Date: Fri 18-Aug-1995

By KAAREN VALENTA

Published: Aug 11, 1999 12:00 am

Date: Fri 18-Aug-1995

Publication: Bee

Author: KAAREN

Quick Words:

xxx-FHH-Wasserman-oversight-

Full Text:

Wasserman And Cascella Are Named To Fairfield Hills Oversight Panel

B Y K AAREN V ALENTA

State Rep Julia B. Wasserman and First Selectman Bob Cascella have been

appointed to a new committee that will provide oversight and local influence

on decisions on the future uses of Fairfield Hills Hospital.

The appointment of the two local officials to the Fairfield Hills

Implementation Oversight Committee was not unexpected. Rep Wasserman

co-sponsored the legislation that created the seven-member committee during

the last legislative session. Both also served on the Fairfield Hills Task

Force, an ad hoc committee chaired by Rep Wasserman, which was formed several

years ago to study the future use of the hospital campus as its use by the

Department of Mental Health decreased.

"The oversight process that we are now embarking on is important not only to

Newtown as the site of the Fairfield Hills campus but (also) to our region as

a whole," Rep Wasserman said.

"This property is owned by all of the taxpayers of Connecticut and as such the

decisions we make about its future represent an investment on their behalf.

The property is a great resource that can be of great benefit to Newtown and

to the rest of our region," she said.

Mrs Wasserman was appointed to the oversight committee by House Minority

Leader Robert M. Ward, R-Northford. Speaker of the House Thomas D. Ritter,

D-Hartford appointed Mr Cascella. Richard Nuclo will sit on the committee as a

representative of the state's Office of Policy and Management. The committee

also will be composed of a representative from the Department of Mental Health

and Addiction Services, the Department of Economic Development, the Department

of Agriculture, and the Housatonic Valley Council of Elected Officials

(HVCEO), the regional planning agency.

Rep Wasserman said the oversight committee will need to begin its work as

quickly as possible since Fairfield Hills Hospital is scheduled to be closed

early next year and its remaining patients transferred to Connecticut Valley

Hospital in Middletown.

"The decision to close Fairfield Hills as a major psychiatric facility was a

difficult but necessary one," Rep Wasserman said. "However, this decision has

been made and we must focus on the future of this valuable resource. We

established the task force in recognition of the changes that were occurring

at Fairfield Hills and to insure that the needs and concerns of the residents

of Newtown and this region were taken into consideration as we planned for the

future."

"This same high degree of local involvement and local input is not only

necessary to insure a continued voice for the citizens of this process, but is

also critical to the success of this process," she said.

The General Assembly this year enacted legislation to close both Fairfield

Hills Hospital and Norwich Hospital and to establish Connecticut Valley

Hospital as the state's major psychiatric hospital. Gov John Rowland, who

proposed the closing in his first budget address last February, recommended

that the state pursue opportunities to sell or lease the state's holdings at

Fairfield Hills to generate revenue for the state.

The task force report recommended that the Department of Mental Health

transfer its open land at Fairfield Hills to the Department of Agriculture, a

transfer which was made possible through other legislation sponsored by Rep

Wasserman. The task force also recommended that buildings on the Fairfield

Hills campus be used for a variety of purposes, such as general administrative

office space, business, education, affordable housing and expanded housing for

the elderly.

Mr Cascella said he planned to use the task force's recommendations as

guidelines for the "extremely important" work that the oversight committee

must tackle.

Rep Wasserman, who represents the 106th District areas of Newtown and Bethel,

is a member of the General Assembly's Public Health Committee, which is

responsible for legislation involving mental health issues.

Nighthawk Track And Field Teams Host Meet

New Heights Vacation Bible School Returning

Next HRRA Household Hazardous Waste Drop-Off Event Scheduled In Newtown

Genealogy Club's Next Program To Dig Into 'Dissecting A Civil War Pension Record'

Choral Society Planning ‘Voices Of America’ Performance

The editorial took no position on the budget going up or down so you're reading things into the editorial that simply aren't there. The turnout is tied to the lack of passage, in that people who came out to vote last time did not this time, indicating a lack of support on their part. Perhaps it wasn't spelled out clearly enough, but that's what the editorial was driving at, people showing lack of support by not casting a vote. The editorial did address likely concerns among voters that may have led to lack of support and lack of turnout. This lower turnout also follows increasing turnout over the past four referendums in three years (meaning it is an aberration from that), and increased turnout is something that I do push for regularly in editorials. Any disappointment you might be seeing is at the break in that trend, not at whether the budget passed or not. I'd rather see more people come out and vote "no" then not vote at all.

Lower Turnout Results In Two Budget Defeats

Clearly, property owners no longer want to bear the burden of expenses while the state does not meet it’s responsibilities. Rising costs must be addressed by actions that do not include yearly increases of property owners’ taxes. The state of CT must meet its share of the educational costs, and other costs.

Town And School Budgets Fail At Referendum

This feels like an oddly misleading headline and narrative, particularly coming from the Editorial Board. The headline "Lower Turnout Results in Two Budget Defeats" pushes a misleading narrative regarding voter turnout, and then seeks to tie the outcome of the referendum to that misleading narrative. Sure, voter turn out for this year's referendum, 18%, was lower than last year's. However, last year's turnout, 25.4%, represented the highest turnout in the most recent 10 budget referendums. If you take the time to examine turnout percentages between 2017 and 2026 (2017: 19.9, 2018: 15.7, 2019: 17, 2020: 0, 2021: 8.98, 2022: 7.7, 2023: 8.8, 2024: 15.1/17.49, 2025: 25.4, 2026: 18), this year's turnout was actually the third highest in the past 10 cycles. Perhaps the headline of this article should say "Lower Voter Turnout Than Last Year", which is more accurate, rather than creating an impression that this year's turnout is some type of aberration - a narrative that the turnout numbers, in all their binary glory, simply do not support. Further, the headline of this article appears to tie the "lower turnout" to the defeated budgets. Sure, that could be true. But, perhaps, its more likely that Newtown residents are feeling the squeeze of multiple economic influences. In Newtown, we've experienced property revaluations and increased municipal spending. Eversource continues to raise rates. The state legislature gives PURA the authority to impose Public Benefit charges that benefit a tiny percentage of the public (and subsequently burdening the rest of us). At the national level, inflation has run rampant for years and many of those costs remain high to this day. In short, the data tells a far less dramatic—and far more honest—story than the headline suggests. This wasn’t an electorate vanishing in apathy; it was a fairly typical turnout delivering an verdict that, perhaps, some at the Editorial Board didn't like. At some point, it’s worth considering that residents aren’t confused, disengaged, or misled by turnout; they’re simply doing math at their kitchen tables and concluding that “no” is the only responsible answer left.

Enjoyed the forum which only confirmed my support for Brandon Moore as the Democratic candidate to run for the state representative position. Brandon Moore did not waiver about his duty to all the people, if elected, when an issue presents itself that requires that he voice a difference of opinion for the wellbeing of Newtown residents. If Michelle Ku’s 16 years have led to her loyalty being to other elected officials, as she implied, then Newtown is going to continue to witness actions that do not protect its residents. She could not unseat republican, Mitch Bolinsky, during a Blue Wave, and once again, will not do it now. Winning that seat is critical for all. That explains why her previous campaign committee now campaigns for Brandon Moore. It explains all the endorsements he has received from local elected democratic officials. It’s why we need Brandon Moore to be the democratic candidate to run for state representative.

Second Newtown DTC, League Of Women Voters Candidates Event Planned

Appreciated the opportunity to hear from both candidates as we were present for the College Dems forum but only heard from Brandon Moore. It was an opportunity to see who can unseat the Republican incumbent and there is no doubt that Brandon Moore should be the Democratic candidate. One concerned parent posed a question about discrimination unaddressed by the school district and interestingly enough, Michelle Ku, who proudly speaks of her Board membership years, said little, while Brandon Moore passionately addressed the issue along with his experience as an Apache Helicopter Commander. This family is supporting Brandon Moore. We need change and someone who is not afraid to disagree, especially about the rising costs of living in Newtown.

<< May 2026 >>
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
26	27	28	29	30	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	5	6

Log In

Date: Fri 18-Aug-1995

Leave a Reply Cancel reply