I am grateful to The Democratic Town committee. I can vouch for the careful consideration they took in selecting our candidates. I appreciate their confidence in my managing skills to address the many issue facing Newtown. Ill be conducting listening tours over the next few months to gain a deeper understanding of my Newtown neighbors concerns and will be ready to address then day one.
There has been a rash of dog attacks, at least three that I know about on the sidewalks in town. Owners of pets need to be more attentive and respectful of their neighbors. Aggressive dogs need to be watched carefully to protect all. This is a serious issue and should be addresses not swept under a rug.
I attended the meeting, and the results were reached after extensive discussion. Thats why its important to attend these high profile meeting, you see the facts yourself, As Alex, in the following letter, said the solution is not always more rules and legislation. Speaking to each other often solves issue a lot quicker with more flexibility.
es, Councilman Pisani used strong words—but let’s not pretend there isn’t real frustration behind them. When a serious and measured question about protecting public safety, reducing taxpayer costs, and improving traffic control is met with performative outrage and political theater, frustration is more than justified. It’s earned.
I too will continue to vote for those who will fight for everyone's rights. Newtown deserves leadership that's not afraid to speak the truth and to suggest positive change.
Speaking of SMH, Ackert’s comment is the perfect example of why Newtown’s public discourse has become so toxic. He accuses Councilman Pisani of ignoring the will of “26 out of 30” people—as if 30 people in a room define the will of an entire town. That’s not how representative government works, and it's certainly not how thoughtful policymaking should be conducted.
Ackert runs a Facebook group that has made a habit of weaponizing process. At nearly every turn, he threatens lawsuits over minor procedural points, creating unnecessary hurdles and sowing fear. This isn't civic engagement—it's obstruction, dressed up as activism. And it comes at a cost to taxpayers, town staff, and the very businesses that help keep Newtown vibrant.
Councilman Pisani raised a valid question about whether it’s worth exploring an ordinance that could both protect protestors and save the town $225,000 in police overtime. He didn’t propose banning protests. He didn’t even draft an ordinance. He asked whether we should consider one. For that, he’s met with mockery and personal attacks. It’s telling that his critics can’t engage with the substance—they just yell “stupid” louder and hope no one notices.
If Mr. Ackert is so sure of his position, perhaps he should stop threatening lawsuits and start presenting ideas that balance safety, fiscal responsibility, and smart development. Until then, spare us the righteous indignation.