In a pair of recent press releases, local Democrats are coming out swinging just weeks before voters go to the polls. The local candidates and Democratic party leaders are railing against local Republicans they say have dominated local government and its decisionmaking processes for far too long.

In an October 14 release, Newtown Democratic candidates are “urging voters to end the one party domination of Newtown government on November 3 by voting in the Democratic slate to add balance, inclusiveness and transparency to the governing bodies. The one party domination has deprived the town of the benefit of the Democratic vision for the future of Newtown.”

According to the release, “critical decisions affecting the lives and livelihood of Newtowners should be made in an open participatory environment and not by a few representatives, with predetermined agendas, in an exclusionary one.”

“Republicans outnumber Democrats two to one on most of the elected boards and commissions and have controlled the Legislative Council for 30 years,” the release states. “The choice for Newtown voters between Democrats and Republicans could not be clearer if they feel underserved, as we do, with regard to high taxes, excessive spending, inadequate education funding, declining roads and infrastructure and stagnant real estate property value increases.”

The release points out that the Democrat-controlled Parks and Recreation Commission has produced achievements including the development of Eichler’s Cove, and proposed improvement to Dickinson Park.

“The Republicans take credit for downtown economic development when, in fact, the development is promoted by non-political Borough Boards such as the Board of Burgesses and the Borough Zoning Commission,” the release states.

The document goes on to state what Democrats call “misadventures presided over by the Republican controlled government of Newtown that [have] severely disserved the taxpayers,” including:

“Eighty-two percent of debt service [going] to the town and only 18% to education, reversing the past 20 years, with Democratic Party balance, when 62% of Debt Service went to Education.

“The Republican controlled Police Commission spending $18,000 of taxpayers’ dollars for yet another flagpole study when a $50,000 study was done in 2006 and another study was done in 2000.

“Newtown [having] one of the lowest real estate property value increases in the area. Property value growth is dampened by talk of closing schools while receiving $50 million for a new school and slashing education budgets. This significantly reduces the attractiveness of moving to Newtown.

“The Republican chair of the Police Commission attempted to exceed Commission authority and stop Hook and Ladder’s relocation to Church Hill [Road]. Fortunately, the non-political Borough prevented this bold overreach.

“The Republican chairs of the Legislative Council and the Board of Finance, on the day of the Board of Education vote to close Hawley School, met with [School Superintendent] Dr Erardi and represented that they had canvassed their Boards privately and told him it was okay to postpone the school closing business. The chair of the Board of Education was invited to the meeting by Dr Erardi but the Republicans would not let him join the meeting.”

And “The Hawley School improvements could have been done for approximately $5 million in 2005 rather than $15 million today and was in the Capital Improvement Plan for years until it was recently removed despite having to be done anyway.”

An earlier release that ran in the October 9 print edition of The Newtown Bee further stated in part “an example of Republican control of the Legislative Council was the appointment of a Charter Review Commission dominated by Republicans (in past Charter Commissions, membership has been much more balanced) that proposed to reduce minority representation on the Board of Education contrary to what voters thought they were approving in 2008.”

The release closes saying local Democrats believe “the balance of ideas makes us better.” The release adds, “If elected, we pledge to fight for transparency in decision making, based upon research to find the facts first and with a balanced interpretation of those facts. Decisions will be made by many not just the few.”