DTC On The Charter

By LINDA BAUER

Published: Apr 18, 2008 12:00 am

DTC On The Charter

To the Editor:

The Democratic Town Committee met on April 10 and voted to support Question 4 of the Charter revision because it contains the language required by Moodyâs in order for us to be considered for a bond rating increase. An increase in our bond rating will save the taxpayers quite a bit of money when you look at the figures in the capital improvement plan.

We also voted against Question 7 because the seventh member would be chosen by Board of Education members, not the voters.

We encourage others to follow our lead.

Sincerely

James Juliano

Chairman DTC

36 Hundred Acres Road, NewtownÂ Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â April 15, 2008

Comments

Comments are open. Be civil.

0 comments

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

COA Briefed On Mary Hawley Public Service Award, Encouraged To Participate

Boy Scouts Scheduling Christmas Tree Pickups

Swim And Dive Team Begins Season With Visit To Masuk

NHS Wrestling Team Wins Matches

The Way We Were

Head on a swivel at all times - especially in grocery parking lots! Keep an eye out for folks turning at the flagpole - it befuddles them at times.

Please Drive Safe In 2025

How do you propose tapping the brakes, Dave? 8-30g already trumps any local regulations- you don't have a brake pedal to push. Brookfield, Trumbull and now Ridgefield have a clear case for a moratorium based on the development (thanks to 8-30g) that has already occurred. I don't see a clear case for Newtown to request a moratorium... yet.

Backs Moratorium On Dense Development Applications

Nobody is suggesting shutting the doors on new neighbors. What neighboring towns are doing, and what we should be doing too, is to tap the brakes on all of the multi-family residential development proposals so that we can spend 6 months updating our regulations such that if you want to build dense residential housing here, XX percent of it needs to be affordable (we will never make any headway on increasing our percentage of affordable housing otherwise, short of 8-30g), and the rest needs to be done in as low an impact manner as possible. Low impact on traffic, health & safety, the environment and on the cost of town services.

Backs Moratorium On Dense Development Applications

Hey, there you go! Richard solved it. Thanks, that seems so easy- we'll just get rid of the 2nd amendment and the Supreme Court. Seriously, the 2nd amendment doesn't create violent criminals or mental illness. The Supreme Court doesn't create violent criminals or mental illness. The problem is not the tools, but the criminals & the mental illness. The state of Connecticut seems to be focused on the tools, like Richard, while ignoring the users of those tools.

Why Gun Violence Is Higher In The US

Ned, please familarize yourself with 8-30G, and then please share the unique flaws that may be helpful in formulating a denial An 8-30g project can be denied only on very narrow grounds – i.e., if it presents health, safety or other concerns that exceed a town’s need for affordable housing. According to the TOG website, “projects cannot be rejected for incompatibility with a Town’s Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD); density; traffic congestion; height; aesthetics; concerns of neighbors or the community; and failure to comply with local zoning regulations.” 8-30g proposals are rarely denied by planning and zoning officials because the burden of proof on appeal is on the town. Appeals are costly, but a municipality can be successful in a court case if it has sufficiently established that the concerns leading to denial are factual and substantive.

P&Z Should Reject Vessel Proposal

<< Dec 2024 >>
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30	31	1	2	3	4

Log In

DTC On The Charter

Leave a Reply Cancel reply