses, site conditions, etc. The options are endless. There is no “one size fits all” in building schools. Doing that gives you uninspired, uninteresting and likely less effective buildings. In Connecticut, local building committees work hard to plan a building to serve their community best. So you understand, building code sets the design standards to be used and the Connecticut Department of Education sets certain parameters that must be met. The committee selects and then works with an architect within those parameters to design and build a building that meets the community needs. It has worked VERY well here for decades. There’s no need to change it.
I used public housing as an example of why the standardized design process a State Building Authority does not work well. This approach has led to some of the ugliest and least liked buildings in the world. Do you think the bland uninspired buildings of the Riverview Project in Springfield are nice? It is similar to scores of failed public housing projects across the state and country and has LONG been admonished as how to NOT do public buildings. As I said a State Building Authority could lead to more of that and no one wants that no matter how much money it saves.
I also don’t know why you think Connecticut’s economy is bad. The facts show otherwise. We aren’t in the Top 5 in Gross Domestic Product per capita for no reason you know. That says a LOT for the strength of our economy and most states would love to have that position. You obviously buy into all the negative media coverage our state gets but as I pointed out here ALL the time, it’s just a lot of clickbait journalism designed to pander to those that are jealous of our state’s affluence. Is there room for improvement? Of course there is but criticism should be constructive and not just random pot shots taken without just cause and purpose. Jay
Most local elections are people running unopposed??? What are you talking about? Most elections here in Connecticut have at least two candidates, sometimes more. In fact I can’t think of one election that I’ve voted in where there was only one candidate. i never missed voting and I’ve been voting a long time. Maybe that happens in Massachusetts but I doubt it.
Yes, it’s your opinion and your opinion only. You moved to our state and have not stopped complaining about it. That’s fine but you need to realize that Massachusetts is not the beat all, end all of the world and that there are reasons our state is the way it is. It may be different from Massachusetts but that is not wrong, it’s just different. To think otherwise is pretty obnoxious and conceited.
You obviously have never been involved in planning and building of any project. Of course the local community has specialized needs. Building codes have nothing to do with building layouts, size, number of rooms and their uses, site conditions, etc. The options are endless. There is no “one size fits all” in building schools. Doing that gives you uninspired, uninteresting and likely less effective buildings. In Connecticut, local building committees work hard to plan a building to serve their community best. So you understand, building code sets the design standards to be used and the Connecticut Department of Education sets certain parameters that must be met. The committee selects and then works with an architect within those parameters to design and build a building that meets the community needs. It has worked VERY well here for decades. There’s no need to change it.
I used public housing as an example of why the standardized design process a State Building Authority does not work well. This approach has led to some of the ugliest and least liked buildings in the world. Do you think the bland uninspired buildings of the Riverview Project in Springfield are nice? It is similar to scores of failed public housing projects across the state and country and has LONG been admonished as how to NOT do public buildings. As I said a State Building Authority could lead to more of that and no one wants that no matter how much money it saves.
I also don’t know why you think Connecticut’s economy is bad. The facts show otherwise. We aren’t in the Top 5 in Gross Domestic Product per capita for no reason you know. That says a LOT for the strength of our economy and most states would love to have that position. You obviously buy into all the negative media coverage our state gets but as I pointed out here ALL the time, it’s just a lot of clickbait journalism designed to pander to those that are jealous of our state’s affluence. Is there room for improvement? Of course there is but criticism should be constructive and not just random pot shots taken without just cause and purpose. Jay
"Every two years, Connecticut has the chance to refresh the General Assembly with new faces and innovative thinking. After this year's arduous legislative session, and with the state's gloomy financial forecast, the need for serious challenges to established thinking is clear.
What a shame, then, that more than 25 percent of the House seats will go unchallenged by a major-party candidate, along with four seats in the Senate.
When Democrats and Republicans selected their candidates in local nominating contests earlier this year, for 39 of the House district races, only one party put forth a candidate. Twenty-three Republicans will run unopposed by a Democrat, and 16 Democrats will run unopposed by a Republican, nearly all of them incumbents, according to preliminary information from the secretary of the state's office."
So much for that statement of yours of constant competition. Solid republican seats, solid democratic seats. Usually they call that collusion.
building codes have nothing to do with layouts? Uh fire escapes and exits for starters. Remember the station nightclub fire? Architects still have to be hired, not just have a volunteer and frankly they are more apt to go to larger communities or the state rather than small towns. Yes I have been in project management and actually there is a new community center that just passed, granted it took about 15 years in Mass. There were interruptions with school needs and covid.
You keep repeating yourself and yet you don't have links anything GDP per capita frankly isn't what people normally talk about as part of office parlance. Mass is listed as #1 but frankly I could care less. NY is #2 so of course being surrounded by #1 and #2 you are apt to have some rub off of you. If you took CT and made it and island do you honestly think it would have the same GDP levels without NY and Ma? Of course not. It's like the youngest of a family that gets hand me downs and thinks its due to their own actions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...GDP_per_capita
Yeah riverview looks bland but that isn't the point. You ignored Central street which also was publicly assisted for housing. https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0980...7i16384!8i8192
2007 has a huge ugly boarded up building. 2011 tornado so much was destroyed. 2015 new houses made and 2019 looks pretty normalized now. https://www.google.com/maps/@42.0973...7i16384!8i8192
Same thing across the street. Ugly large building, tornado, new houses made. I'm not saying it all ends up this way but I wouldn't assume that every public building made by a state or federal government is somehow ugly for housing or business. Personally the worst I think is Boston City hall.
You cannot realistically maintain an economy without a growing population, just ask Russia and rest of the former CIS. Go to upstate Maine or the Berkshires. Flat populations can be ok but it still ages out. What an economy works on is expanding opportunity. The "firsts" tend to drive an economy. First degree, first kid, first apartment, first car, first house etc. The higher the price something is the fewer the buyers will seek it. I'm not advocating for rock bottom but there comes a point. More affluent people have fewer kids and if there's no immigration on top of that where do the new customers come from? Of course a business can sell online no argument there. Isn't it ironic that there's a whole foods for Evergreen Walk (40% vacancy) given that it's owned by Amazon which probably put those retailers out of business to begin with?
Then you have East Windsor that asked for a mere 3 million a year and was denied. So the tribes get sports gambling and they get..no financial compensation for four years of waiting and then have to wait ten years before this prime real estate can be redeveloped for *anything* else... It's always easier to redevelop rather than develop. There were no environmental issues so what' the point of saying land can't be developed for a decade? Put it on the tax rolls so they make revenue. https://www.journalinquirer.com/poli...a9b02cc40.html
You still haven't said specialized needs. If you mean a historical district that has to be actually established in a historical zone and hopefully funded. You can have businesses in a historical area, just establish form based code..pretty simple. If you want to preserve a historical look you can't look any further than form based code. If looks are what you really care about more than anything else by all means go for it. Of course there's going to be site plan review but anything in zoning is going to involve some form of basic compliance. Unless you spot zoned an industry (which is illegal) a business can usually get an approval to operate. You can't act as your own architect and you aren't going to take some scribbles from a committee (or circles from the Hudsucker Proxy)
Exactly and CT does certainly have some good "firsts" as well. One being allowing free phone calls for those incarcerated, which is a good step to actually rehabilitating people and the legislature just recently passed a five-year urban investment initiative that's targeted and will improve investment and quality of life in our cities. This is the exact opposite of what you see in many states where they try to take all the money from urban hubs, but not reinvest anything substantial back into it.
It's a pastime for some MA boosters to bash CT. To me, it's just a sign of the inferiority complex some MA folks have towards NY/NYC and they're just using CT bashing as a proxy.
Comparing a free phone call for a felon to equal rights for all is appalling.
Comparing a free phone call for a felon to equal rights for all is appalling.
Amen. I wonder how many calls will be made involving criminal activity.
It is true most do not become rehabilitated, but IMO it is because most were simply bad seeds, destined for a life of crime. Our best recourse is to simply keep those not able to be rehabilitated behind bars, as long as legally possible.
Amen. I wonder how many calls will be made involving criminal activity.
It is true most do not become rehabilitated, but IMO it is because most were simply bad seeds, destined for a life of crime. Our best recourse is to simply keep those not able to be rehabilitated behind bars, as long as legally possible.
Thats not factually true. Between you and kidyankee and a few others, why continue to comment on the CT thread if all you do is nitpick and complain about this state. Back to the topic, the fundamentals of the CT economy are strong as borne out by the data. Hopefully, there's another post about economic development so we can cut through the unsubstantiated negative non sense on this thread.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
