Tagged: CT House

Prostitutes Under 18 May Get To Blame Someone Else For Turning Tricks

from a press release:

SEN. DUFF: SENATE APPROVES CHILD SAFE HARBOR LEGISLATION

Thanks Brien McMahon students for their advocacy on behalf of bill

Hartford – In legislative session today, the state Senate approved legislation unanimously that extends safe harbor to minors who are victims of sexual exploitation, reported state Senator Bob Duff (D-Norwalk).

Under current law, prostitution is considered a crime regardless of the offender’s age. The bill—approved unanimously by consent in the Senate today—creates the presumption that a 16 or 17-year-old charged with prostitution was coerced into committing the offense by another person in violation of laws against trafficking in persons and that younger children would be free from prosecution in all cases.

On the floor of the Senate, Senator Duff recognized the student members of the Center for Youth Leadership at Brien McMahon High School in Norwalk for their support and advocacy on behalf of this legislation.

“Even on their spring vacation, the students from the Center for Youth Leadership sent numerous e-mails in support of this legislation, working diligently to see this bill brought through the legislature,” said Senator Duff. “I’m proud of the effort these Norwalk teenagers put into this legislation—which will help to protect children who are coerced and forced into a bad situation through no fault of their own—and was proud to support the bill in the Senate today.”

The bill increases the penalty for promoting the prostitution of a person under 18 years old by making it a class B felony, which carries a prison sentence of one to 20 years, a fine of up to $15,000 or both. The bill imposes a nine-month mandatory minimum prison sentence for promoting prostitution of someone under age 18.

The legislation—Senate Bill 153, An Act Providing a Safe Harbor for Exploited Children—now moves to the state House of Representatives for consideration.

The 2010 regular legislative session adjourns on May 5.

Legislature Thinks It Knows What To Do About Domestic Violence

Here’s a startling factoid, 30% of the judicial system dockets are tied up with domestic violence cases, according to Gerald Fox, State Rep from Stamford. Naturally this has prompted the House into action:

HOUSE VOTES TO APPROVE SERIES OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BILLS

Legislation addresses judicial, education, and human services issues

The Connecticut House of Representatives on Tuesday evening voted in favor of a three-part legislative package that takes a comprehensive approach in dealing with family violence in the areas of the judicial and criminal justice systems, housing and human services issues, and education matters.

The legislation is the result of a bipartisan task force created late last year by Speaker of the House Christopher G. Donovan (D-Meriden) charged with identifying trends and research pertaining to domestic violence matters and developing a series of legislative recommendations.

“Not a week goes by without yet another horrific story about domestic violence in our communities,” Donovan said. “That’s why it was so important to develop a comprehensive approach to a serious issue that has a wide-ranging impact on people’s lives.  I am proud that the Connecticut General Assembly stood tall today in voicing its support for the victims.  We owe them and their families nothing less.  We also owe a debt of gratitude to the Representative Mae Flexer and the members of the Domestic Violence Task Force for their vision and hard work.”

State Representative Mae Flexer (D-Killingly, Plainfield, Sterling) served as chairwoman of the task force and played a key role in authoring the legislation.  “We met with prosecutors, survivors, and advocates when creating this legislation,” she said.  “The state has an obligation to ensure that victims of domestic violence are receiving the help they need.  Law enforcement, service providers, and educators must have the necessary tools that will empower them against the horrible crime of family and teen dating violence.  The changes we approved today are the most sweeping reforms to domestic violence laws in Connecticut in the past 25 years.”

Changes to the judicial portion of the package includes the creation of a pilot program for electronic monitoring for the highest risk domestic violence offenders; improvement of the enforcement of protective orders; enhancement of information sharing in family violence cases among appropriate state agencies; elimination of the look-back period and for persistent family violence offenders; authorization for prosecutors to consider out-of-state offenses for persistent family violence offenders; implementation of employment protections for family violence victims; and the creation of three additional domestic violence court dockets.

“Most people don’t realize that about 30 percent of criminal court dockets involve domestic violence,” said State Representatives Gerald Fox III (D-Stamford), Vice-Chair of the Judiciary Committee.  “Enhancing the tools of the legal system, particularly in the area of protective orders, is critical to reducing the incidence of domestic violence.”

Other changes approved include a requirement that funding from the state’s marriage license surcharge is adequately distributed to domestic violence shelters in a timely manner; the loosening of penalties for survivors of domestic violence who need to terminate their housing leases; and the addition of teen dating and domestic violence education to educational staff training programs.

The approved bills, which next move to the State Senate for their consideration, are:

  • HB 5315 (An Act Concerning Education And The Reduction Of Domestic Violence)
  • HB 5246 (An Act Concerning The Protection Of, And Services For, Victims Of Domestic Violence)
  • HB 5497 (An Act Concerning The Recommendations Of The Speaker Of The House Of Representatives’ Task Force On Domestic Violence).

Longevity Bonus For State Workers; Yay Bonds; Nay

Inaction gripping the hearts and minds of Hartford legislators has resulted in the spending two-step. Step one, allow for longevity bonuses to be paid out to state employees. Step two, put off any bond offerings because those financial returns of state bonds have been so exemplary.

But the tax-writing finance committee moved to push that further to make $412.7 million in bond de-authorizations Monday, including 255 individual cancelations and reductions.

“We have not added any new authorizations,” said Sen. Donald DeFronzo, a New Britain Democrat who co-chairs the bonding subcommittee of the finance committee. ”We do not include any authorizations for the UConn medical school.”

Rep. Carlo Leone, a Stamford Democrat who co-chairs the subcommittee with DeFronzo, said lawmakers are responding because of concerns about a “negative outlook” and potential bond downgrade from the Wall Street bond-rating agencies.

“We all recognize that we’re in a tough fiscal environment,” said Rep. Cameron Staples, a New Haven Democrat who co-chairs the finance committee.

With bipartisan support, the bond de-authorization bill was moved to the “consent” calendar for non-controversial items.

Lawmakers also discussed the selling of bonds to refurbish the service plazas along Interstate 95 under an agreement that was reached with the state in November 2009. Under the old contract, the state got 11 cents per gallon from gasoline sales, and now the state is getting one cent, officials said.

What was that last line again? The state is getting less money in the fab deal struck by Governor Rell in selling off, er leasing our service plazas? I’m not the only one asking that question.

State Sen. Andrew McDonald, D-Stamford, said he is concerned with several aspects of the agreement. McDonald noted, for example, that Connecticut has given up a signficant cut of rest area profits.

“It’s a bad deal. There’s no doubt about it,” said McDonald, who is a member of both the Finance and Transportation committees.

But Sen. Toni Boucher, R-Wilton, although in favor of a joint hearing on the contract, said “it seems to me we’re getting a very good deal indeed.”

Boucher, who also sits on the Finance and Transportation committees, argued that is because besides providing food and gas, the partners are also going to be investing $178 million to overhaul the rest stops – an expense that might otherwise have to be footed by a cash-strapped state government.

“We are lucky to have a private investor that will shoulder the cost of this during a difficult time and it will create jobs,” Boucher said. “We should characterize this as a postive, fortuitous opportunity for the state of Connecticut.”

State Sen. Donald DeFronzo, D-New Britain, who co-chairs the Transportation Committee and is a member of the Finance Committee, said he is awaiting a thorough review of the contract being conducted by the state’s non-partisan Office of Fiscal Analysis.

“It’s a very complicated, involved analysis,” DeFronzo said. “But the idea of a hearing is good.”

A hearing might be a good idea before raising some more fees:

Lawmakers also debated over municipal fee increases on a bill that divided chiefly along partisan lines – with Democrats supporting the fee increases and Republicans against. The bill would increase certain notary fees, town clerk fees, marriage licenses, burial and cremation permits, and dog and kennel license fees.

Boucher On Legislature

By Senator Toni Boucher

I thought you might be interested in a review of last week’s public hearings on bills regarding other issues that are of special interest to our communities.

The Finance, Revenue & Bonding Committee took up the annual $250 business entity nuisance tax on every company in Connecticut, including those that make no profit. The Finance Committee is now considering proposed legislation that would partially remove this tax, but at the same time establish a new tax on certain bonuses. In my view, this legislation, Senate Bill 1, simply replaces one anti-business tax with another anti-business tax — a tax that no other state is considering imposing.

The Transportation Committee held a public hearing on Senate Bill 427, which would further restrict the use of cell phones and various other electronic devices while operating motor vehicles. Also under consideration by the Transportation Committee are House Bill 5033 which would require seat belts on school buses, and House Bill 5474 which calls for the establishment of electronic tolls at state borders. More fuel efficient cars have resulted in declining revenues from the gas tax, and so some are looking for new ways to raise money for the state. It has still not been determined if reinstituting tolls would be possible due to federal restrictions. Questions to be answered include: will the state cut the gas tax; will border towns receive additional compensation; will the revenue stream be used only for transportation projects; are there computerized alternatives to e-z passes; and will businesses in border towns lose out-of-state customers?

Topics under consideration by the Education Committee include House Bill 5425, An Act Concerning Special Educa-tion which would establish that the burden of proof lies with the party requesting a special education hearing, and House Bill 5491 An Act Concerning Certain School Districts Reforms to Re-duce the Achievement Gap in Connec-ticut which would allow parents to vote to restructure a school if they are in need of improvement.

When constituents take the time to share their concerns and propose ideas about state issues that are important to them, I have often been able to spearhead changes in state law that not only assist them but also help many others. Some of those legislative proposals under consideration this year include:

Senate Bill 363, An Act Concerning Polling Places For Primaries, would permit municipalities to save money by using fewer polling places for primaries, which generally attract fewer voters than general elections.

Senate Bill 335, An Act Concerning Justices of the Peace which would allow justices of the peace who are authorized to officiate at marriages in other states to perform weddings in Connecticut.

Senate Bill 253, An Act Concerning Proof Of Delivery Of Cancellation Notification Of Life Insurance Policies, which would require insurers to notify customers by registered or certified mail at least 15 days before terminating life insurance benefits.

The Government Administration & Elections Committee is holding a public hearing regarding House Joint Resolution 65, Resolution Memorializing Congress To Abide By The Tenth Amendment, at 10 a.m., Wednesday, March 17, in Room 2B of the Legislative Office Building in Hartford.

Boucher can be reached at 1-800-842-1421 or via e-mail to Toni.Boucher@cga.ct.gov.

Pickles versus Pickled

The Hartford legislature couldn’t bring itself to get a bill out of committee in order to hold an up or down vote on beer and wine sales on Sundays. But they voted out of committee a bill to allow farm stands to sell pickles and salsa. So you can buy pickles on Sunday but can’t get pickled on a Sunday unless you are in a bar.

Anna Duleep To Challenge Larry Cafero

In an early start, Anna Duleep confirmed that she will be filing paperwork to run for the State Rep seat in the 142nd district, a seat currently held by Minority Leader Larry Cafero. The last significant challenge Cafero experienced was in 2006, when the Democrats ran Lex Paulson in the district. Paulson came within 688 votes of winning that race. In 2008, there was no Democratic candidate challenging.

Duleep served on the Norwalk Common Council when she was appointed to fill in for Councilman Doug Sutton who retired at the start of 2009. Duleep also holds a position on the South Western Regional Planing Agency (SWRPA) as co-chair of the Housing Committee  and is also on the Environmental Committee.

Hartford Legislators Mull Red Light Cameras

Other states have them. Cameras atop traffic lights that automatically snap a photo of cars that run red lights. They are, to put it simply, controversial. The chief arguments for them go along these lines. Police Departments don’t have the manpower to enforce every traffic law, motorists know it, so they drive recklessly. The chief argument against them is that they violate some vague civil liberties and are money makers for governments.

Neither position really covers the issue in a fair manner. Like most things, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

In Connecticut, no municipality is allowed to use them. The question before the legislature is decide on whether to allow them. Today, Mayor John DeStefano, Jr. and NHPD Assistant Chief KenGillespie will join the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities (CCM), members of the Connecticut General Assembly, Yale-New Haven Hospital and the CT Livable Streets Campaign to announce support for the legislation, at a press conference in New Haven.

In March of last year, S.B. 149 made it out of the Transportation Committee, only to get stalled out in the much and mire of the endless budget debates. That bill featured the magnanimous gesture of a 50/50 revenue split with municipalities. I’d almost bet that somehow the burden of installation and maintenance fell 100% to the municipality.

The New Haven Independent reports the ACLU position:

The ACLU said it has not changed its position on the cameras, spokesman Patrick Doyle said. It still violates people’s privacy and due process rights, Doyle argued.

He criticized the impersonal nature of the camera-ticket strategy.

“When you get pulled over [by a police officer], there is interaction with a person,” he said. “The policeman will ask you what’s going on. That’s part of due process.”

The CT Livable Streets project proposes legislation here and gathers facts and presentations about the issue here.

Meanwhile the issue of just where does revenue go from traffic violations in Connecticut is itself mired in controversy. Good governance pacticies suggest that No local government should retain traffic fines. The money collected in local courts should be transferred to the state and returned via a local aid formula based on population. Yet what happens once money goes to the state? The municipalities in Fairfield County know the answer, it doesn’t come back here.

Governor Rell last year proposed adding cameras to record speeders on I-95. You can tell she doesn’t often travel I-95 in Fairfield County, but I digress. Her idea then was to split the revenues between the state and the camera operators. The legislature wisely shot it down.

Moving violation ticket fines go to the state. The municipality collects only $10 out of each ticket. If the State managed to actually reinvest ticket fines into road safety improvements, like funding new traffic signals and improving safety for pedestrians maybe the revenue split would make sense. But instead the money seems to go into the endless bottom of the general fund.

Automating ticket enforcement of moving violations is not a bad idea. Bu the money it generates should not go to private companies and should not go for anything but capital expenditures towards improving road safety. Without that focus, it would just be another unfunded piece of legislation not based in reality.

Why Aren’t They Asking If We Need Package Stores?

State legislators are re-examining the ban on Sunday liquor store hours. The argument can be distilled to lobbyists for small package stores are against it because they don’t want to be open 7 days a week, large stores and stores along state borders want the ban lifted so they can tap into the lost revenues they see leaking to neighboring states without arcane laws, and three big city mayors supporting the idea because, well, after reading two articles on the subject I’m just not quite sure what the cities of Bridgeport, Hartford and New Haven have to gain other than positioning themselves for more state tax dollars.

It all comes down to projected revenues that the Hartford legislators. For once I would really like for political flunkies to just do something for the purpose of streamlining government regulations. Eliminate the whole ban on Sundays and holidays and hours and just do something for the people of this state. Stop passing new legislation, and dedicate some fervor to repeal legislation and bureaucracy.

To the small store owners who don’t want to open on Sundays then don’t. If you think running a business simply involves opening your doors and people will buy stuff from you, then you are an order taker. Give people compelling service and interesting products and they will buy stuff from you, even if you decide to open on Sundays and close on Mondays.

What’s more interesting for legislators to debate is whether we even needs package stores. For a complete rundown of what state does what, the WIKI.

Malloy picks up first endorsements.

New Britain’s Pulaski Democratic Club was the site of the first salvo of formal endorsements by sitting Democratic officials in the race for Governor.

Stepping to the podium yesterday afternoon were Berlin Mayor Adam Salina; State Senator and dean of New Britain’s delegation at the capitol, Don DeFronzo; State Rep. (and New Britain Democratic Mayoral challenger) Tim O’Brien; and Berlin Democratic Town Chair Fred Jortner. New Britain Democratic Town Chair John McNamara emceed the joint announcement. Video:

Malloy’s Press Release after the jump.
Continue reading →

Connecticut Bonding Woes

The legislative session is up and running, and here’s a new wrinkle unraveling up in Hartford. Connecticut currently has 18 billion in bonding debt. That is about the max Connecticut can bond out. Which means that Connecticut, as CT News Junkie reports, the state credit card is maxed out:

In this letter to the chairs and ranking members of the Finance, Revenue, and Bonding Committee, Rell’s Budget Director Robert Genuario warned lawmakers that the state is approaching its bonding cap. This means it may need to consider scaling capital projects already approved by the state Bond Commission.

…

Revenue estimates are off $342 million already this year, according to Rell’s budget office and the legislature’s Office of Fiscal Analysis. Wyman is expected to release the latest revenue estimates later this afternoon, but not much is expected to change.

If revenue estimated continue to fall Genuario warned that by the Spring the state could blow through the cap by about $242 million. If that happens Rell and the legislature would be required to come up with a list of projects to scale back or delay a few years.

Since the bonding cap is based on revenues, the state could also raise taxes to boost its revenue projections. Last year Rell and the legislature negotiated about $800 million in tax and fee hikes, which were included in the $18.9 billion state budget for fiscal year 2010-11.