To the Editor:

I write in support of Governor Malloy for Governor, Elizabeth Esty for the US House of Representatives, Kim Fawcett for State Senate, and Matt Cole for state representative. The support and compassion Governor Malloy and Representative Esty provide Newtown and its families goes without saying. They demonstrate strong leadership in times of challenge.

State-wise, I find of particularly importance is the micro-grid clean energy initiative. Connecticut businesses pay one of the highest energy costs in the nation. All the candidates above strongly support the Governor’s grant programs that three towns and grid areas such as at Wesleyan and UConn have undertaken. These solar and/or wind micro-grids not only save energy costs, reduce mass outage risks experienced in recent storms, but also may sell back energy to power companies.  This is the type of program Connecticut needs to continue to attract business. Contrast this with the recent report that Newtown’s delegates received poor 2014 showings by the CT League of Conservation Voters. Where Matt Cole supports micro-grid programs, his opponent, Mitch Bolinsky received a grade of D (67 percent) from the CT League. A vote for Matt Cole and Kim Fawcett is a vote for business, energy security, and the environment.

Mitch Bolinsky is a nice guy, but what I find somewhat troubling is that he voted against the state bonding for Sandy Hook Elementary School. Kim Fawcett voted Yes for the Sandy Hook school bonding. Matt Cole would have voted Yes, too. The state bonding included support for roads, schools, tax incentives for new businesses, and state military readiness. I’m told out of 54 Republicans in the State House, Mr Bolinsky was one of only 8 Republicans who voted against it. So, we have a Task Force of 28 town elected officials unanimously voting to rebuild Sandy Hook school. Newtowners by a 90 percent referendum margin voted to rebuild the school. The Governor endorsed it, the State Bonding Commission approved it, and there was no Plan B. Failure would have been a cruel heartbreak.  The reason for the No vote – a “philosophical stand.” If the Democratic votes weren’t there to pass it he asserts, he would have voted Yes. That’s not a philosophical stand. A principled philosophical stand would be “I think the bonding package is too high and if it means losing Sandy Hook so be it.” The truth is, the bonding package was good for Connecticut as Democrats and Republicans recognized.  Again, Mitch is a nice guy, but we need visionary-action officials in Hartford like Kim Fawcett-State Senate, and Matt Cole-State Representative (reminds me of Chris Lyddy).

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Jim Gaston

18 Main Street, Newtown                    October 22, 2014