Think. Plan. Do.

Malloy Looks to Complete Route 11

2011-01-29T10:43:00.001-05:00

The Day - Malloy looking to put Route 11 on road to completion | News from southeastern Connecticut

The New London Day's new political reporter, Matthew Collette, who succeeds Ted Mann, reports that the Route 11 project appears to be moving toward the front burner.

As a general principle, advocates for sustainability take the position that spending our exceedingly limited funds on building new roads is exactly the wrong route to a sustainable, competitive green economy. Governor Malloy has tended to subscribe to this notion.

In the business world, we talk about "making the business case" for doing project x, y or z. As a parallel, what's the sustainability business case for proceeding with expanding Route 11? Are decision makers use a common set of criteria to make go/no-go decisions on transportation projects? If so, what are they?

Here are some criteria by which we might evaluate projects going forward. Will the project:

Resolve safety problems?
Create viable alternatives to driving?
Reduce VMT (vehicle miles traveled)?
Reduce greenhouse gas pollution?
Discourage sprawl?
Avoid runoff pollution?
Induce transit-oriented development?
Create long-term good, green jobs?
Create some other quantifiable benefit that exceeds that cost?

Transportation for America has a good set of similar performance objectives here. The site at http://www.nycroads.com/roads/CT-11/ makes for interesting reading, discussing the Route 11 Greenway concept that was funded in 2003.

What do you think? What's the sustainability business case for expanding Route 11?

Why Not? Greater Hartford as Mecca for Outdoor [Muscle-Powered] Sports Enthusiasts

2011-01-24T12:38:00.005-05:00

I guess it’s so cold that even my camera turned blue. But that hasn’t stopped me, or my beloved pooch, from getting out and enjoying the snow. With a two-foot snow base, you’d think we were in New England. Oh wait! We are!

Whatever the season, I spend a lot of time on the trails around my home in West Hartford. I’ve probably been out on my XC skis or snowshoes at least a dozen days since Christmas, including an 8 miler to Heublein Tower yesterday.

While schussing along, it occurred to me that Greater Hartford has a really good thing going here.

What if, as The Courant has suggested, we did form a regional park and recreation management organization?

What if it not only helped maintain our vast trail network, but actually groomed the trails for XC skiers? Apparently it’s commonplace in Canada for municipal parks to be groomed for skiing.

And what if GHPR (Greater Hartford Parks & Recreation) operated a small fleet of snowmobile groomers - fueled by used vegetable oil?! Is it possible?

What if, instead of plowing the 3.2 mile roadway around the West Hartford reservoir completely bare, we used it for a skate skiing invitational?

Would city dwellers from Boston or New York or Providence go for a weekend of skiing, snowshoeing or hiking on our trails?

Could we entice visitors to finish off a good day on the trails with a visit to our restaurants, brew pubs or music venues? Could it encourage a little B&B sector? Could we require modestly-priced trail tickets?

I know this is the best snow season in about a decade, but we should be prepared to capitalize on it when we get it. And, besides, this idea isn’t limited to winter sports. We’d just want to make sure our trails don’t get loved to death.

Anybody with me on this?

Coming up next: Bringing an Iron Horse music and family pub concept to West Hartford.

Let the Frenzy Begin : Lieberman Not to Run for Re-Election

2011-01-18T21:00:00.000-05:00

The New York Times has reported that Connecticut senator Joe Lieberman has decided against running for a fifth term.

Cue: frenzy on the political front.

Linda McMahon is expected to resurrect her failed campaign of 2010. Susan Bysiewicz, who went from promising gubernatorial candidate to being forced to bow out of the race for attorney general, says she plans to run for the senate seat. And rumors are building about interest in the senate seat on the part of Congressmen Chris Murphy and Joe Courtney.

More at: Lieberman Will Not Run For Re-Election - NYTimes.com

Joan McDonald Named By Governor Andrew Cuomo As Next State Transportation Commissioner In New York State - Capitol Watch

2011-01-14T22:52:00.000-05:00

Joan McDonald Named By Governor Andrew Cuomo As Next State Transportation Commissioner In New York State - Capitol Watch

Now there's some news.

Chris Keating reports for the Courant... More details here and at at http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20110114/FREE/110119899

Malloy Now Leads by 4242 Votes

2010-11-04T10:02:00.001-05:00

With New Haven votes apparently corrected and with the addition of the votes from Windsor Locks’ 2nd precinct, Malloy now appears to be leading Foley by 4242 votes.

Votes from 10 precincts in Bridgeport are still unreported.

The AP reports a total of 559,609 votes cast for Malloy, 555,369 for Foley, and 17,315 for Independent candidate Tom Marsh.

The Hartford Courant reports that Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz will report official vote counts at noon today.

Secretary of the State Reports Unofficial Malloy Win by 3100 votes

2010-11-03T11:45:00.001-05:00

CT News Junkie reporter and tech queen Christine Stuart rocks. Thanks to her Ustream broadcast from her iPhone I was able to watch a bit of SOTS Bysiewicz’s press conference going over the status of last night’s vote count.

Pretty sure I got this right: SOTS said Malloy appears to have won by 3103 votes at this point.

Besides Bridgeport, New Haven votes and those from a few smaller towns had not been reported until late this morning, accounting for the jump in the Malloy column.

Stay tuned. It’s not over till it’s over.

Connecticut Needs a Governor Who Can Hit the Ground Running– and It’s Malloy

2010-11-01T07:50:00.001-05:00

Running a government in a democracy may be the ultimate test of leadership.

Unlike a private sector CEO, whose company’s shareholders have a single goal (profits), a governor must balance the diverse and competing interests of the state’s shareholders (voters and other residents). And unlike a CEO, who can hire and fire, a governor can’t fire the legislature; he or she needs work with them if the business of government is to get done. It’s naive for anyone to think that private sector management skills are all one needs to be effective in government. Leading in government is harder than that.

Connecticut needs a governor who already knows his way around state and local government and can hit the ground running. After serving as Stamford’s mayor for 14 years, Dan Malloy earned the endorsement he got from that city’s newspaper. As a former prosecutor, Malloy is tough on crime. As a product of the working middle class, he knows how much we need good jobs that pay a living wage. Malloy believes, as I do, that we must reduce our energy costs and move to a clean energy economy; that a rigorous education and innovation are essential to competing in the 21st century economy; that government must develop—and stick to—a coherent plan with measurable goals and be accountable and transparent. Malloy has an unmistakable fire in his belly to turn this state around and make a difference.

While I like Tom Foley, he’s not ready for the job he campaigns for. The stakes are too high to elect a governor who doesn’t already understand the intricacies of city-state relationships and how to navigate the complexities of our messy representative democracy.

I'm currently registered as a Republican, but Dan Malloy has my vote. Connecticut needs the kind of governor Malloy will be.

Sign the Energy Bill, Governor Rell!

2010-05-12T21:14:00.000-05:00

West Hartford Seeks Savings With New 'Energy Plan' -- Courant.com

2009-03-16T20:02:00.004-05:00

The Courant's Josh Kovner reports on West Hartford's new Energy Plan, the product of a small group of dedicated and knowledgeable volunteers:

WEST HARTFORD —

This isn't about dimming the lights.

Well, it is — but the energy plan passed last week by the town council seeks to go a lot further — millions of dollars in savings further. The broad conservation scheme, backed by a task force of volunteers, will chase large reductions in energy bills for every town building and structure, outdoor fixture and vehicle. Right now, the town's energy bill is more than $16 million a year.

Here's an example of how the 40-page plan, available on the town's website, lays out a problem and incremental solutions:

The gasoline tab for the town's 300 vehicles was $670,000 last year. The plan is to reduce fuel usage by about 5 percent this year and next ($68,000 in savings) and by 10 percent in 2011. The goal, said council member Tim Brennan, is for new vehicles to have better gas mileage than those they replace. Read more...

Check out the town's new Energy Plan here.

"Never underestimate the power of a small group of people to change the world. In fact it’s the only way it ever has."
– Margaret Mead

Attractive Nuisance: Reader Poll on Luring Film Studio to CT with Tax Credits

2009-02-25T16:19:00.002-05:00

Today’s Hartford Business Journal reader poll asks, “Should the state use tax credits to lure a $90 million film studio to South Windsor?” 83% of respondents answered yes.

This of course illustrates the trouble with polls and relying on them.

You have to wonder how those 83% decided it would be a good idea for the state to use tax credits to lure a film studio to South Windsor. Maybe they know something the rest of us don’t, but here are a few questions that need to be answered in order to offer an intelligent response:

What kind of tax credits are we talking about?
How much revenue would the state forego with those credits?
What does a “$90 million film studio mean?” Is that their annual net income? Their net worth?
Where are they moving from - Norwalk? (You laugh; yet we awarded tax credits for an intrastate corporate move before…)
How exactly would the film studio benefit Connecticut? Are they going to hire new employees? How many? Would they be jobs that pay well? Does the studio offer insurance, or do they use a Wal-Mart type of arrangement? Will their staff live here and pay income tax? Will the studio actually film here, so we’d benefit from the all the subsidiary economic activity associated with filming and film crews and the like? Or are we just making ourselves a tax shelter state for the film industry?
Would the state make the credits conditional on anything, like hiring x number of new employees or filming x number of movies in Connecticut over a given time span?

Without doing the homework and putting out answers to questions like these out there, polls are nothing more than an attractive nuisance. I’d rather read a well-researched, well-written story than an empty-headed poll any day, wouldn’t you?

Rell’s Budget Address: B+ for Content

2009-02-04T16:17:00.006-05:00

Rell’s opening salvo in Connecticut’s budget balancing misery was surprisingly good. I almost gave her “A” for content, but then realized that was only because my expectations were not so high.

On delivery, I say “eh.” All the talk about “we are Connecticut” took me back to my cheerleading days. And I wasn’t so interested in hearing repeatedly how hard she worked on the budget. Yes, being Governor is a hard job.

Here’s what I liked:

No cuts to Educational Cost Sharing grants. Good idea.
Incentives for regional cooperation. Hallelujah. 169 little fiefdoms all doing the same thing is an absolute embarrassment.
Agency consolidations (I think). In principle, I agree that we have too many little economic development type organizations scattered all over. They really ought to be under one umbrella, and in one location (what about a real campus of government agencies in Hartford, like Mass does it in Boston). However, consolidation is one thing David Osborne (Reinventing Government, performance based budgeting expert) specifically advised against in troubled economic times. Count on turf battles and more bureaucracy, not less.
Accountability Office within OPM (I think). I’m all for accountability. Just put someone in charge who’s hardnosed, means business and takes no prisoners, and give the office some teeth. I had hoped, naively perhaps, that the governor and her chief of staff were holding their appointees accountable all along.
Probate court reorganization. Yes. Long overdue.
CT Conservation Corps – another good idea. Heaven knows there’s much work to be done. Let’s hear the details.
Green jobs as economic engine. You bet. It’s coming. Let’s be at the front of the line to capitalize on it.

Here’s what I take issue with:

Suspending binding arbitration agreements for two years. Not a good idea to thumb your nose at arbitrated settlements. Trust is the coin of the realm. If that’s how it’s going to be, why would anyone agree to arbitrate? This would just exacerbate litigiousness. Which is bad. Very bad.
Raiding designated funds to cover operating expenses. Again, trust is the coin of the realm. Another reason why no one trusts state government. At least the RGGI funds dedicated to conservation seem to have been spared.
Cutting half the funding for energy conservation. Bad. Very bad. And not smart either. Because energy conservation and the savings therefrom are an economic stimulus in themselves. (Please check out “How California's Green Push Will Boost Economy” and Energy Efficiency, Innovation & Job Creation in California.) This is not rocket science. If we save money on energy, we have more to spend on other stuff. Plus – if we’re going to train a green workforce, wouldn’t it be a good idea to support the industries that will employ them? Otherwise, we’ll just train a ready-to-export green workforce. We already do enough of that sort of thing. We ought to be looking at Germany and Japan for lessons in how government policy can drive a green economy.

All this is just the opening salvo. But as the Governor spoke, I started getting pretty excited about all the positive change that we could be on the brink of. So maybe she deserves better than a C on delivery after all. Carpe diem!

Wyman's Fiscal Policy Workgroup - Take A Good Idea One Step Further

2009-02-04T08:00:00.001-05:00

Comptroller Nancy Wyman’s idea to form a fiscal policy workgroup of noted economists to address our current budget and revenue challenges is a good one. We should take it one step further and make the initiative as transparent to the public as possible.

Wouldn’t it be a breath of fresh air if Wyman created a section on the Comptroller’s website dedicated to this workgroup’s activities? The information that should be available for public viewing should include:

• who’s on the workgroup, and their credentials
• what the group is expected to accomplish, and by when
• meeting agendas
• meeting minutes
• reports
• the cost-benefit analysis for any proposals
• how proposals align with David Osborn’s Reinventing Government and performance based budgeting recommendations summarized at the LOB on 2/2 and at CERC’s 2008 annual conference.

One would expect that all the above documentation is going to be prepared in electronic documents anyway, so posting it to the website would not present a burden. The Comptroller might also set up an email subscription feature or blog so readers could subscribe for announcements of activities and the release of information.

The cost of the taking these measures is low, but the benefits, in terms of public trust, would be enormous. Trust, they say, is the coin of the realm.

Analyze Benefits, Not Just Costs, in Prioritizing Shovel Ready Projects

2009-01-30T10:44:00.001-05:00

We need an intellectually disciplined, transparent system for prioritizing our spending. And that means conducting a rigorous cost-benefit analysis that prioritizes projects according to a set of consistent, consolidated criteria.

Everybody knows that federal stimulus discussions have included talk about putting money into “shovel ready” infrastructure projects that could put people to work quickly. That’s fine – as long as those shovel ready projects don’t just dig us deeper into the hole we’re already in, perpetuating our reliance on petroleum and continuing to create greenhouse gases. As in spending the money on roads at the expense of smarter, more efficient, and cleaner systems for moving people and goods from place to place.

So yesterday’s call at the capitol for investing in a well-planned system of walkways, bus service and passenger rail was right on the mark. (See Connecticut Legislators Told To Focus On Mass Transit.) Transportation advocates are right: we do need to prioritize among the projects that get funded.

Of course it’s appropriate to call for the Governor, DOT Commissioner Marie, and legislators to prioritize funding for transportation projects and be transparent about it. That’s just fundamental good government. But let’s not stop there. We need to take the next step and tell those folks how we want to see the projects prioritized.

I’m no transportation expert, but I’ll take a stab at it to get the discussion going. In a cost-benefit analysis, we might evaluate a project’s benefits by asking:

Does it enhance safety?
Would it reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT)?
Does it promote walking? Cycling? Bus or train travel?
Does it connect transportation alternatives?
Does it promote transportation oriented development in a smart location?
Will it put Connecticut residents to work? How many? For how long? At what income level?
Is there a feasible plan to cover its operational costs?

The more “yes-es” a project scores, and the degree to which it would accomplish those goals, the stronger the business case would be for going forward with a project. Now that would be good, transparent government.

Infrastructure, but no Roadmap

2008-12-11T22:55:00.001-05:00

Today's "Where We Live" show on 90.5 WNPR tackled an excellent topic: investing in infrastructure. It included John Dankosky's interview with Governor Rell. (Click here to listen.)

What it all boils down to is "are we trying so hard to show that we're responding to the current economic crisis that we're not thinking it through according to a smart, sustainable plan for the long term?"

Plans a Plenty: But Do We Follow Them? Are They Consistent?
We have a state Plan of Conservation & Development. We have plans from the Transportation Strategy Board. We have a Climate Change Action Plan. We have blue ribbon recommendations on smart growth and property tax reform. We have (had?) a Governor's Competitiveness Council. We have economic competitiveness recommendations in the Partnership for Growth 1 report. And again in the Partnership for Growth 2 report.

We're Responsible.
We have an Office of Responsible Development. We also have an Office of Responsible Growth. Last year the Responsible Growth Task Force issued some pretty good recommendations that would create an overarching set of principles that would guide our economic development patterns. They were included in a bill in the 2008 legislative session that did not pass. How about an Office of Responsible Implementation?

And What About That Economic Strategic Plan?
One thing that did pass was legislation calling for a statewide economic strategic plan to be submitted to the Governor by July 2009. The status of that plan is unclear. But the need for it is not. Meanwhile, a smart growth work group is reportedly at work at the legislature devising another set of plans.

Rebuilding our infrastructure is probably a very good idea, but it depends partly on how you define “infrastructure.” Deciding to invest in projects that are “shovel ready” may sound good at first, but let’s be a little more discerning in our thinking. Given the length of time it takes for a Connecticut project to be “shovel ready”, there’s a good chance it was designed for the old paradigm of cheap oil and a climate that was presumed to be stable.

If You Don't Know Where You're Going, You Might End Up Somewhere Else. (Is that what just happened?)
How do we know that any federal money that might come our way isn't going toward projects that not only don’t prepare Connecticut for the new economy, but set us even further back? As in more reliant on highways when we've got to become much less so? What are the consistent set of criteria we're going to use for deciding what the state invests in? In the interest of transparency in government, Governor, show us: put those criteria and guiding principles up on your website.

One Vision. One Plan. And not to be difficult, but could we please get them pretty soon?
It’s generally a good idea to invest in infrastructure, but please, let’s make sure we do it with some semblance of a roadmap. If there is one, show us, but I don’t think there is. We have a lot of good plans to work with, but now it's time for Connecticut to settle on one vision and one plan for our economic renewal, and sustainability must be at their core. Time’s a wastin’.

P3 TV: News You Can Use

2008-02-12T17:46:00.005-05:00

Without weighing in on the merits of the Live Smart Connecticut Plan (I haven't seen it yet), Don Williams' call for municipal collaboration in his February 10 Courant op-ed is on the mark (Residents Deserve Fast Relief -- Courant.com).

For 169 separate towns to each provide their own separate services and each run their own separate infrastructures is an inefficient indulgence we can no longer afford. It is obvious to pretty much everyone that this is no way to succeed in the 21st century global economy.

Williams' op-ed reprises a municipal collaboration theme that Simsbury First Selectwoman Mary Glassman championed in her November 2007 op-ed (excerpted here), and which was the subject of the Capital Region Partnership's series on "People, Prosperity & Place" series of panel discussions.

Two of those panel discussions are now available for online viewing. The West Hartford program featured Duby McDowell moderating, with Tom Phillips on people, Barry Feldman on place, and UConn economist Fred Carstensen on prosperity. The Hartford panel featured Oz Greibel moderating, with Jim Willingham on people, Tim Abbott on place, and CERC economist Jeff Blodgett on prosperity. Watch them on p3 TV at www.peopleprosperityplace.org > watch.

Will America Turn on Michelle?

2008-01-31T10:40:00.001-05:00

I’m an Independent voter still struggling with which party to register with and which candidate to vote for in Connecticut’s upcoming primary.

But as John McCain pulls ahead in the race for the Republican candidate for president, I can’t help noticing that the anti-Hillary talk seems to be cranking up. It’s being said on many fronts that if she becomes the Democratic nominee, Republicans’ animosity toward her will help them unite their many factions.

What is it, really, that’s behind the intense animosity that some people harbor toward Hillary?

The Hillary-haters seem to deride her for her ambition. What – the men the race aren’t ambitious? As if ambition and drive are a bad thing. Would we prefer candidates who are aimless instead?

It is interesting that Republican candidates’ spouses are taking such a low profile in the campaigns. I’ve seen Cindy McCain stand by her man in TV news clips, but I had to dig a little to find out that she’s had a special ed teaching career and founded the American Voluntary Medical Team. The most I’ve heard about Ann Romney is that she MS. I had to dig to find a 2006 the Boston Globe article that said that “though largely invisible back home in Massachusetts, [she] is winning praise as a warm and witty sidekick.” I wonder if this says anything about the role that some Republicans have in mind for women generally.

I'm concerned that perhaps the animosity toward Hillary has less to do with her, and more to do with what she represents. The very things that make her competent seem to be the things she’s disliked for. Could it be that even in 21^st century America, the land of purported opportunity, there’s a sizeable part of the population that is very uncomfortable with smart, well-educated, driven, strong and capable women as leaders? I hope not, and I’d love to be proven wrong.

So it’s going to be really interesting to watch the dynamic that plays out as Michelle Obama, the Princeton- and Harvard-educated lawyer and wife of Barack, begins to take a higher profile in his campaign. You think she’s going to want to put her smarts and savvy and professional drive on pause if he’s elected? Will America turn on Michelle, too?

- - - - -

Post Script: Apparently Nicholas Kristof was on a similar wavelength, writing in his op-ed in the Sunday New York Times for February 10, 2008 ("When Women Rule"), that:

The broader conundrum is that for women, but not for men, there is a tradeoff in qualities associated with top leadership. A woman can be perceived as competent or as likable, but not both.

Clean Energy: Get with the Program, Connecticut!

2007-07-13T12:04:00.000-05:00

West Hartford Leads State in Clean Energy Signups

According to the latest data from the Connecticut Clean Energy Fund, West Hartford is leading all other Connecticut towns in clean energy signups, with 905 by the end of May. The other top ten towns for clean energy sign ups are New Haven (865), Fairfield (486), Hamden (371), Glastonbury (362), Branford (317), Middletown (315), Stamford (290), Mansfield (279), and Manchester (268).

In terms of household participation in the clean energy program, Norfolk leads the way at a rate of 12.7%. The other top ten towns for household participation are Bethany (10.8%), Canaan and Portland (6.3%), Cornwall (6.1%), Lyme (5.6%), Mansfield, (5.0%), Chester (4.7%), West Hartford, Canton and Washington (3.6%), Essex (3.4%) and 10) Glastonbury, Ashford and Old Lyme (2.8%).

Haven’t signed up for clean energy yet? You’ve got plenty of company! Here’s what you need to know to make the switch:

You can get either 50% or 100% of your electricity from clean energy - approved renewable resources such as wind, small hydro and landfill gas - rather than from fossil fuels that contribute to global warming and climate change.
Choosing clean energy adds 1.1 cent per kilowatt hour to your electric bill.
If you’re a typical Connecticut household, using about 700 kilowatt hours of electricity per month, you’ll pay about $8 more a month if you choose the 100% option, or about $4 a month if you choose the 50% option.
You can sign up with either Sterling Planet (uses wind, small hydroelectric and landfill gas) or Community Energy (uses wind and small hydroelectric).

For more information on your clean energy options, go to http://www.ctcleanenergyoptions.com/options.htm.

To sign up now (do it! do it!), have a copy of your electric bill handy (you’ll need your account number), then go to http://www.ctcleanenergyoptions.com/now.htm.

By enrolling today, you are doing your part for a sustainable environment, a sustainable economy and energy security.

State's Got No Business Meddling With Local Taxes

2007-04-27T07:42:00.000-05:00

Today's Op Ed piece from Ralph Eno, First Selectman of Lyme, is a good read. Eno deserves credit not just for speaking up and backing up his arguments against Governor Rell's proposal to cap municipal property tax increases proposal, but especially for his decidely non-partisan examination of the merits of the proposal. Or in this case, demerits.

Nowhere in his essay does Eno stray from focusing on the proposal and its consequences into the childlike partisan name-calling that characterizes most elected officials' conduct. Good for him. Let's have more of it.

My reaction to the proposal was along the lines of Eno's. From a Management 101 perspective, the proposal for the state to impose limits on towns already limited ability to raise revenue struck me as misguided. If Rell's proposal were adopted, we'd have a textbook case of imposing responsibility without authority - a fundamental "don't" in management.

Cities and towns are "children" of the state, meaning all their powers, everything they do, must be enabled by state law. In Connecticut, state law limits rather narrowly the ways that towns can raise revenue to pay for its public schools and other services to residents. For the most part, towns get most of their revenue from property taxes.

Towns get money from the state too, but how much is always a big mystery every year. The uncertainty to which towns are held hostage by the state makes for a suboptimal planning process, to be sure.

Then there's the state's lousy track record for following through on the amounts it promises to towns. Take the school funding formula, for example: the state rarely, if ever, makes good on its promises to "pony up" the money it promises to each town for public education. Towns get stuck holding the bill. And what else can they do but cover the shortfall by increasing their residents' property taxes?

And then there's the matter of unfunded mandates - instructions from other levels of government to do certain things or to do things in a certain way. When the governmental body that issues those instructions fails to provide the money to cover the cost of following those instructions, we get unfunded mandates.

Unfunded mandates are a well utilized way for one level of government to pass the buck. It allow legislators to back proposals without having to commit political suicide by voting to raise the revenue [read: taxes] required to actually carry out those proposals. How convenient.

It's bad enough that the state severely constrains how towns may raise revenue while it simultaneously mandates that towns do the state's work. To then tighten the noose by telling towns how much they can raise their taxes, is just plain ludicrous. Backwards even.

People don't seem to realize that our dysfunctional state government, with all its childish partisan bickering and name calling and finger pointing, is the reason people in this state feel so squeezed.

But then, who is government? Government is a reflection of us. Unless we're all really paying attention and making our voices heard on matters like this, maybe we are all complicit in the charade.

Science Friday: Check it Out

2007-04-24T10:03:00.000-05:00

Last week while traveling in New York I picked up a terrific NPR program I’d never heard before: Science Friday. I heard some great discussions on solar and battery technology and climate change. The guests did an excellent job of explaining their expertise in a way that was easy to understand and interesting.

I don't think Science Friday is carried by any of the CT public radio stations or WFCR, but you can listen online or download podcasts from the archives. I downloaded a number of recent shows and listened while I worked out. I doubt it did much for my running pace, but it was a good way to listen. And how nice to avoid static and weak signal problems.

I especially enjoyed the show on Climate Action Day, featuring Bill McKibben (Middlebury College) and Chris Goodall of Oxford, UK.

See www.sciencefriday.com, and for archived downloads, see http://www.sciencefriday.com/pages/2007/

A Look in the Mirror

2007-04-18T10:19:00.000-05:00

Monday's shootings at Virginia Tech are a horrific tragedy. As a parent, my thoughts go to the parents of the victims, especially to the parents of slain students whose lives were just beginning.

Now we know that the student gunman was perceived by many, and for a long time, to be mentally unstable. Still though, we ask ourselves what could drive a person to do something so unthinkably heinous?

This event apparently simmered in my subconscious as I slept, because I woke up thinking it's not so surprising. I think it's a reflection of a society that is losing its way. We have become a society that tolerates violence and killing and hunting for fun and sport and watches it voyeuristically on the screen as entertainment.

I don't watch a lot of mainstream television, but when I do I am stunned at what's being aired in the name of entertainment. I don't go to the movies much anymore, and when I do it's usually to take my daughter to a kid flick. Even there the "coming attractions" previews are astonishingly, even sickingly, violent.

So let's see:

The killer obtained his guns legally. Guns may be purchased legally at a rate of one per month. According to an AFP article on Yahoo, "buying and owning a gun in Virginia does not require a permit, but without a gun permit only one handgun purchase per month is allowed, and there is no waiting period to acquire the gun." We call this gun control?
Guns n Ammo magazine is still published monthly. Fabulous.
For a time, some genius had a website where you could actually engage in virtual "hunting." I think the site has been shut down, but viewers were able to watch their prey through a web camera mounted to the scope of a gun and send a signal to shoot by computer. Do these people not have anything better and more constructive to do with their time?
And of course we have the fenced in game preserves where the rich can have fun plying their shooting skills and entertain themselves by killing trophy animals that have no chance to escape.

If the mindset that purveys and consumes these sorts of things is more or less tolerated, if not encouraged, by mainstream society, should we really be surprised that an unstable, mentally ill person who feels oppressed might encage human beings and take a gun to them?

This is global warming.

2007-04-18T10:04:00.000-05:00

I drove between Pennsylvania to Connecticut yesterday so my daughter could visit with grandparents, of whom she is most fond, over spring break. (I wish mass transit were a feasible, affordable option, but I'll save that for another post.)

While I contributed to global warming myself with all that driving, I was struck by two things: the extent of the flooding I saw from the week's storms, and the endlessness of development in so many places along the way.

Many of us haven't yet paused to consider the immediate ramifications of global warming and the turbulent, extreme weather patterns it spawns. I wonder if that's true for the folks in Simsbury and Granby and around the Passaic River in New Jersey.

Water in your basement is bad news, of course. But what when your backyard becomes a pond? And when the water level in the parking lot at your local shopping centers is up to the top of the tires of the tractor trailer truck that didn't leave in time? And when those stores can't open? And when their merchandise and equipment are likely flooded from the bottom up and the top down as water gushes in from poorly maintained flat roofs? And what when the water level rises to cover the tracks for the train you take to your job in the city? And when low lying roads and bridges are closed?

Elsewhere, drought in South Florida is shaping up as one of the worst. Water managers are apparently being "forced" to drain water from the Everglades, including conservation areas, to pump into drinking-water wells. Without emergency action, South Florida's drinking water could be poisoned by saltwater intrusion.

Then, there's the 65 tornados that occurred across five states on March 30, 2007. I don't recall seeing anything about this little tidbit in my local newspaper, but I did catch part of the story on National Public Radio. According to the National Weather Service, at least 65 tornadoes were reported in Oklahoma, Texas, Kansas, Colorado and Nebraska by late in the day on March 30. (I wonder why this didn't get more coverage. What do you think?)

Then, there's the opinion piece from last Sunday's Courant about the need for a real conversation on population. The author, a physician and retired Army colonel, introduces the idea of "overshoot." Overshoot, he explains, is when a species reproduces to a number that its environment can't sustain.

Are humans at that point? If not, might we be getting dangerously close? After all, at the end of the 19th century, the human population was 1.6 billion. It is now 6.5 billion. Another 2 Billion people are predicted worldwide by 2050. That's not so far off.

We are unwilling, the author writes, to see ourselves as subject to the same constraints as Earth's other inhabitants. Yet population is at the very heart of everything from your property taxes (yes - think about it) to traffic jams to sprawl to agriculture to global warming. It is a serious topic that we must start to think, and talk, about honestly.

91 mph?

2007-04-18T08:19:00.000-05:00

What in heaven's name were NJ Gov. Jon Corzine and his state trooper chauffeur thinking as they drove 91 mph on a busy highway en route to one of the Governor's engagements? That the law applied to everyone else but not to them?

People who drive like that are a menace on the roads, plain and simple. Are we so sure that it wasn't the Governor's own vehicle that caused the accident? And don't even get me started on the no seatbelt thing.

At what point do elected officials lose sufficient touch with reality that they think they are invincible and that the rules - of law, nature, physics, whatever - don't apply to them? I am genuinely intrigued with this question of psychology and human behavior.

The extent of Governor Corzine's injuries is alarming, but not surprising. I wish him a full and speedy recovery and look forward to his subsequent mea culpa and a new day where he leads by example.

Sustainable Development News & Resources

2007-01-24T21:59:00.000-05:00

Hi everyone - There's lots to cover this month, but I'm trying to keep coverage to a few manageable highlights and offer some interesting, useful news you might not come across elsewhere.

Be sure to mark your calendars for the January 30 Connecticut Summit on School Funding Reform at Central Connecticut State University, featuring national education funding specialist John L. Myers as keynote speaker, economists Jeff Blodgett and Fred Carstensen, as well as seven panelists from state and local government and the business sector. And be on the lookout for details on "People, Prosperity, and Place," a new regional collaboration initiative of the Capital Region Partnership and the Citizens Network of the Capital Region. As always, I hope you’ll find something here that’s interesting, inspiring and useful to your work.

Sustainable Development

Finding the Green in Building Renovation
Green building is catching on for new construction. Of the nearly 5000 buildings awaiting Green Building Council certification, about 90% are new construction. Apparently green renovation is slower to take hold. New York developer Jonathan Rose is looking to change that. The $100 million Rose Smart Growth Investment Fund focuses exclusively on acquiring existing properties in locations served by mass transit. The expectation is that the fund will make environmentally conscious improvements to the properties and hold them as long-term investments.

“Over the life of a building, more energy is consumed traveling to and from a building than is used by the building itself,” Mr. Rose said. “So location in urban areas with good mass transit is critical to reducing environmental impact. And when you pick transit-based urban sites, supply is already constrained. So the strategy is to hit a sweet spot of holistic development and economic return.” More

Recycling Needs A Pickup
Connecticut is going to have to almost double its current recycling rate of 30 percent just to keep up with increasing amounts of waste and changing lifestyles over the next 20 years. That ambitious goal is the cornerstone of a new Solid Waste Management Plan released by the state Department of Environmental Protection. More How is your town increasing recycling efforts?

Economic Development

Speed of Innovation in High Technology Firms: Geographic and Organizational Strategies
Competition in the high-tech sector is increasingly based on rapid innovation. The authors of this paper find that local amenities determine firm location - that is, "place" matters. On the other hand, relationships with suppliers and customers are the main determinants of innovation speed. More

Public Policy

Connecticut's Fiscal Capacity Ranks First Among States
A joint report by the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center and the New England Public Policy Center at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston finds that Connecticut ranks first in fiscal capacity compared to all other states. Fiscal capacity has to do with the relationship of the state’s capacity to raise revenue, the revenue it raises as a result of policy choices, and the states expenditure needs. A state's revenue capacity measures the resources its state and local governments can tap to finance public services. Revenue effort is the ratio of actual revenues to revenue capacity. Expenditure need is a measure of the cost of providing public services at an average level given the state’s characteristics.

States with high per capita income and high property values tend to have high revenue capacity. A state with low fiscal capacity has a relatively small revenue base, a relatively high need for expenditures, or, as is often the case, a combination of both.

New Hampshire, Delaware, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Nevada and New Jersey kept their position in the top ten states with the highest fiscal capacity. Connecticut ranks highest with a revenue capacity of $6,272 per person and a revenue capacity index of 135.

Report authors find little relation between the amount of federal aid states receive and their fiscal capacities. Differences in state revenue capacity and expenditure need might justify federal intervention in terms of equalizing grants. Indeed, the federal government may view supplementing revenues for states with low fiscal capacity as part of its redistributive role.

This analysis should provide an interesting perspective of Connecticut's budget situation. Earlier this month, State Comptroller Nancy Wyman said the projected state budget surplus has grown to $532.2 million and is expected to climb significantly higher over the next few months. The estimated $516.5 million surplus is based on a budget of $16.07 billion for fiscal 2007. The state ended the 2006 fiscal year with a $940.5 million surplus.

But is it really a "surplus" when we haven't fully funded so many things in keeping with what the laws require? Connecticut Data; Tax Policy Center Fiscal Disparities Page
Governors Collaborate on "Innovation America"
China overtook the U.S. in 2004 to become the leading exporter of information technology products. In 2005, only four American companies ranked among the top 10 recipients of patents granted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Finland, Israel, Japan, South Korea and Sweden each spend more on research and development as a share of GDP than the U.S.

Seeing the writing on the wall, the National Governors Association has formed a bipartisan Innovation America initiative, led by Governors. Janet Napolitano (AZ) and Tim Pawlenty (MN). "Working with the NGA Center for Best Practices, the task force will take the lead in developing strategies that drive innovation," said Gov. Pawlenty. "The work of this task force will be critical to ensuring every state—and our nation—is equipped to excel in the global economy."

The 17-member task force includes governors, business leaders and university presidents. The task force will develop strategies to create clusters of innovation and new approaches to math and science education for all students. The agenda includes discussions centered around the state innovation landscape, new approaches to K-12 science, technology, engineering and mathematics education and the role of postsecondary education as an engine of innovation. Key gubernatorial staff members will learn about the resources being developed through the initiative and begin framing an action plan for creating an "innovation environment" in each state. What's Connecticut's Innovation Environment? More
Commission on Education Finance Releases Report
The Governor's Commission on Education Finance has released its final report, calling for just over $1.2 billion in additional state education aid--$1.14 billion for education cost sharing and $60 million for other grants. More

Funding

EPA Smart Growth Implementation Assistance
EPA is offering direct technical assistance from national experts to communities and states that want to incorporate smart growth techniques in their development. This assistance from EPA is intended to help applicants overcome roadblocks by providing evaluation tools and expert analysis. Application deadline: March 8. More
Five-Star Restoration Matching Grants Program
This program provides modest financial help for community-based wetland, riparian, and coastal habitat restoration projects that build diverse partnerships and foster local natural resource stewardship through education, outreach, and training activities. Projects must involve diverse partnerships of ideally five organizations that contribute funding, land, technical assistance, workforce support, and/or other in-kind services. Projects that can leverage the funds requested with significant cash or in-kind contribution from project partners are considered much more competitive. Application deadline: March 9. More
Rural Business Opportunity Grant
The USDA Rural Business Opportunity Grant program promotes sustainable economic development in rural communities with exceptional needs. Assistance provided through this program may include funding for economic planning for rural communities, technical assistance for rural businesses, or training for rural entrepreneurs or economic development officials. Application deadline: March 30. More

Events

Connecticut Summit on School Funding Reform, Jan. 30
Featuring national education funding specialist John L. Myers as keynote speaker, economists Jeff Blodgett and Fred Carstensen, as well as seven panelists from state and local government and the business sector. Central Connecticut State University, 9 am to 12 pm. Summit Details; Commission on Education Finance Report; Survey.
New Partners for Smart Growth Conference, Feb. 8-10
The Local Government Commission will host the 2007 New Partners for Smart Growth conference Feb. 8-10 in Los Angeles. Conference sessions will cover such topics as funding for smart growth efforts, preserving workforce housing, smart schools and smart growth, transit-oriented development, selecting sites for homeless housing, and eminent domain. Register by Jan. 26. The National Charrette Institute is also holding a three-day training program in conjunction with the New Partners Conference. More
Smart Growth for Local Governments Conference, Feb. 26-27
The International City/County Management Association will present its second smart growth Leading Practices Conference Feb. 26-27 in Washington, D.C. The conference will feature three case studies of local governments at the "leading edge" of smart growth: Arlington County, Va.; Sarasota County, Fla.; and Winchester, Va. In addition to sessions led by representatives from these communities, participants will have an opportunity to share their own leading practices and get feedback from their peers and national experts. Register by Feb. 21. More

Info for the Eco-Minded

Choosing TVs and Computers
Some big-screen plasma TVs can actually consume more energy annually than your refrigerator—one Panasonic plasma weighed in at 849 kilowatt hours/year, versus 670 kwh/year or less for many fridges. More
Junk Mail Redux
Ever wonder how much your junk mail adds to our landfills and recycling burdens? Check out this junk mail reduction service from 41pounds.org.

Subscribe: If you haven’t already, please subscribe to be included in future distributions of this newsletter (it’s still free)!

Governors Collaborate on "Innovation America"

2007-01-24T13:59:00.000-05:00

China overtook the U.S. in 2004 to become the leading exporter of information technology products.

In 2005, only four American companies ranked among the top 10 recipients of patents granted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Finland, Israel, Japan, South Korea and Sweden each spend more on research and development as a share of GDP than the U.S.

Seeing the writing on the wall, the National Governors Association has formed a bipartisan Innovation America initiative, led by Governors. Janet Napolitano (AZ) and Tim Pawlenty (MN).

"Working with the NGA Center for Best Practices, the task force will take the lead in developing strategies that drive innovation," said Gov. Pawlenty. "The work of this task force will be critical to ensuring every state—and our nation—is equipped to excel in the global economy."

The 17-member task force includes governors, business leaders and university presidents. The task force will develop strategies to create clusters of innovation and new approaches to math and science education for all students. The agenda includes discussions centered around the state innovation landscape, new approaches to K-12 science, technology, engineering and mathematics education and the role of postsecondary education as an engine of innovation. Key gubernatorial staff members will learn about the resources being developed through the initiative and begin framing an action plan for creating an "innovation environment" in each state.

What's Connecticut's "innovation environment"? Comment here.

Recycling Needs A Pickup

2007-01-24T12:27:00.000-05:00

Connecticut will have to almost double its recycling rate - from 30 percent to 58 percent - just to keep up with increasing amounts of waste and changing lifestyles over the next 20 years. That ambitious goal is the cornerstone of a new Solid Waste Management Plan released Thursday by the state Department of Environmental Protection. More.

How is your town increasing recycling efforts? How are you increasing yours?
Add your comments here.

Benchmarks Study: Connecticut's Economic Competitiveness In Decline

2006-12-01T12:41:00.000-05:00

Yesterday CERC, the Connecticut Economic Resource Center, released its second annual Benchmarks study of the Connecticut economy to representatives from business, government, policy and press at Northeast Utilities headquarters.

The study, entitled Benchmarking Connecticut 2006: Determinants of Economic Growth, analyzes key aspects of Connecticut’s current economic state and its historical growth trends. The study also considers how well poised the state’s economy is for success in the future. The study was led by CERC economist Jeff Blodgett, with contributions from the New England Public Policy Center, the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, the Connecticut Department of Labor, and the University of Connecticut Center for Economic Analysis.

Current Economic Picture: Not So Bad
The Benchmarks study compares 50 states’ economies, based on 35 measures, i.e., benchmarks, of economic health. Those 35 measures fall into five categories: technology, financing, entrepreneurial and business vitality, human capital and global links. The benchmarks include such factors as the percentage of eighth-graders at public schools who achieved at least a basic level on the National Assessment of Education Program exams; the percentage of the population over age 25 who hold a bachelor’s degree; initial public offerings per 10,000 employer firms; the number of patents awarded per one million people; the percentage of households with computers and Internet access; and computers’ and electronics’ share of total exports.

The current state of Connecticut’s economy may seem healthy enough through many peoples lenses, and indeed the Benchmarks study backs up any such perception: Connecticut’s current rank among all other states is above average for 26 of the 35 benchmarks.

Future Economic Growth: Not So Good
The Benchmarks study warns that our current state is no predictor or guarantee of future success. The growth rate for each of the 35 benchmarks over time is what’s really telling. And that growth data tells a very different story. In terms of growth, Connecticut’s rank among all other states is above average for only 5 of the 35 benchmarks. That means that other states are gaining on us. We’re losing our competitive edge, and fast.

Brookings Expert Offers Ideas
In his keynote address, Bruce Katz, founding director of the Brookings Metropolitan Policy Program, offered some unvarnished assessments of Connecticut’s economy. Connecticut deserves praise for its strong minimum wage laws. And we now have a Brownfields Redevelopment Authority. But while that’s a good sign, Katz pointed out that other states having been doing that sort of thing since the ‘80s, and it took Connecticut until 2006 to get into the game.

Confessing that he struggled to find other good policies and practices that Connecticut uses to advance its economic competitiveness, Katz joked that it reminded him of the Seinfeld episode, The Opposite, where George decided that to be successful, he would have to start doing exactly the opposite of everything he usually does. But Katz stopped short of proposing a Seinfeldian (or Costanzian) approach to economic policy for Connecticut, saying that might not really be the way to go. I think he was only half joking.

Katz concurred with prior speakers (and this author) that the state needs a vision for growth, sustainability and innovation. Among Katz’s other remarks: We need to promote innovation and quality places. Connecticut needs to identify its strengths and develop competitive economic polices that capitalize on them. Our 169 cities and towns need to compete, together, for quality growth and prosperity. We need to invest in urban areas and metropolitan prosperity because it’s the competitive thing to do. Like it or not, Katz said, a state’s success, and a region’s success, depends on urban centers’ ability to adapt to a changing competitive global economy. Advocates for a competitive economy need to organize for success. We already know that many diverse organizations have common ground in a shared desire for serious economic competitiveness. Those groups could be effective change agents if they connect, communicate, and speak with one voice, as a massive coalition.

Like many before it, the conference concluded with numerous calls for a call to action, for private-public partnerships, and for government to lead the way. We need a vision. We need a plan. We need goals and measurable objectives. We need accountability. The question that went unasked is how much longer can we wait for government to take the lead? What if it never does? And anyway, maybe free market and limited government theories call for government to take its cue from the people, not the other way around.

Take the Next Step Now
Consider taking the next step now, with an online brainstorming session to identify Connecticut’s strengths and assets. So what exactly are they, in your view? What does make Connecticut truly unique? What is Connecticut’s truly “unique value proposition?”
Use this online survey to weigh in. Add some thoughts now, and come back to it later and add more if you like. The survey is set up so you can see others’ responses, I hope you’ll try it and keep the Benchmarks conversations going. We’ve got to start somewhere. Why not you? Why not now? Survey.

P.S. On a Similar Note
Consider the impact if those of us who are likeminded and working on similar projects kept in touch and built on each other’s efforts rather than duplicate them. In the interest of connecting, organizing for success, and sharing information about who’s doing what:

Faith Middleton’s WNPR show featured UConn economist Fred Carstenson on November 30, discussing the benchmarks study and its implications for Connecticut’s economic outlook. The show asks “Now that the elections are over, will our leaders deliver? Listen.

The Old State House exhibit “History is All Around Us” takes on the importance of place. One part of the exhibit invites museum-goers to add their thoughts on such probing questions as “Is a strong central city essential to 21st century living?” and “What makes a healthy city?” Go, and read some of the answers.

The Capital Region Partnership and CPTV are laying the groundwork for a Compass indicators project for the Capital Region, as a follow up to the regionalism documentary that aired on CPTV this past spring. The Citizens Network of the Capital Region is collaborating by organizing a series of town meetings across the region to get everyday folks thinking about “people, prosperity and place” and about what really matters in the region, and how to measure it. The town meetings are being planned for the early part of 2007.

See also: “State's Economy In Jeopardy, Report Says”

The full Benchmarks report is available at www.cerc.com/benchmarks

When The Market Sets Its Sites Low

2006-11-20T23:00:00.000-05:00

Here’s an interesting tidbit, and I think I got this right: nondefense spending has grown 28% under Bush. How much do you think it grew under Clinton? A) 48% B) 22% or C) 2%.

If anybody answered “C”, you got it. Told you it was interesting. The party of small government goes on a spending spree. But already I digress.

Tonight I attended a talk at Trinity College featuring James Glassman, American Enterprise Institute Fellow (and editor and publisher of The American), on what’s ahead for the global and US economy (and where I learned above mentioned interesting tidbit). As I heard it, the crux of his remarks was that we better get serious about education and get over our isolationist proclivities.

Outsourcing is going up, as businesses are finding highly skilled labor at a better price outside the US. Insourcing – the practice of foreign firms setting up shop in the US with US workers – is down, as the US becomes decreasingly hospitable to non-Americans.

Glassman talked about the income and net worth disparities among college grads, high school grads and high school dropouts. As one would expect, the earning power and net worth of college graduates is higher than that of high school graduates and high school dropouts. But the disparities are growing. Education, according to Glassman, is the source of the widening gap in incomes in the US.

If Americans by and large aren’t educated well enough to be competitive in the global economy, whose fault is that? Are our schools failing us, or are we failing ourselves?

Does a school’s poor performance necessarily indicate a failure of the teachers or the administration? It’s always easy to point the finger at someone else. Could it be that teachers are expected to work miracles, and pick up the slack for parents who don’t feel like parenting? Could the problem be that the students simply perform up to or down to the levels expected of them?

Does a school’s poor performance mean that democracy has failed since the voters didn’t demand change?

If Americans aren’t educated well enough to be competitive in the global economy, perhaps we should turn off the gameboy and unplug the Tube. And take a good long look in the mirror. Maybe American society has gotten too accustomed to coasting. We may just be getting a good dose of what we deserve.

News and Resources for Sustainable Development

2006-10-27T19:45:00.000-05:00

October 2006 News

Here are this month's picks for news and resources on sustainable development, economic development, public policy, funding opportunities and related events in or near Connecticut. If you haven’t already, please subscribe to "News and Resources" to be included in future distributions of this newsletter (it’s still free)!

Sustainable Development

"This is Smart Growth" - ICMA, the International City/County Management Association and the Smart Growth Network recently released "This Is Smart Growth," a new publication that illustrates how communities can turn their visions, values, and aspirations into reality, using smart growth techniques to improve the quality of development. Many people want to know what smart growth looks like; "This Is Smart Growth" illustrates and explains smart growth concepts and outcomes Free copies are available from the EPA National Service Center for Environmental Publications at 800-490-9198 or via e-mail at ncepimal@one.net. Ask for publication number 231-K-06-002. "This Is Smart Growth" is available electronically at www.smartgrowth.org.

EPA awards for Best Workplaces for Commuters - Each year, the congestion created from commuting to and from work causes 3.7 billion hours of lost productivity, costing employees 92 million work weeks, and the nation $63.1 billion in wasted time and fuel. It doesn't have to be that way. The EPA released its annual list of Best Workplaces for Commuters from the Fortune 500 companies. This year, 133 companies employing more than 700,000 workers qualify. The top 20 employers are ranked by the percentage of domestic employees who are eligible for commuter benefits, such as subsidized transit passes, telework, carpool programs, and emergency rides home. More. And check out New England's Best Workplaces for Commuters too.

President Signs Bill Expanding Conservation Tax Incentive - On August 17, President Bush signed into law legislation that included an improved conservation tax incentive. The provision, which expires at the end of 2007, will: Increase the charitable deduction limit from 30% to 50% of adjusted gross income; Increase the charitable deduction limit to 100% of AGI for eligible farmers and ranchers; and Allow the taxpayer to carry forward the deduction for 15 years (rather than five years). More

Public Policy

Tax Foundation Ranks Connecticut's Business Climate at 37 - This is one case where a higher number is not good. The Tax Foundation's business climate index is based on analyses of 113 factors, grouped by corporate, individual income, sales, unemployment and property taxes. "The best states in the Index are those that levy taxes on a broad base and at a low rate," says a co-author of the report. Tax Foundation's Executive summary; Full report. Related: Are a "Good Business Climate" and a High "Quality of Life" Mutually Exclusive? Not if You're New Hampshire.

INC Magazine Gives Rell a 2-Star Rating - INC Magazine took a good hard look at the country's 26 governors up for reelection to see where they really stand on support for small business. Instead of looking at what they promise during campaign season or when they're riding the good news bus, INC ranked governors on their actual records for how well or poorly they support entrepreneurial activity and business ownership. Inc gave Governor Rell two stars. And she didn't make the cut for any of INC's "best of" lists, covering topics like technology transfer, health care, or fiscal policy. Rating the Governors. Related: The 2-Star State?

Brookings ID's Weak Market Cities (and they include Hartford, New Haven and Bridgeport) - After ranking 302 cities nationwide based on economic (employment growth, establishment growth, payroll growth) and residential well-being (income, unemployment rate, poverty rate, labor force participation) indicators, Brookings defined 65 cities as “weak market”. Weak market cities are those that ranked in the bottom third across both sets of indicators.

A strong city depends on a strong metropolitan region – and the ability to capture a critical share of the metro economy. Out-migration, racial and ethnic segregation, and concentrated poverty have negative impacts on schools, public safety, market investment, fiscal health, and quality of life.
As the quality of human capital, costs of doing business, and amenities are correlated with metro/city performance over time, these cities can become mired in a downward spiral.
In addition, major federal and state policies often stack the deck against cities – beginning with fragmented government on the state end, skewing funding toward greenfield development, and setting up barriers to brownfield redevelopment.
Plus the cities themselves are often dysfunctional.
Small and mid-sized cities may be less resilient against economic downturns, plant closings and major downsizings, and generally have “thinner” job markets.
So how can city and state leaders fix what’s broken, capitalize on urban assets, and help foster city and regional prosperity? Read on (go to slide 50 for Brookings recommendations).

Affordable Housing: Managing the Message - Word choice, stories and images can have a remarkable effect on how the public views "affordable housing." More

Connecticut: 3rd Smartest State for 2006 - Down from 2nd in 2005 :(
For the second consecutive year, Vermont has earned the title of the nation’s Smartest State, as announced in Education State Rankings 2006-2007, a new reference book from Morgan Quitno Press. “Vermont produces stellar students, thanks to its commitment to high quality elementary and secondary education,” said Scott Morgan, President of Morgan Quitno Press. The 2006 award measures states based on factors including expenditures for instruction, pupil-teacher ratios, high school graduation and dropout rates, and reading, writing and math proficiency. Rounding out the top five states with Vermont were Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey and Maine. Bringing up the lower end of the rankings scale were Arizona in last place, preceded by Nevada, Mississippi, California and Alaska. More.

Solving the School Funding Crisis - Speaking of our commitment to high quality education, the Citizens Network of the Capital Region, greater Hartford's new citizens' league, has a new online survey to learn more about the public’s preferences for solutions to Connecticut's school funding problem. You can weigh in anonymously; it'll take only a minute or two. Click here for the survey.

Funding

Environmental Literacy Grants for Formal K-12 Education - The NOAA Office of Education is requesting applications for two environmental literacy projects - one in support of K-12 education, and another in support of "free-choice" learning. Funded projects will last between one and five years. The K-12 projects must propose ways to expand the amount of Earth System Science taught in the classroom to improve student learning of that subject.

Free-Choice Learning projects should support NOAA's vision which is: an informed society that uses a comprehensive understanding of the role of the ocean, coasts, and atmosphere in the global ecosystem to make the best social and economic decisions. Successful projects should reach significant segments of the U.S. population at a State, multi-state or national level.

This funding opportunity meets NOAA's Mission Goal to understand climate variability and change to enhance society's ability to plan and respond. Eligible applicants are institutions of higher education, K through 12 public and independent schools and school systems, science centers and museums, other nonprofits, and State, local and Indian tribal governments in the United States. An estimated six awards will be made, ranging from $200,000 to $750,000. Pre-proposals due Nov. 29. More

Events

Nov. 2 - Get Sewer Savvy - 12:30 - 2 pm, Hartford Public LibraryA referendum on the MDC's $1.6 billion Clean Water Project will be held on Nov. 7. The project will correct serious problems in the 150 year old combined sewer system in Hartford. An MDC official will describe the project and a panel will discuss it from the perspectives of Hartford’s neighborhoods, urban design, and environmental impact. More

Nov. 6 - KnowledgePlex Expert Chat - Reclaiming vacant and abandoned properties to create affordable homes, 2pmReclaiming vacant and abandoned properties to create affordable homes is one innovative way to address the affordable housing challenge. KnowledgePlex will present an online chat featuring representatives from the organizations that won top honors in the Maxwell Awards, presented by the Fannie Mae Foundation in partnership with the National Vacant Properties Campaign. More

Nov. 8 - Building Tomorrow's Workforce - 6 - 7:30 pm, Hartford Public Library - Most of Connecticut’s future workforce will have to come from Hartford and the other large cities in the state. Less than half of the third graders in Hartford today will graduate from high school. That's a problem that will have massive implications for Connecticut’s future economic development and quality of life. In this HartfordInfo Today session, business, education, and government leaders will discuss this important issue and possible strategies for addressing it. More

Nov. 13-14 - Leading Practices in Smart Growth Symposium - Boston, MA. The Leading Practices in Smart Growth Symposium is presented by ICMA University with support from the Smart Growth Network and the U.S. EPA. This symposium will be held in conjunction with the Brownfields 2006 conference in Boston. More.

Nov. 13-15 - Brownfields 2006 - Boston, MA - A Revolution in Redevelopment and Revitalization. Opening Keynote Address Featuring Michael Porter, Harvard Business School, and father of the cluster theory of economic development. Looks like a top notch program. Check it out. AND IT'S FREE! Hurry - registration ends Oct. 25. More

Nov. 14 - CT Earth Net - Yale Peabody Museum, New Haven, 8:30 - 1:30 pm - Half-day meeting of environmental advocates, community activities, educators, and concerned individuals about collaborating to accomplish shared objectives. RSVP by Nov. 3 to Brendan Hanrahan at bhanrahan@ctearthnet.org. See http://www.ctearthnet.org/ and http://cttrips.blogspot.com.

Nov. 30 - Benchmarking Connecticut 2006 - Northeast Utilities, Berlin - The key findings of CERC's 2006 research initiative will be released on Thursday, November 30, 2006 at CERC's 2nd annual Benchmarking conference. Bruce Katz, Vice President at the Brookings Institution and founding Director of the Brookings Metropolitan Policy Program, is the scheduled keynote speaker. Stay tuned for more details.

Are a "Good Business Climate" and a High "Quality of Life" Mutually Exclusive?

2006-10-12T10:39:00.000-05:00

Not if You're New Hampshire

Thanks again to the Hartford Business Journal for reporting important information that tends not to get much coverage in the Courant. The October 12 edition of HBJ Today reports:

Connecticut appears on the bottom half of a list ranking states based on business climate compiled by the Washington, D.C.-based Tax Foundation. The Nutmeg State is listed at No. 37, while nearly tax-free states like Wyoming, South Dakota, Alaska, Nevada and Florida took the top five spots. While not a stellar result, Connecticut did move up from the No. 41 spot it claimed on the ranking last year. New Hampshire reached the highest ranking of any state in New England, coming in at No. 7.

The Tax Foundation's business climate index is based on analyses of 113 factors, grouped by corporate, individual income, sales, unemployment and property taxes.

"The best states in the Index are those that levy taxes on a broad base and at a low rate," says a co-author of the report. The broad base part means certain kinds of transactions aren't favored by being excluded from the tax while the others are discouraged by being taxed. The low rate part is more obvious - keeping the tax rate low reduces the effect of the tax in economic decision-making.

TF's top ten states for business climate are: Wyoming, South Dakota, Alaska, Nevada, Florida, Texas, New Hampshire, Montana, Delaware and Oregon.

TF's ten worst states for business climate are: Rhode Island, Ohio, New Jersey, New York, Vermont, California, Nebraska, Iowa, Maine and Minnesota.

As the executive summary says, "How much states collect in taxes is critical, but how they take it is also important." Connecticut's property tax is a prime example.

With all due respect to Governor Rell and her remarks in the October 11 gubernatorial debate, raising revenue through taxes is not, I repeat, not just a little matter of taking tax revenue from taxpayers' one pocket or the other. Because towns must rely on property tax to pay for public services and public education, naturally towns must capitalize on every opportunity to raise that revenue. And so it is that one Connecticut field and forest after another get bulldozed as a sacrifice to "progress."

But back to the main question: Could it be that a "good business climate" and a high "quality of life" are mutually exclusive?

Things like top-rate schools and universities, small classes, high-tech resources, public libraries, public parks, state forests, good roads, modern, efficient public transit systems - all things people point to when they talk about "quality of life" - tend to cost money. And that money comes from taxes.

This Tax Foundation report elevates the discussion by emphasising that our tax burden - how much we pay in taxes - is by no means the end of the story, as many watchdog groups insist. A state's tax burden may be low, and that may, at first glance make it an attractive place to do business. But look at the other side of the equation -would you want to live there? Is it clean, safe and stable? With good schools, good transportation systems, good recreational places - and high paying jobs?

According to Morgan Quitno Press, for 2006 the top ten:

Most Livable states are: New Hampshire, Minnesota, Iowa, Vermont, New Jersey, Wyoming, Massachusetts, Virginia, Nebraska and Connecticut.
Smartest states are: Vermont, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Maine, Minnesota, Virginia, Wisconsin, Montana, and New York.
Safest states are: North Dakota, Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire, Wyoming, South Dakota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Montana, and West Virginia.
Healthiest states are: Vermont, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Maine, Iowa, Massachusetts, Nebraska, Utah, Connecticut, and Hawaii.

And according to the US census, the 10 richest states, measured by median household income according to 2005 data are: New Jersey, Maryland, Connecticut, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Alaska, Virginia, California and Delaware.

Good business climate states without high quality of life ratings. Bad business climate states with high quality of life ratings. What to make of it all?

Figure out what New Hampshire's doing. They're on to something up there.

-------------------------
Tax Foundation's Four-page executive summary
Tax Foundation's Full report
-------------------------

The 2-Star State?

2006-10-05T09:01:00.000-05:00

"Connecticut may well find itself at a crossroads in the coming years"

The Hartford Business Journal covered it a couple days ago, but I haven't seen any coverage of INC magazine's "Rating the Governors" article in the Hartford Courant yet.

INC took a hard look at the country's 26 governors up for reelection to see where they really stand on support for small business. Instead of looking at what they promise during campaign season or when they're riding the good news bus, INC ranked governors on their actual records for how well or poorly they support entrepreneurial activity and business ownership.

Janet Napolitano (Arizona), Bill Richardson (New Mexico), Kathleen Sebelius (Kansas) and Jim Douglas (Vermont) were the only governors who earned INC's 4-star rating. Connecticut's Jodi Rell came in with 2 stars. And Rell didn't make the cut for any of INC's "best of" lists, covering topics like technology transfer, health care, or fiscal policy. Yet as the magazine notes:

"Rell is popular, and Connecticut is a rich state, boasting the second highest household income in the country behind New Jersey. In two years in office, she has focused on good government measures such as making state contracting more transparent. This impulse is understandable, given that her predecessor, John Rowland, resigned from office under indictment for corruption. But Rell could be more proactive when it comes to small-business policies, because Connecticut may well find itself at a crossroads in the coming years. The state routinely struggles to balance its budget. Cities such as Hartford and key industries such as manufacturing and insurance are in decline. Housing costs are high, which makes Connecticut an unappealing destination for younger workers. And even with some bright spots, such as the hedge fund industry, job creation is flat."

Got a minute? Take a quick look at the 4-star performers:

Arizona governor Janet Napolitano, a college and law school graduate, lists her task forces and commissions, lists their members, their goals and objectives (!!!), and even their agendas and minutes. Check out the Governor's Council on Innovation and Technology.
New Mexico's Bill Richardson has a distinguished career serving in various high offices of federal government. Richardson not only has policy priorities, he committed them to writing. He even goes so far as to focus on accountability in government and Performance Review, reporting recommendations and progress in implementing them.
Kathleen Sebelius (Kansas), served previously as the state's insurance commissioner and in the state house of representatives. In 2005, Time magazine named her one of the nation's top five governors. Not bad. Check out the details on her initiatives. Points scored for apparently having a State Economic Revitalization Plan, but points lost because I couldn't find it.
Jim Douglas (Vermont), also a college grad, served in the state legislature, as secretary of the state, and as state treasurer before elected governor. Good rotational training program. He too outlines a list of priorities and initiatives. What? A Strategic Vision and Business Plan for Job Creation and Economic Advancement? The document is exemplary. It starts with the end in mind (it asks and answers "what do we seek to achieve?") and follows up with an outline for "how will we do it?"

Like they say, if you don't know where you're going, you might end up somewhere else. Like at the intersection of two roads you don't want be on.

For more on INC's review, click here.

Basically Bummed

2006-09-22T11:43:00.000-05:00

While the thoughts are still fresh I thought I'd write about a very good program I attended this morning on revitalization downtowns. Sponsored by Connecticut Main Street Center and the Partnership for Strong Communities, the program featured two able and interesting experts, Dan Carmody from the Fort Wayne Indiana Downtown Improvement District, and Brian Hollenback, from the Rock Island (IL) Economic Growth Corporation.

The program focused on revitalizing downtown areas through mixed house development, the mix being residential and business uses. In a nutshell, the theories go that businesses need X number of people in the immediate area to buy stuff, and that real people of all varieties coming and going from their residences - by foot rather than in the isolation of their cars - contributes to the area's vibrancy and economy. Getting feet on the street is a big part of having a successful downtown.

Through before and after pictures, the audience saw solid examples of the power of collaboration among local and state government, economic developments corporations, nonprofit community development corporations, and the business sector in salvaging one ugly eyesore after another .

All happy, uplifting stuff, right?

Well yeah, except after immersing myself into topics of this sort for the last few years, I couldn't chase away some discouraging observations about Connecticut's state of affairs. I see a lot of familiar faces showing up for the programs like this, so it's not for want of interest that we still don't have many revitalized downtowns for all our years of talking.

This smart growth, urban revitalization stuff is a lot like losing weight: we all know darned well exactly what we need to do, it's in the doing where we fall short.

So what exactly keeps us from revitalizing our cities and growing as smart as we say we want? And how do we overcome those obstacles? Thoughts along these lines nagged at me all morning.
Carmody and Hollenback talked of successful downtowns being the product of "cohesive visions and strategies." Well yeah. Obviously. Demerit number one for Connecticut.

Hollenback talked of a government leader in Illinois who commissioned a multi-agency task force to come up with goals, priorities and strategies for increasing affordable housing. As the speaker told it, that leader forced those agencies to actually work together and make sure the left hand knew what the right hand was doing. And guess what? The task force actually produced.

Carmody cited some civic "virtues" and "vices" that enhance and detract from the likelihood of making cities better. Among the virtues: trust and respect, inclusiveness and persistence. Among the vices: complacency, distrust, arrogance, and myopia.

In different parts of his presentation and during the Q& A that followed, Hollenback reiterated the critical need for trust and respect in constructive partnerships. So it was a bummer later to overhear some guy approach the folks next to me (one of whom yapped loudly throughout the entire presentation) about how Completely Incompetent some body of government is that he and the people next to me apparently work with. The venom and contempt in his voice was unmistakable. Nice. Not exactly a great platform for building productive relationships for revitalizing our urban centers. Everybody thinks he knows better than the other guy.

At one point one speaker made an offhand remark about the multi-agency task force focusing on the governor's affordable housing goals. The governor's affordable housing goals? Other states' advantages in revitalizing its downtowns were becoming more apparent.

Just what is it that keeps Connecticut from accomplishing what so many people say they want to accomplish?

The takeaway from today's program: great information, but my bet is Connecticut, with its complacent, apathetic, electorate, is going to keep sitting on its hands. I'd love to be proven wrong.

courant.com | Step Toward Smart Growth

2006-09-12T07:23:00.000-05:00

courant.com Step Toward Smart Growth

Sunday's Hartford Courant notes that "In an unusually passionate announcement last weekend, Gov. M. Jodi Rell said she's begun a national search for a deputy commissioner of the state Department of Transportation who will focus on mass transit and anti-sprawl measures."

A national search? For a deputy commissioner? My goodness. We almost never do that for people at the commissioner level.

One can only hope that this is good practice for filling all agency leadership positions with strongly qualified appointees in the future.

Budget "surplus" grows in new fiscal year

2006-08-23T11:08:00.000-05:00

Today's HBJ Today from the the Hartford Business Journal reports that Connecticut's budget surplus has grown:

"Gov. M. Jodi Rell's office announced that the state budget surplus for the new fiscal year that began July 1 is now projected at $212.9 million. Revenues have been revised upward by $54.4 million over the past month from the fiscal year 2007 adopted budget. The state of Connecticut enjoyed a $940.5 million surplus for fiscal year 2006, which ended June 30. Of that surplus, $455.1 million was deposited into the state's rainy day fund."

But is it really a surplus? Maybe it's only a "surplus" because the state isn't paying its bills.

For starters, there's that pesky underfunded teachers pension. And cities and towns are considerably shortchanged in the state's payments under the education cost sharing formula.

I'd have a nice surplus in my bank account too if I paid only part of my bills too.

Just a thought.

Connecticut Falls From 19 to 27 In E-Government Study

2006-08-18T09:23:00.000-05:00

Connecticut fell to 27th place from 19th place in 2005, in a new Brown University review of states e-government efforts. Governing.com reported on the August 2006 Brown study today. Connecticut's low ranking may not be so much that our e-government efforts got worse, but that other states got that much better. In other words, we're not keeping up with the competition.

In its seventh annual state and federal e-government study, Brown University’s Taubman Center for Public Policy ranked Texas and New Jersey as the top state government portals. Other top websites include Oregon, Michigan, Utah, Montana, and New York. West Virginia, Mississippi, Wyoming, Alabama, Alaska and several federal courts got the lowest ratings, often because they included too much information, creating a cluttered and confusing look, or contained outdated information, the study said.

Although it tumbled 8 slots lower this year, Connecticut was recognized (as was Pennsylvania) for being innovative in having a "daily flag status alert" to indicate whether the U.S. and state flags are at full staff - probably a consequence of the number of casualties in the Iraq war. Connecticut was also recognized for eventually adopting a consistent template for all state agency websites. Inconsistent menus, layouts, and color schemes, usually with too much information and illogical navigation, makes it hard for users to quickly find what they're looking for.

Connecticut government could be much more efficient if it made good use of the technology it already has at its disposal. Does each agency really need to send 19 paper copies of proposed regulations on legal-sized paper in special (and expensive) folders? How much work would it take for legislative and regulatory agendas and notices to be distributed by email to a customized distribution list? Or to be posted on the net? When a citizen corresponds with government by email, do we really, really need to send a paper reply by US mail?

Continuing to require interagency transactions by paper is just crazy - you've got to print the document, often make and collate multiple copies (which often begets nasty and time-consuming paper jams), address the envelopes, give them to somebody to deliver, and wait a couple days for them to get where they're going. If laws and regulations still require paper transmissions and don't accomodate electronic ones, it's time to change the law. In addition to saving time, there's got to be paper, toner, postage and labor cost-savings by going electronic. Across agencies with 50 thousand some employees, those cost savings might add up to some real money. And more efficient government.

Just a thought.

Connecticut Government Needs Strategic Planning - and Execution - Now

2006-05-18T10:11:00.000-05:00

This entry ties in to my entry from last year, “Wanted: A Sharper Vision for CT’s Economic Agenda” – a wish that remains unfulfilled.

In my fifteen years as an attorney in state government, it’s been my experience that it’s the rare commissioner who states what he or she intends to achieve during their tenure and communicates it throughout the agency. I’ve been shocked by the disdain for goal-setting I’ve heard articulated among the highest levels of management. Performance goals, when required, are routinely set in arrears. As the current Lisa Moody hearings emphasize, blurring the lines of accountability is an institutionalized practice at all levels. We can do better. In fact, we must.

Charging commissioners with articulating, communicating and achieving specific goals and objectives would be a major step toward promoting accountability and transparency in government, and ultimately, toward restoring the public's trust in government.

Connecticut government, starting with its governor, needs to figure out 1) what it wants to accomplish, 2) the specific steps it will take to get there, and 3) precisely who is responsible for completing those steps. This is not rocket science, and other state governments have done it.

Some of the strategic planning things we need to do have fallen within OPM’s jurisdiction, although staffing for strategic planning functions has been eviscerated (which just goes to show how important we think it is to invest in planning).

Besides, strategic planning efforts across the executive branch of government have taken place at too low a level (that too just goes to show how important we think planning is). Executive branch strategic planning—and specifically performance review – needs to happen at the level of the Governor’s Office for it to be meaningful and taken seriously.

It is reasonable to expect the Governor, her chief of staff, and the Office of Policy and Management (OPM) as the Governor’s management arm, to ensure that state agencies complement, and not undermine, the work of other agencies. The Governor and her chief of staff need to mind the store and require monthly progress toward agency performance goals. A few thoughts for this strategic planning initiative include:

Articulating the Governor's principles for good government, or even a Governor's strategic plan for the state. Georgia’s done it. A plan for the state – what a concept.
Establishing a properly staffed, high level, strategic planning function to ensure that state agencies, through their strategic plans, support the Governor’s clearly stated goals.
Charging agency commissioners, as de facto CEOs, with articulating, communicating, and achieving their visions and goals for the agency.
Holding agency commissioners accountable for planning for such things as benchmarking, continuous improvement, internal communication, succession planning and leadership development, fostering positive relations with employee unions, ethics education, and publishing their strategic plans and updated progress reports on their agency's website.
Exploring a performance-based compensation system for a meaningful portion of commissioners' pay.

Connecticut earned an uninspiring C+ in the 2005 Government Performance Project’s ranking of states’ performance (http://results.gpponline.org). One OPM official was quoted there as saying “Not much is happening [on performance measurement.] I wouldn’t even say not much. Nothing is happening at a statewide level.” Unless a C+ economy is good enough, this is not okay. We can do better. In fact, we must.

courant.com: $500 Fines Peeve Officials

2006-03-09T13:02:00.000-05:00

courant.com: $500 Fines Peeve Officials: "$500 Fines Peeve Officials

Penalties Would Close Moody Cases

By JON LENDER
And EDMUND H. MAHONY Courant Staff Writers

February 24 2006

Some top Rell administration officials are squirming - even fuming - about the prospect of paying $500 each to end the State Elections Enforcement Commission's probe of their improper distribution of invitations to a December gubernatorial campaign fundraiser.

Earlier this month, the elections panel authorized its staff to secretly discuss settling its pending investigation of any affected state commissioner or deputy commissioner who agrees to pay a $500 fine - far less than the $2,000 civil penalty they could be charged for violating the state's legal ban on political fundraising by heads and deputy heads of state agencies.

But, behind the scenes, several state commissioners have been indignant about having to pay any penalty at all in the case stemming from a Dec. 7 fundraiser for Gov. M. Jodi Rell at the Marco Polo restaurant in East Hartford.

Perhaps the most vocal objector has been Linda Yelmini, Rell's commissioner of administrative services, sources say. Yelmini declined to talk about the matter.

Objectors have talked about fighting the elections commission legally, or trying to get the panel to back down on its legal interpretation that it 'constitutes a prohibited solicitation' for a state agency commissioner or deputy to hand a subordinate an invitation to a fundraiser.

But none of these officials voiced resentment Wednesday, when they had a chance to, during a commissioners' meeting with Rell at the Capitol.

Some officials resent that their legal predicament comes from following the instructions of Rell's chief of staff, M. Lisa Moody - who gave them the invitations, many with "bring check" handwritten on them, at the Capitol and told them to hand them out to subordinates at their agencies. Moody is not covered by the prohibition herself and thus has avoided legal sanctions, although Rell suspended her for two weeks for violating office policies.

Any displeasure by Rell with Moody had evaporated by Wednesday's 45-minute meeting, attended by more than 30 state agency heads. Rell reaffirmed her faith in Moody, who sat to her right, and delivered a "let's work together" message that some sources interpreted as a signal to pay the $500 settlement and put the politically embarrassing case behind them in this gubernatorial election year.

"The governor did reaffirm her faith and friendship in Lisa Moody," said Judd Everhart, Rell's press secretary. "She said, `I have apologized, Lisa has apologized, but I would like to apologize again ... for any trouble'" connected with the Marco Polo affair.Rell also said words to the effect of "let's move on," Everhart said. Asked if that meant she was urging them to pay the $500, he said, "The context was that the General Assembly session is in full swing, there are important issues to debate from reorganizing the Department of Economic and Community Development to updating our transportation system, to repealing the car tax, and it's time to move on.

"The election enforcement commission has been investigating the Marco Polo fundraiser since December, when it was disclosed that Moody had summoned the agency heads to her office on state time, gave them the fundraiser invitations, and sent them on their distribution errands.

The state's top prosecutor decided earlier this month not to bring criminal charges, but turned his files over to the elections commission. That panel decided behind closed doors on Feb. 8 to continue its non-criminal probe at least until next month. In the meantime, it authorized its executive director, Jeffrey B. Garfield, and staff to discuss the $500 settlement with each of the numerous officials who handed out invitations.Garfield has refused to comment.A proposed three-page settlement, obtained by The Courant, has been sent to affected officials, and it includes the commission's finding that "distribution of a campaign fundraising invitation to a subordinate constitutes a prohibited solicitation of a contribution."

But it also would allow any official to accept the settlement and pay the $500 "civil penalty" without admitting to any violation, and it says "there is insufficient evidence" to show anyone "knowingly and willfully" violated the law.

Some of the commissioners reportedly are inclined to take the settlement to put the matter behind them and avoid paying thousands in legal fees to fight any charges pressed by the commission if they do not sign. But others, including Yelmini, have reportedly been saying it would be a blot on their records and may even jeopardize the ability of attorneys - Yelmini is one - to practice law.

Several legal sources said that worry is unfounded, since the settlement would not require an admission of guilt. But that has not quelled talk by the objectors of fighting on the grounds that handing a fundraiser invitation does not constitute a "solicitation" because the term is not clearly defined in the election laws.

However, other sources said that it would be hard to fight the case and that it would not help objectors that solicitations are defined elsewhere in state statutes, under laws regulating charities, as "any request directly or indirectly for money" or something else of value.Yelmini has reportedly gained the ear of some listeners by virtue of her status as a lawyer and as the state's top authority on state personnel rules. Through a spokeswoman, she declined comment Thursday on both her behind-the-scenes objections and the question of whether she had handed Marco Polo invitations to the two subordinates from her department who, according to a list of attendees, joined her in attending the Dec. 7 Rell fundraiser.

Yelmini also would not talk about how her actions might be viewed under her own department's ethics policy - which says an employee may not "use your position to directly or indirectly influence any political process including payments, lending of money or anything of value to a party committee, organization, agency or person for political purposes."
Copyright 2006, Hartford Courant

courant.com: List Of Commissioners Fined

2006-03-09T12:57:00.000-05:00

courant.com: List Of Commissioners Fined: "List Of Commissioners Fined"

Associated Press

March 8 2006, 12:27 PM EST

The following is a list of commissioners and deputy commissioners fined $500 by the State Elections Enforcement Commission for violating a statute that prohibits certain state department heads and deputy department heads from soliciting campaign contributions:

James F. Abromaitis, commissioner of Department of Economic and Community Development

Leonard Boyle, commissioner of Department of Public Safety

Ralph Carpenter, commissioner of Department of Motor Vehicles

Susan Cogswell, commissioner of the Insurance Department

Robert Galvin, commissioner of the Department of Public Health

Thomas A. Kirk, commissioner of the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services

Stephen E. Korta II, commissioner of the Department of Transportation

Pamela Law, commissioner of the Department of Revenue Services

Regina McCarthy, commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection

Peter O'Meara, commissioner of Department of Mental Retardation

Linda Schwartz, commissioner of the Department of Veterans Affairs

James M. Thomas, commissioner of the Department of Emergency Management and Homeland Security

Linda J. Yelmini, commissioner of the Department of Administrative Services

Anne Gnazzo, deputy commissioner of the Office of Policy and Management

Jerry Farrell, Jr., deputy commissioner of the Department of Consumer Protection

Michael Starkowski, deputy commissioner of the Department of Social Services
Copyright 2006 Associated Press "

courant.com: Sixteen Rell Aides Fined

2006-03-09T12:56:00.000-05:00

courant.com: Sixteen Rell Aides Fined: "Sixteen Rell Aides Fined

Agreements May End Fundraiser Flap

By JON LENDER And EDMUND H. MAHONY
Courant Staff Writers

March 8 2006, 1:50 PM EST

The State Elections Enforcement Commission fined 16 members of Gov. M. Jodi Rell's administration Wednesday for illegally giving subordinates invitations to a Rell campaign fundraiser.

Thirteen commissioners and three deputy commissions each agreed to pay a $500 civil penalty for violating an ethics law that bans them from soliciting political contributions.

Many of the affected officials have griped privately about having to pay a fine when the official who told them to hand out the invitations - Rell's chief of staff, M. Lisa Moody - escaped legal sanctions because she fell outside the law banning solicitations by 'any department head or deputy department head.'

A legislative committee will hold a hearing today on a bill that would close that loophole, and include Moody and the rest of the governor's staff under the solicitation ban.

Jeffy Garfield, the commission's executive director, said it was the first they had applied the law since 1983.

Word of today's settlements comes after widespread talk behind the scenes of some commissioners refusing to settle their cases. That would have been a risky course that would have frustrated Rell's desire to get past the episode as she runs for governor on an ethics platform, after inheriting her office on the resignation of her scandal-plagued predecessor, John G. Rowland.

That talk faded. Even the most vocal of those reluctant officials, Administrative Services Commissioner Linda Yelmini, signed a settlement calling for a $500 fine, sources said. But she played a large part in drafting her agreement, which differs from the standard document that Garfield and other enforcement staff members circulated last month to officials and their lawyers.

Other officials' lawyers also tinkered with the language in negotiations. How much Yelmini's agreement differs from the others was still in question Tuesday. Yelmini has refused public comment in the past and couldn't be reached this week.

The elections enforcement panel could have imposed a $2,000 civil fine on any official found in violation of the law. The panel's non-criminal probe continued after Chief State's Attorney Christopher L. Morano last month dropped his own investigation into possible criminal charges, saying a prosecution would have required proof of knowing and willful conduct.

However, Morano has been called to testify today before the legislature's elections committee to give his views on a bill intended to close the Moody loophole - and comments Tuesday by the committee's co-chairman indicate Morano may face some pointed questions.

Co-chairman Christopher Caruso, D-Bridgeport, said Morano has "set election law on its ear" by failing to proceed based on a perception of a lack of requisite intent. "Is he saying it's OK to do this?"

Caruso wants to know how Morano would change the law if he can't enforce it as it is.The legislator disagreed with Morano's finding of insufficient intent, saying the Rell commissioners clearly knew the law. They had been recently briefed about the prohibition by Rell's ethics counsel, Caruso said - adding that one of them, Public Safety commissioner Leonard Boyle, was a former federal prosecutor.

Caruso also said that the officials knew they were handing their subordinates fundraiser invitations that said donations up to $2,500 for Rell would be accepted."What do you think the message is to a subordinate when the commissioner gives you a ticket to a fundraiser?" Caruso said. "What's the subordinate going to tell them, to go to hell?"

An Associated Press report is included.

Smart Officials Willing to Combine Forces

2006-01-31T21:44:00.000-05:00

Today's Governing features an Allen Greenblatt blog on regionalism that Connecticut would do well to consider.

Georgine Welo gets it. She's the mayor of the Clevland, Ohio suburb of South Euclid. "Together, collectively, we're great," Welo says of surrounding suburbs. "Separately, we're not going to be able to exist. Regionalism is definitely the way to go."

Cleveland-area cities are becoming more serious about regionalism in general. Last week, mayors and city managers from 30 cities, including Cleveland, pledged to fund a joint economic development fund of $25 to $50 million. The cities would devote half of their new income tax revenues to the fund.

Greenblatt calls Welo's attitude "refreshingly abundant" in the Cleveland area, where many towns are recognizing the benefits of regional cooperation. [Contrast: Connecticut.]

"Ego and self-protection" foils most attempts at governmental mergers, he notes, but "smart officials are willing to combine forces on an ad hoc basis."

Food for thought.

Are We Ready for a Connecticut Center for Sustainable Development?

2006-01-29T14:54:00.000-05:00

Mark Pelligrini, president of the Connecticut Chapter of the American Planning Association (CCAPA), had a thoughtful article in this week's Place section, asserting that the state should be on top of planning. Mark's been reading my mind. With respect to planning and development in Connecticut, some organization, somewhere, needs to ensure that the left hand knows what the right hand is doing, and that what they’re doing is complementary, not counterproductive. I’ve been talking to a few people recently about my ideas for something like a Connecticut Center for Sustainable Development, and what the mission of such an organization might look like.

I was glad to learn last year that new DEP Commissioner Gina McCarthy listed “smart growth” as one of her priorities. That effort is underway under the heading of “landscape stewardship.” That's great and I'll support and look forward to their work. But for all the reasons Pellegrini pointed out in his article and more, somebody’s got to really spearhead our planning and development efforts, a role that one DEP official says they haven't been asked to take.

Allowing for a fragmented approach isn't the most efficient way to go about it. Massachusetts is on the right track by taking a big picture approach with its Office of Commonwealth Development, which puts offices on the environmental affairs, agriculture, conservation, housing and community development, and transportation all under one roof. In Connecticut, OPM would be a natural spearheader, given its role as the Governor’s planning and budget office. But I don’t see that happening any time soon.* Indeed, the Governor’s article on sprawl some months ago indicated she was content to leave planning to cities and towns. Maybe that's just as well, for now.

As a non-governmental organization with a small staff of go-getters, a Connecticut Center for Sustainable Development would be a highly proactive, cutting-edge resource center dedicated to informing and inspiring local government and regional planning groups on smart growth issues and related topics. Through intensive outreach, it would help Connecticut and its communities collaborate, secure federal funding and take better advantage of programs like the Smart Growth Implementation Assistance Program and the Governors’ Institute for Community Design.

The center would not replicate the work of experts in other organizations, but instead function as a convener, periodically bringing together the planners from OPM, DEP’s landscape stewardship staff, and appropriate staff from the Department of Economic & Community Development, the Department of Transportation, the CT Development Authority and other agencies to the extent their work affects smart growth and sustainable development.

A Connecticut Center for Sustainable Development could work with UConn’s CLEAR and NEMO programs, and UConn Law School’s land use experts to offer workshops for citizen planning, zoning and conservation boards. CCAPA and the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities would be other naturals to have at the table. Even business groups like CBIA and SACIA should be encouraged to join in the fun and participate on some level.

I agree that other organizations like the ones Pellegrini mentions are taking a good stab at some of this work. I am reluctant to advocate for yet another nonprofit organization, but the other groups’ missions are either more narrowly drawn around a topical or regional area (which is fine), or they simply lack staff needed to function with sufficient intensity.

Now, the question is, how does something like a Connecticut Center for Sustainable Development become more than a figment of my imagination and a reality? The Last Green Valley, New Jersey Future, Grow Smart Rhode Island, might serve as good models to start from.

How can this happen? What might be better? I welcome your ideas. Write me at kelly.kennedy@think-plan-do.net.

*Post Script :

State of Connecticut Population: 3.5 million
Planning Department Staff Total #: 4
Department Head Position: 1
Planning Staff Positions #: 3
Clerical Positions #: 0

West Hartford Councilor Fills Seat on MDC Board

2006-01-19T17:28:00.000-05:00

In the "good news in government column," West Hartford Town Councilor Joe Verrengia is filling a seat on the MDC policy board. Joe's right when he says that we need to see and hear more from MDC commissioners - we do need more communication from and transparency at the MDC.

Aside from its obvious function as “the water company,” the MDC plays an enormous role in providing unspoiled land for recreation and respite. Being avid outdoors-people, my husband and I bought a house in this part of town specifically for its proximity to the reservoir. I run, walk and cross country ski there, he runs and cycles there, and now our daughter cycles and scooters there. I'll bet at least one of us spends time at "the rez" at least three days a week.

Unfortunately, a noticeable anti-recreational user sentiment has been developing over the last four to five years, and I can’t figure out why. And it started before 9-11, when the hyper-militant former CEO of the MDC went a little overboard in his zeal to protect us all from the terrorists.

In one amusing incident, I was actually scolded for not wearing a bike helmet while walking beside my daughter as she learned to ride a bike. Other times I've arrived at the reservoir a few hours after a great new snow, eager to set some tracks, only to find the gates locked behind a silly sign saying the property was closed due to "hazardous conditions." The parking lots seemed to be the very last thing to be plowed.

Until a few years ago, the cross country skiing at Reservoir 4 was outstanding. For some reason though, it has become routine to plow snow from every inch of the dirt roads - and even some trails - and drive over them with heavy trucks, rutting the trail and making it utterly unski-able. If the trails and dirt roads can't possibly be left in pristine condition, why not leave a narrow swath for skiers - even on the paved roads?

And what of the clear-cutting on the face of the hill near the back parking lot last year? When I asked about it, I was told that someone decided to restore the view from a lookout that allowed you to see all the way to Glastonbury. Perhaps that person remembers a glorious view from days gone by - all I see are those big blue tuba-like things sticking out of the ground and the development across the street where the beautiful field used to be. Yuk.

I for one look forward to Mr. Verrengia's role with MDC and his updates on its goings on.

Contract Reform for Connecticut? Steady Habits Strike Again

2005-11-18T12:13:00.000-05:00

The Hartford Business Journal asked in an online survey whether readers thought contract reform would be enacted in Connecticut, and whether it was needed. My answer: Yes, eventually, and yes, emphatically, having experienced first-hand the dismal products of some of the state's contracts. (Hint: Tunxis Management and CORE-CT, for starters.)

I just read the nonpartisan bill analysis, which (assuming it is accurate) makes the governor's explanation for vetoing the bill sound, well … seriously flawed. Here’s why.

According to the analysis, the bill would allow state agencies to privatize services when certain conditions are met - one being a cost-benefit analysis. (Which begs the question: you mean we don't do cost/benefit analyses now?) If we don’t conduct cost/benefit analyses, when Rell touts the "committed and effective corps of non-profit and private providers" that operate in a "professional and highly cost-efficient manner", how does she know this be true?

The bill would allow privatization contracts to 1) address a sudden danger to public safety, 2) prevent or mitigate the loss of essential public services or the loss of life, health or property, or 3) comply with a court order or the like. How does Rell see this is "unacceptable language jeopardizing private service providers and the people who rely on them"? How is this “a bill that threatens to interrupt the aid and comfort needed by so many people and threatens the livelihoods of so many people”?

According to the nonpartisan bill analysis, the bill would not apply to contracts with nonprofits that don't layoff, transfer or reassign state employees until 2008. That means that for nonprofit contracts that do affect state employees and as of 2008, it just has to be shown that the benefits of the contract exceed the costs. The bill would also require a description of why the proposed privatization contract is in the public interest. Sounds like responsible government to me.

The Governor impliedly criticizes the requirement that private providers would have to "pay their employees at rates equal to wages and benefits 'enjoyed' by state employees.” Yet she puts "Making Jobs and Connecticut's Economy a Priority" at the top of her agenda. While state employees may have slightly better health care benefits than private sector employees, state employees do not receive the perks that so many private sector employees do, in the form of annual bonuses, profit sharing options, stock options, employer matching contributions to 401ks, company cars, paid business dinners, in-house medical facilities, in-house fitness facilities, healthy worksites, or even up-to-date equipment and resources on par with the private sector. So what wages and benefits would the governor like to see state contractors pay their employees? What kind of jobs does the governor want to make?

And by the way, how is it that preserving wage and benefit levels at a moderate standard apparently is not okay, but it is okay for the governor to express "her anger over the potential job losses resulting from the acquisition by MetLife of Travelers Property and Casualty"? How is it okay to tell the chairman of MetLife how to run his business and keep any job cuts "to an absolute minimum" and that he needs to keep 1,310 jobs in Hartford? This is free market theory at work? The Governor cites these as accomplishments in her progress report on her “agenda in action.”

So what's the big deal? The bill would not forbid privatizing services. Work must be outsourced: there aren't enough state employees or hours in the day to provide all the services Connecticut residents demand or need. Perhaps the big deal is that CT government would actually have to take a detailed, thoughtful, business-like approach to contracting. Maybe having a solid business case for doing what we do is too much like work. Maybe it would make government too transparent.

I know this reads as if I am anti-Rell. I’m not. I positively love the idea of a woman at the top, appointing other women, and making her way to the top without even trying. I am simply disgusted with elected officials - and especially their constituents - being intellectually lazy and playing fast and loose with the facts.

So don't take the word of this unaffiliated voter on any of this. Read for yourself. The governor's press release and veto statement are at here ; her progress report on her agenda is here (by the way, when did she first publish her agenda - it's not a retrospective is it?); and last but not least - the analysis and Senate Bill 2101 (Public Act 05-1) are here.

Wanted: A Sharper Vision for CT's Economic Agenda

2005-05-09T20:16:00.000-05:00

As much as I admire Governor Rell, it’s disappointing that she hasn’t yet emerged as a champion for regional cooperation, sprawl management, or accountability for results in state government. To be fair, it doesn’t help that she’s called on to baby sit one ethics scandal after another, distracting her daily from the more constructive work of government. The renewal of the Governor’s Competitiveness Council, as reported in the April 25, 2005 issue of the Hartford Business Journal, presents an opportunity to address these overlooked topics in one fell swoop. The Governor’s Competitiveness Council, chaired this year by Michele Macauda, president and CEO of SBC East, is a group of nearly 70 business leaders who advise government on the state’s economic competitiveness agenda.

Never mind that the Governor’s Competitiveness Council seems to be charged with doing what one would expect the Department of Economic and Community Development (DECD) and the Governor herself to do: to come up with a vision and broad goals for Connecticut’s economic agenda and a realistic plan for achieving them. Although the Governor and DECD are wise to seek advice from business leaders, the Competitiveness Council can’t be a substitute for top-level government leadership. If the Governor and DECD officials can’t, or won’t—for whatever reason— get around to finalizing the state’s economic agenda themselves, the next best thing may be for an unelected body of business leaders to do it for them. Somebody’s got to do something, and fast. The sunbelt is the nation’s new center of economic activity and population growth. Global competition is fierce. We’ve got lots of catching up to do.

Vision, Goals and Action Plans
The Competitiveness Council has a chance now to achieve what many of us have been clamoring for, for so long:

A cohesive, thoughtful, focused vision for what Connecticut wants to be;
Concrete, measurable goals, priorities and timeframes that support that vision; and
Specific and realistic plans for getting there.

Industry Clusters
The Governor’s previous Competitiveness Council, composed of the Governor and 69 other business and government leaders, produced the handsome 132-page Partnership for Growth II: A Competitiveness Agenda for Connecticut (March 2004) (http://www.youbelonginct.com/pupload/PforGreport_web.pdf). This report was meant to spur legislation and action among leaders in the private and public sectors.

Partnership for Growth II has the state’s economic development agenda revolve around “industry clusters.” Developed by Harvard Business School professor Michael Porter, industry clusters is a supplemental approach to traditional economic development tools that creates extensive collaboration among business, government, education and civic leaders in specific geographic areas. The point is to boost the state’s economy and global competitiveness by nurturing the state's key industries, which DECD lists as: aerospace; agriculture; bioscience; insurance/finance; maritime; metal manufacturing; plastics; software/IT; and tourism.

While industry clusters have a place in Connecticut’s strategic economic development agenda, they can’t be all there is to it. Partnership for Growth II could leave the reader thinking that Connecticut’s greatest hope is to be the industry cluster capital of the world. We need a sharper vision of what Connecticut wants to be.

Regional Cooperation
The Council’s agenda must call explicitly for regional cooperation—to capitalize on shared assets within each region, to reduce costs of duplicative government services, and to avoid having cities and towns work at cross purposes, undermining the competitiveness of the region.

Sprawl Management through School Funding Reform
That state government policies promote cities and towns working at cross purposes is a basic impediment to our economic success and the foremost reason for our cannibalization of the landscape. Like a boxing promoter, the State pits cities and towns against one another in competition for property taxes to pay for schools and other municipal services, and watches on, all the while keeping less and less of its yearly commitment to share the costs of educating our kids. Meanwhile, Connecticut is becoming one big blob of suburbia surrounding a handful of dying cities. Can you say "dysfunctional?” An effective economic agenda must stop Connecticut’s pathological reliance on property tax to pay for public education.

Execution and Accountability
Coming up with an agenda is one thing. Getting it executed is another. The Council’s agenda needs a specific plan for its implementation. Otherwise, the Council’s report will be just one more dust-collecting coffee table book. The Council can pre-empt such a fate by calling for state agency commissioners to be accountable for achieving specific goals, within specific timeframes, that directly advance whatever strategic economic development plan the Council devises and the Governor endorses.

Call me crazy, but I believe that agency commissioners, as de facto CEOs, must be accountable for articulating, communicating, and achieving goals for their agencies. The Council could write the script for at least some commissioner and agency goals to the extent they directly advance the state’s economic development agenda.

It is reasonable to expect the Governor, her chief of staff, and the Office of Policy and Management (OPM) as the Governor’s management arm, to ensure that state agencies complement, and not undermine, the work of other agencies. The Governor and her chief of staff need to mind the store and require monthly progress toward agency performance goals. Heck, to improve the state’s ability to execute its strategic economic development plan, the Council might even explore a performance-based compensation system for a meaningful portion of commissioners' pay.

Unless a C+ economy is good enough, this is not okay. If Connecticut is to be a player in the national and global economy, we must set and meet high standards for accountabilty and proactively and continuously reinvent ourselves to avoid the predictable fate of becoming just another rustbelt state full of empty factories. Our unelected officials, in the form of the Governor’s Competitiveness Council, can do something about that.

Changing School Start Times in West Hartford

2005-03-08T10:04:00.000-05:00

Whenever I try to book high school-aged babysitters for my daughter, I'm struck by their rigorous schedule. Sometimes I try to call my regular babysitter before she's off to school to confirm or change a babysitting time - because she's hard to reach in the evening. She leaves for school by 7 am. On a typical day, by 7 am I'm just pouring my first cup of coffee.

My babysitter, being well-rounded, heads off to swim team practice after school, then maybe back to school for play practice or a yearbook meeting. She seems to often get home by 9 or 10 pm. Then it's homework time.

So when I first heard about ideas to change school start times, it sounded like a good idea - especially for the high schoolers.

But as the proposals have come closer to becoming reality, I'm skeptical. I don't think we've given sufficient thought as to how we'd work out the details for after school activities, or to the havoc the changes will wreak on parents's work schedules - and consequently our family time together. It doesn't look like anyone's weighed the costs and benefits of these proposals.

I'm told that the Wilton, CT school district's adjustment to school start times has been a success. But I also hear that Wilton is a small enough to allow high school and middle school students to be bussed together - meaning, I guess, that there are only two sets of schedules to contend with instead the three we'd have - for elementary, middle and high school. I also hear that Wilton installed lights at its athletic fields to accommodate after school sports programs.

...But does that strike anyone else as oddly self-defeating, that we'd have our kids playing sports later, after darkness sets in, making it hard to wind down by bedtime? Was the Englehart cartoon right about high school kids thinking that a later start time was just a license to stay up that much later?

Courant columnist Jim Shea says "the main reason [teenagers] don't go to bed is because their body clocks get too wound up by all the cellphoning, instant-messaging, web-surfing, TV-watching, music-listening - and occasional spurts of homework-doing." Think he's on to anything?

Proposed Options for New School Start Times at www.whps.org/HIGH%20SCHOOL%20START%20TIME.pdf
School Issue Stirs Debate at http://www.courant.com/news/local/fv/hc-whdstart0308.artmar08,0,5445550,print.story
Bats are Morning Creatures, Compared with Teenagers, at http://www.courant.com/features/lifestyle/columnists/hc-shea0305.artmar05,0,3654247.column
Don't Change School Start Times (letter to the editor, 3/5/05 Hartford Courant, from Joseph DeLucco, who served on the West Hartford Board of Education from 1995 to 2002) at http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/letters/hc-satlets0305.artmar05,0,583208.story?coll=hc-headlines-letters

Sprawl Is Here To Stay, So Let's Make It Work! Say What?

2005-03-07T20:19:00.000-05:00

In his article Sprawl Is Here To Stay; Let's Make It Work, Joel Kotkin suggests that redefining "suburbia into someplace more diverse, interesting and multifaceted . . . would provide us with an opportunity to stop complaining about sprawl and start learning how to make better the places that most of us have chosen as home."

Hmm... Kotkin seems to see the problem of sprawl as merely a matter of bland, boring architecture and an absence of sophistication and cultural activity. If only it the issue were that superficial.

The bigger problems with sprawl, of course, are its adverse impact on the environment we live in and the often overlooked fact that "they're not making any more land."

Kotkin's numbers may be "incontestable and the trends inexorable." It's probably true, as he says, that "since 1950, more than 90 percent of U.S. metropolitan population growth has taken place in the suburbs. Roughly two out of three people in the nation's metro areas are suburban dwellers. " The 'burbs" have become the homeland of American success, with an increasing share of our national wealth and half the poverty of the urban core."

At this point in the game Kotkin is probably right: sprawl is winning the battles that "legions of planners, urbanists, environmentalists and big-city editorialists have waged" for half a century in a war against sprawl.

But in urging us to call it a day and declare the battle over, Kotkin is wrong and short-sighted. The "legions of planners, urbanists, environmentalists and big-city editorialists" - not to mention small-city editorialists and millions of everyday people like you and me, who are waging war against sprawl are growing. More of us than ever are refusing to stick our hands in the sand while our society inflicts irreparable harm on our most precious resources - Kotkin excluded.

Joel Kotkin is an Irvine Senior Fellow at the New America Foundation. He teaches urban and suburban history at the Southern California Institute of Architecture in Los Angeles.