Date: Fri 10-Apr-1998

By CURT CLARK

Published: Aug 11, 1999 12:00 am

Publication: Bee

Author: CURT

Quick Words:

Varese-Rowland-drunk-driving

Full Text:

Rowland Says Varese Should Rethink Reelection

HARTFORD (AP) -- Gov John G. Rowland says the Monroe lawmaker who avoided

suspension of his driver's license because of a loophole after his arrest for

drunken driving, should think twice about running for reelection.

State Rep William Varese, R-Monroe, was charged with drunken driving last

month after witnesses said he crashed into five parked cars shortly after

leaving a Bridgeport strip club.

Rowland told reporters last Friday that while he didn't think Varese should

resign, he doesn't like seeing "a situation this serious get off on some legal

loophole."

But Republican Party Chairman Chris DePino said Varese should be given, "time

and space to make up his own mind."

The 50-year old attorney is due back in court May 18 to face the drunken

driving charge. He avoided having his license suspended by the Department of

Motor Vehicles as a result of flaws in the police report on his arrest.

The police report on the arrest failed to include the time when Varese

allegedly struck five cars March 9 and was then stopped by police.

Varese was charged with driving while intoxicated and evading responsibility

in the incident. Court records show his blood-alcohol level was 0.167. The

state's blood-alcohol limit is 0.10.

State law requires blood-alcohol tests to be taken within two hours of an

alleged drunken driving accident.

Fire Reports | April 28-May 4, 2026

Just Over The Border: Southeast Kitchen And Bath’s New Showroom

Police Reports | April 27-May 3, 2026

Silent Auction To Coincide With Garden Club Standard Flower Show

BOE CFF Discusses Itemized Estimates, Summer CIP Projects

Well that is some spin. The Democrats have a super majority on the LC and passed the Education Budget without serious consideration of if the voters could afford the multi million dollar increase. "Was the request justified?" rather than "is this needed?" and "can the voters shoulder yet another large increase?" The voters rightly sent it back. Then for some reason all the discussion around reductions to the increase seemed to be coming from the classroom, rather than administration and overhead costs. Is this a coercive tactic to manipulate parents into supporting the budget like tacit threat of cutting freshman sports was two years ago? Who believes the Democrats did not caucus privately before the meeting and came in with a number already worked out? This is the Dems budget, they own it.

Education Cuts: Who Voted For What

I think it is important that we do not villainize every black box seen around a home, business, farm, or municipal property. A black exterior station does not always mean rat poison is being used. These stations can hold a number of different products, including monitoring blocks, snap traps, non-toxic bait, anti-tick bait stations, organic salt- or cornmeal-based control products, and newer fertility-control approaches intended to reduce rodent populations without traditional poisons. The better conversation, in my opinion, is not simply “black boxes are bad,” but rather: what is inside them, who is maintaining them, and whether the rodent issue is being managed responsibly. Exclusion, sanitation, trapping, habitat reduction, and careful monitoring should all be part of a responsible IPM strategy. To be fair, on my own property I do use rodenticides, including Bromethalin and Bromadiolone, in secured bait stations. But that is a choice I make for my property, based on my circumstances and the risk I am trying to manage. I also believe property owners should understand the tradeoffs and be encouraged to use the least harmful effective method whenever possible. I support protecting Newtown’s wildlife. I also support giving residents accurate information and not assuming that every black box represents reckless or unsafe pest control. The goal should be responsible rodent management, not fear of the box itself.

Discusses Policy Against Rodenticides

Debora, thank you! I accidentally doubled the project prices by adding the bond to the appropriation. Thank you so much for catching that and pointing it out. With the corrected numbers, the voters approved a combined $1.32 million for a salt shed ($600k) and library pavement ($720k), while rejecting the $1.12 million replacement turf. Regarding the 80s, I truly respect the hurdle of 14% mortgage rates. My point is simply that the math has shifted: in 1980, while the rates were higher, the price of a home relative to earnings was significantly lower. We are facing a different, but equally crushing, financial wall. Ultimately, it is disheartening that voters who recognized safe sidewalks and parking lots as essential, dismissed a playing field in the exact same condition. The turf has passed its life cycle and is just as much of a liability as the library’s pavement, the only difference is that this safety concern affects thousands of children who, coincidentally, cannot vote. These are apples-to-apples needs. I was hopeful our community would agree that all Newtown residents deserve safe conditions, regardless of which facility they utilize. Again, I would be remiss not to mention that when 82% of residents don’t show up, we have to deal with the interests of those who did. Hopefully, the next referendum will have a bigger turnout.

The ‘Me’ Generation

Thanks for the reply. I meant the numbers you presented in your letter. I found one place where other numbers were listed: https://www.newtownbee.com/04232026/get-out-and-vote-on-the-2026-27-proposed-municipal-and-school-budgets/?q=\\\%22advisory%20questions\\\%22. In that article, the numbers were cited as: Treadwell field: $1,125,000 Library: $720,000 Salt Storage: $600,000 As one who started out in the early 80's when inflation was double digits, my 1985 mortgage rate was 14%, and child care costs were comparable (in present value), I shared your grief but never considered the voters ironic or shameful. PS. I agree college tuition is ridiculous. Thankfully, universities are offering (or considering) waiving all or most tuition for middle class families (upwards of $200,000 incomes). Hopefully, they'll also reconsider their need for those funds in the first place.

Sure! Child care costs: https://www.ffyf.org/2022/10/13/data-child-care-prices-continue-to-rise-ahead-of-midterm-elections-outpacing-inflation/ (also from 2021-2025 we had 2 children in a local daycare in Newtown and it cost us $3200 a month, so that's a number I am very familiar with) Home price / median price vs income source: https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/home-price-income-ratios Tuition increase vs inflation: https://feed.georgetown.edu/access-affordability/noting-a-decline-in-middle-class-students-colleges-provide-more-aid/ Hope this helps :)

Log In

Date: Fri 10-Apr-1998

Leave a Reply Cancel reply