[POLL] Trumbull's Ciocci: 'This election is not just about economics'

Town Council Majority Leader Chadwick Ciocci accepted the nomination by republicans from Monroe, Trumbull and Bridgeport for the 22nd state Senate district.

In Connecticut, facts no longer matter, according to Chadwick Ciocci, the GOP candidate picked Monday to run against Democrat Anthony Musto.

He cited confused financial assessments, high taxes and a negative business climate, among the state's problems.

He quoted Abraham Lincoln, who said, "If a man can convince you that 2 plus 2 equals anything but 4, then you can't possibly win the argument because facts don't matter."

"I'm running because I envision a Connecticut where everyone who wants a job has a job, where our elected officials don't just treat your taxpayer dollars like it was their own money," he told supporters at the Monday night. The district includes Trumbull, Monroe and Bridgeport.

"This election is about jobs, out-of-control spending, deficits, regulation and thelargest retroactive income tax increase in our state's history," Ciocci said.


Interested in Trumbull's news, events, community bulletins, blogs and businesses? Sign up for the free Trumbull Patch daily newsletter, "like" us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.



He recalled a story in which a Rhode Island moving company owner tried to open a branch in Connecticut but was rejected after two other companies opposed him and admitted "they were simply protecting their self-interest."

Ciocci also called for electing the Siting Council, which reviews cell tower applications. It recently approved a new cell tower for the Police Station to the opposition of neighbors. Police Chief Tom Kiely had asked for one to improve radio and communications. 

However, the council did reduce the height of the tower from the original proposal. Construction has not begun yet.

The majority leader proposed allowing students who are able to complete high school in three years to split the cost of their education with the town. He also called for reviewing funded and unfunded mandates, improving public transportation and repealing Gov. Dannel Malloy's tax plan.

Trumbull First Selectman Tim Herbst and Town Councilwoman Kristy Waizenneger both praised Ciocci.

"This election is of critical importance," Herbst said, adding that Ciocci will "place the people's interest ahead of special interests."

The district needs a candidate who will "take a stand, not just a seat" and fight.

"It's time to retire the rubberstamper we currently have," he said, referring to Musto.

Musto voted for Malloy's tax increase, and has not "positively impacted" his constituents, the first selectman said. Further, he added that Ciocci fought hard to get onto the Town Council in a democratic district, maintained the seat and became majority leader chairman of the Council's Education Committee.

"I would put Chadwick Ciocci's record up against Anthony Musto's any day of the week," Herbst said.

Waizenegger also praised Ciocci.

"I was immediately impressed with his understanding of government," she said. "We're overtaxed and over-regulated. We need a leader in Hartford and I believe Chadwick Ciocci is that leader."

He has taken some unpopular but "right" positions, and has bold ideas and real solutions, she added.

Ciocci, a realtor who studied philosophy in college, is known for his opposition to grants and often quotes philosophy in meetings. He was elected to the Council as a senior.

His opponent, Musto, is a local tax attorney.

Mark E Smith May 18, 2012 at 04:39 PM
Tom, It is quite obvious that you personal hatred for Tim Herbst and the Republican party, the same who GAVE (as you were appointed in a uncontested seat) you your seat on the Board of Education. Of course that will make you "score" things differently. First Musto voted FOR an Income Tax Increase one that effected everyone who is lucky to have job. Second, to rub salt in the wound the Tax Increase he voted for (and you agree with) was Retro-Active back to the beginning of the year. I have a family member who received $0.00 in one pay check and had more tax taken out of the next one. I know that she is not the only one who had this happen. She had to borrow money from our family to pay her mortgage that month. I see Tom that you agree with this taxing strategy as does all the other Trumbull Democrats. Next as you put it, to me having a 20% decrease in assessment impacting my $11,000/yr. property tax is FAR better and more acceptable to me and most people than a 20% Increase in my $125/year Car Tax. Simple math here. Score it the way you want, but in the end you are wrong.
dave wilsoon May 21, 2012 at 01:50 AM
Musto is simply another tax and spender with no thought about Trumbull residents. Considering his majority of voters will hail from WELFARE city, why care about the TAXPAYERS who subsidize the Bridgeport school system, since they prefer handouts to actually funding what they need to operate their very OWN schools.
Kristy Waizenegger May 21, 2012 at 11:57 AM
The general sales and use tax rate increases from 6% to 6.35%; The room occupancy tax increases from 12% to 15%; The tax on the rental or leasing of a passenger motor vehicle for a period of 30 consecutive calendar days or less increases from 6% to 9.35%; A tax rate of 7% applies to the following: the sale for more than $50,000 of most motor vehicles, the sale for more than $100,000 of a vessel, the sale for more than $5,000 of jewelry (whether real or imitation), the sale for more than $1,000 of an article of clothing or footwear intended to be worn on or about the human body, a handbag, luggage, umbrella, wallet or watch. Effective July 1, 2011, sales of the following services are taxable: Services rendered in the voluntary evaluation, prevention, treatment, containment or removal of hazardous waste or other contaminants of air, water or soil; Valet parking provided at any airport; Yoga instruction provided at a yoga studio; Motor vehicle storage services; Packing and crating services; Motor vehicle towing and road services; Intrastate transportation services provided by livery services, with certain exceptions, including nonemergency medical transportation provided under the Medicaid program, certain paratransit services and dial-a-ride services; Pet grooming, pet boarding services, and pet obedience services; Services in connection with a cosmetic medical procedure; Manicure services, pedicure services and all other nail services; and Spa services.
Kristy Waizenegger May 21, 2012 at 11:58 AM
Exemptions Repealed: Effective July 1, 2011, the following exemptions are repealed: Clothing and footwear under $50; Nonprescription drugs and medicines, and smoking cessation products; and Cloth or fabric for noncommercial sewing, and yarn for noncommercial use. Remote Affiliates: Expands Connecticut law to provide that an out-of-state retailer will have nexus with Connecticut based on certain arrangements with remote affiliates located in Connecticut. Exemption for equipment installed in motor vehicles for persons with physical disabilities: This exemption was expanded to apply to the portion of the sales price attributable to such equipment when a motor vehicle is resold. Admissions Tax: Admissions charges for events at the following venues are taxable, effective for admissions charges on and after January 1, 2012: Hartford Civic Center; New Haven Coliseum; New Britain Beehive Stadium; New Britain Stadium; New Britain Veterans Memorial Stadium; Bridgeport Harbor Yard Stadium; Stafford Motor Speedway; Lime Rock Park; Thompson Speedway; Waterford Speedbowl; facilities owned or managed by the Tennis Foundation of Connecticut or any successor organization; William A. O’Neill Convocation Center; Connecticut Exposition Center; Nature’s Art; Connecticut Convention Center; Dodd Stadium; Arena at Harbor Yard; and Games of the New Britain Rock Cats, New Haven Ravens or the Waterbury Spirit.
Kristy Waizenegger May 21, 2012 at 12:00 PM
Corporation Business Tax: Surtax: A surtax of 20% will apply for income years beginning on or after January 1, 2012 and before January 1, 2014. Excise Taxes: Cigarette Tax - Rate increase: The cigarette tax rate will increase from $3.00 to $3.40 per pack on July 1, 2011. Tobacco Products Tax - Rate increases: Effective July 1, 2011, the tax on all tobacco products (other than tobacco snuff products) will increase from 27.5 percent to 50 percent of the wholesale sales price of such products. In the case of cigars, the tax will be 50 percent of the wholesale sales price, not to exceed 50 cents per cigar. Effective July 1, 2011, the tax on tobacco snuff products will increase from $0.55 per ounce to $1.00 per ounce of snuff. Effective July 1, 2011, the tax on cigars will be 50 percent of the wholesale sales price, not to exceed 50 cents per cigar.
Kristy Waizenegger May 21, 2012 at 12:01 PM
Alcoholic Beverage Tax - Rate increases: Effective July 1, 2011, the various alcoholic beverages tax rates will increase by 20%. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Miscellaneous Taxes: Real Estate Conveyance Tax - Rate increases: For deeds, instruments or writings that are currently subject to the state real estate conveyance tax at a rate of 0.5%, the rate is increased to 0.75% effective July 1, 2011. For deeds, instruments or writings that are currently subject to the state real estate conveyance tax at a rate of 1.0%, the rate is increased to 1.25% effective July 1, 2011. Estate Tax: For estates of decedents dying on or after January 1, 2011, an estate is subject to the Connecticut estate tax if the amount of the Connecticut taxable estate exceeds $2 million.
Kristy Waizenegger May 21, 2012 at 12:01 PM
Gift Tax: For Connecticut taxable gifts made by a donor during a calendar year commencing on or after January 1, 2011, including the aggregate amount of Connecticut taxable gifts made by the donor during all calendar years commencing on or after January 1, 2005, the Connecticut gift tax will be imposed if the amount of Connecticut taxable gifts exceeds $2 million (with a credit allowed against such tax for Connecticut gift tax previously paid for Connecticut taxable gifts made on or after January 1, 2005, but prior to January 1, 2011). New Electric Generation Tax: Effective for calendar quarters commencing July 1, 2011, there is a new electric generation tax that is imposed on every entity that is providing electric generation services and uploading electricity generated at a facility in Connecticut to the regional bulk power grid. The tax is equal to $0.0025 multiplied by the net kilowatt hours of electricity that are generated and uploaded. The tax does not apply to electricity generated and uploaded exclusively through the use of fuel cells, solar, wind, water, or biomass. Note: This tax is scheduled to sunset on July 1, 2013. New Hospitals Tax: Effective for calendar quarters commencing July 1, 2011, there is a new tax imposed on a hospital’s “net patient revenue.”
Kristy Waizenegger May 21, 2012 at 12:02 PM
New Residential Day User Fee – ICF-MR: Effective for calendar quarters commencing July 1, 2011, there is a new “residential day user fee” on each intermediate care facility for the mentally retarded in this state. Nursing Home User Fee: Effective for calendar quarters commencing on or after October 1, 2011, the fee is based on the sum of each nursing home’s anticipated nursing home net revenue multiplied by a percentage set by the Department of Social Services, which percentage will not exceed the maximum allowed under federal law. Welcome to CT
Anthony Musto May 21, 2012 at 12:29 PM
Wow Kristy - you've really been working hard on this. I assume you have paid as much attention to the taxing and spending increases you supported in Trumbull. So, could you please answer the questions I asked you? I'll reduce them to two core questions so you don't need 5 posts to answer them: Did you and Mr. Ciocci and the Republicans in Trumbull vote to raise spending by 4.5% this year, plus the costs of full day kindergarten? Did this increased spending result in a tax increase from 25 to 30 mils, or a 20% tax increase, for all taxpayers in Trumbull? Anthony Musto
MAC May 21, 2012 at 01:54 PM
To Mr. Musto, who must have his name at both top and bottom of his posts--CT would be better served if you and your Dem colleagues with the BIG government centered (and RULED) lives understood that citizens and families, and businesses, thrive and prosper when least interfered with by legislators and bureaucrats. Sadly, you don't agree with those common sense, free market principles, but think you are 'doing your job' by writing more and more intrusive and burdensome laws, and voting for evermore TAX increases and new taxe, as Kristy has reminded us. The philosophy of Malloy and all you Dems in Hartford seems to never admit the fact that state government in CT is way too big for our shrinking population--could there be a connection, YES!!!---and spends and BORROWS way too much!! Yes, Malloy, aided and abetted by Musto and his partisan colleagues, is now "borrowing" to pay daily operating expenses!!! Instead of realistic budgeting, their solution is to put further, higher tax burdens on living, dying, "gifting," opening and operating a business, purchasing property, purchasing every sort of goods and services, being sick in the hospital, or cared for in a nursing home in CT. No wonder CT is the number 1 state for outmigration!!
MAC May 21, 2012 at 01:56 PM
Too bad Musto and his colleagues are incapable/unwilling to take a realistic approach to solving the state's budget problems, but instead try to deflect/distract from their gross failures with sarcasm directed towards hard-working unpaid town council volunteers like Kristy. They were at least voted for by tax payers. Musto is kept in office by those looking for a handout from the fruits of others' labors.
Anthony Musto May 21, 2012 at 02:11 PM
MAC - I don't know where you get your facts but you are simply wrong. I think you are fogetting that if the issue is taxes my questions to Kristy about tax and spending increases at the town level are relevant, and Kristy's failure to answer the questions is simply a matter of her refusing to acknowlege the Republicans' actions in this regard. I did not even bring up town bonding, but since you referenced state bonding (although incorrectly) Kristy might also want to comment on the bonding for road paving and purchasing vehicles that was done in the last budget. Also, the effect of "gimmick" like funding an allegedly ongoing program (FDK) without it being in the budget, but that actually increases this year's spending over 5%. Is that "realistic budgeting" in your opinion? Or is that putting "further, higher tax burdens" on Trumbull residents? BTW - the reason my name appears at the top and bottom of the posts is that Patch puts it at the top and I sign my name - my real name - at the bottom so that everyone knows who I am. Please feel free to do the same when answering these questions. Anthony Musto
Thomas Tesoro May 21, 2012 at 03:56 PM
Funny isn't it how Republicans never want to take any responsibility for their actions. Governor Rell left office and gave the new Governor a 4 billion dollar deficit. Was it all her fault, of course not but, she and her Republican colleagues bear a portion of the blame. However to hear the Republicans it is all malloy's fault. These same Republican forget that President Bush and the Republican Congress left incoming President Obama with two badly managed wars and a near depression. Locally, Kristy and her Republican colleagues are more than happy to engage in fiscal gimmickry such as bonding road paving and the curious funding of Full Day Kindergarten while simultaneously raising every fee possible and increasing spending. They accept slipshop work (like the Charter Revision), they redistrict but are unable to articulate one rational reason for doing so and finally, they engage in a systematic exclusion of Democratic opinions by doing things like deny the Democrats even one alternate while the Republicans have two. Mr. Musto has done a fine job representing the diverse interest of his constituents. To criticize him for doing the unpleasant task of rasing taxes in the face of an enormous deficit while the local Republicans are doing the very same thing is a bit, well, to be kind, curious.
dave wilsoon May 21, 2012 at 10:56 PM
Fiscal gimmickry: like paying for all day babysitting with money set aside for something else, with no idea how to pay for it next year? Wow , monies that Dannel and Musto missed taking from the taxpayers, those same taxpayers that subsidize the BPT schools since the Citizens of BPT are unwilling to pay their own way- right Mr. Musto? Maybe if Trumbull and all other CT cities didn't have to subsidize BPT< NEW HAVEN HARTFORD, etc. we would have the funds to take care of our own needs. O I forgot- Obama says that wouldn't be fair. Sure tom great idea to be broke and keep raising taxes. Always a great idea to spend more than you take in, then borrow the difference in the name of fairness. Stupid is as stupid does.
1WayElephant May 22, 2012 at 12:57 AM
Lincoln was never my favorite president. He had a big role in something I disagreed with. I throw my support holeheartedly behind Cheswick Ciocci. He'll keep Trumbull safe from crime and magnet schools.
Anthony Musto May 22, 2012 at 02:11 AM
dave wilsoon - I am not sure what you are getting at. The only thing I can follow is that you are against the state sending funding to Bridgeport because "they are unwilling to pay their own way." I think you should consider that Bridgeport is the host to all the hospitals, courthouses, state offices, etc. in the area. If you wouldn't even want a magnet school in Trumbull, how would you like a jail that holds those accused of murder, rape, arson, etc. in your neighborhood? Train station, bus station, federal offices, even the main offices of the Catholic Diocese, the list goes on, and all are exempt from local property tax. Bridgeport is paid so much from the state because it hosts so many of these regional services that provide no tax revenue. As far as it not paying for itself, it's mill rate is much higher than anywhere else around - many people pay more in taxes than I pay in my mortgage. So, I think you should consider that having access to those things from Trumbull has a value and that is the reason we subsidize the cities in Connecticut. BTW - the rural areas that have prisons also get paid for them, but we don't see that here because we are the most populated part of the state. But go up to Cheshire and look at the 4 prisons near the main road, Route 10. Or go to Enfield and look at the 3 prisons out in the middle of nowhere. They get LOTS of funding, and not because they aren't willing to impose property taxes. Anthony Musto
Alexander B. C. May 22, 2012 at 02:59 AM
Dude, how can you be so obtuse to what is happening in the state with the economy, standard of living and expensive, entitlement baloney? You're either deliberately undermining hard-working decent people for the betterment of slobs or simply stupid.
dave wilsoon May 22, 2012 at 12:41 PM
Anthony We subsidIze those that choose not to work and contribute to society. You liberals left out the FREE, TAXPAYER PROVIDED health and drug clinics, welfare , free public housing and food stamps as additional Bridgeport "assets." MORE Awesome contributions to the greater good ? Will the last taxpayer left in CT please turn the lights out when you leave?
louis May 22, 2012 at 06:24 PM
Very correct Dave! What I don't understand is why we subsidize corporate welfare, when they live large, funding birthday parties that cost $50,000 when there are people in this state starving to death unable to get a job because the barriers exist which prevent their employment. We always knew that our capitalists would one day save their capitalists (well actually they aren't capitalists, they are merely taking the money and opprtunities and moving to the grand cayman). We need to start to differentiate between the two. Don't assume that a person who wants employment can easily get it, with the wrong kind of regulations we allow corporations to discriminate against the hardworking folks who want to play by the rules; they are able to hire people from Asia pacific lands yet we regulate so as to make the environment more unfriendly for them, as if we are pandering to some low sort of dependence, good businesses have to account for every penny they spend of their own money. Such old thinking should be replaced with more pragmatic ideas. Less controls mean greater freedom for them, but we shouldn't penalize the people who are actually trying to improve themselves, and the rising costs of things means, when people have no career opportunities, it means greater outlays of tax dollars to keep these people alive, american people, people who pay taxes when they have well paid jobs.
louis May 22, 2012 at 06:24 PM
well, thats what ideology gets us, tunnel vision
dave wilsoon May 24, 2012 at 03:54 AM
I guess since Anthony won his endorsement, his running commentary can stop and he can now ignore Trumbull and get working on giving away more taxpayers dollars to Welfare City.
Tom Kelly May 24, 2012 at 11:19 AM
Note to Chad Ciocci and the Trumbull Republican Party (and I am being very serious): Check out Dave Wilsoon's post above. In every State Senate election, this kind of elitist comment gets made about Bridgeport. Tell me, why again would the people in the city vote for Chad when his supporters talk this way about Bridgeport? I realize that Chad can't control free speech, but I assure you from talking regularly to people in Bridgeport that there is a perception there that this is how many people in Trumbull think. When a Trumbull Republican can't get 30% in the vote in Bridgeport, I'm telling you this is why. After the election, there will be additional commentary about voter fraud, but the reason that Trumbull Republicans don't get the votes is because the people in Bridgeport really aren't voting for you.
Mabel Buttress May 24, 2012 at 11:27 AM
To imply that a candidate needs to control their supporters is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Seriously.
Tom Kelly May 24, 2012 at 11:37 AM
Mabel, if you read my post, I specifically said that I understand that Chad can't control free speech. My point is very simple...the challenge is to change that mindset and that perception in Bridgeport. While Dave Wilsoon is busy defaming Bridgeport, he doesn't note that Bridgeport has to host the prisons, the oil storage facilities, the train and bus stations, the electric generating facilities, the landfills, the sewer treatment plants, the courthouse, the State Police barracks, the office buildings, the hospitals, the DMV, and many other regional offices. The elitist attitude criticizes Bridgeport while not acknowledging that Trumbull relies on Bridgeport for all of these essential services. Until the "we're better than you" attitude goes away, the election results are not going to change. So while Chad can't control those comments, what can he do? He can publicly condemn them, and he can role model a better dialogue that is inclusive, and shows awareness of the different needs and realities of the different communities in this Senate District.
Anthony Musto May 24, 2012 at 12:34 PM
Dave wilsoon - I have always been willing to comment in public and will continue. But I appear to be one of a few. Mr. Ciocci isn't commenting on his own thread, Mr. Herbst dropped off Tchat once elected. And I have hardly ignored Trumbull, as any fair review of my record shows. More on that later. So, why am I the only one? You have a choice in this election - me or Mr. Ciocci. You should hear his views, so ask him what he thinks. If he agrees with you that the State should not compensate municipalities, either urban or rural, for hosting state or regional services, you should vote for him. But how will you vote if the candidates agree on your major issue? Mr. Ciocci should tell you his position so you can decide. But I would ask you, and Mr. Ciocci if he agrees with you- should we in Trumbull build our own courthouse, hospital, jail, train station, etc.? I agree with your recent comments, the cities also shoulder the majority of the social problems in the state. So, in which Trumbull neighborhood do you propose public housing? This is all a bit tongue in cheek, obviously, but the point is that State supports municipalities, urban and rural, based on the State’s use of land, not welfare. And public housing isn’t just for the “welfare” folks – it is also for the elderly and disabled, and we have some in Trumbull. But unless we divide Connecticut into 169 independent towns, we will continue to pay some areas for supporting State functions. Anthony Musto
Anthony Musto May 24, 2012 at 12:47 PM
I would also point out that your comments regarding welfare are simply misplaced in this discussion. We can discuss social issues, but this discussion is about State support of municipalities – not welfare, which is sent to individuals. I also suggest that your focus on Bridgeport is misplaced. If you travel outside of Fairfield County you’ll find many pockets of poverty, both urban and rural, and if you look around Trumbull you’ll find many of your neighbors with housing, drug, family, employment, or other problems. Bridgeport isn’t the only place with social problems and its residents are not the only ones that receive government help. We are relatively sheltered here in lower CT, and the rest of the state is not doing as well. Those who lost jobs and have been unemployed for so long that they don’t have unemployment benefits anymore are eligible for welfare – and some of our neighbors in Trumbull are in that position – not because they don’t want to work but because they can’t find work. Yes, there are those who take advantage of the rest of us and abuse state services, but the vast majority of state assistance comes in the form of job training, health care, child care, education, etc. – not welfare payments. Anthony Musto
dave wilsoon May 24, 2012 at 05:53 PM
What would WELFARE CITY be without the courts, hospitals, prisons, etc? How about empty. No developer with a brain will come here. The socialist liberals would lead you to believe it would be nirvana. The reality is while every major port city on the east coast has positively developed, WELFARE CITY looks like Beirut- thanks to the Democrat mayors and reps, including the current bunch of liberals. The implication that anyone is better than anybody else is psycho babble and a patent lie. Work breeds success- for all. State and federal handouts have created WELFARE CITY. While other cities flourish, WELFARE CITY corruption rules. Call it defaming if you wish, I call it the truth.
Anthony Musto May 24, 2012 at 09:17 PM
Dave wilsoon - obviously I disagree. I think you have strayed from the issue of State assistance to cities and towns. I would suggest that your comments regarding federal policy and municipal corruption have little or no relevance to the issues facing the voters in the 22nd State Senate district - that is, what do you believe a state senator from Connecticut should do about federal welfare rules? But I would reiterate Tom Kelly's suggestion - Mr. Ciocci should appear on this board and comment on this issue. I am sure others would like to know his position on state aid to municipalities and whether referring to Bridgeport as "WELFARE CITY" is helpful to this debate in anyway. I usually do not find that name-calling, characterizations and generalizations are helpful to a serious discussion of important issues. Anthony Musto
Tom Kelly May 24, 2012 at 10:21 PM
Dave Wilsoon, your comments are becoming more condescending and snobbish. I will dismiss your comment about Bridgeport resembling Beirut as an elitist and ignorant statement. I go into Bridgeport all the time, and if you haven't had a meal at Testo's Restaurant recently, you should. Going to watch the Bluefish at Harbor Yard is a whole lot of fun and it's a great minor league ballpark. The arena next door does not have a bad seat in the house. The Sound Tigers are fun to watch, and the Fairfield Stags play there as well. There are some nice concerts and other events hosted there as well, and I particularly enjoyed Andre Rieu and the Olympic Stars on Ice there over the past few years. My wife and I regularly attend the Greater Bridgeport Symphony at the beautiful Klein Memorial Auditorium, and if you haven't been the Beardsley Park Zoo recently, you are missing out. Bridgeport is an urban city, and as our State Senator says, it has some problems that are consistent with poverty and urban centers. However, there is a lot of great stuff happening in Bridgeport. We enjoy taking the Port Jefferson Ferry to Long Island, Captain's Cove remains a great time, and there are lots of events happening in Black Rock. The University of Bridgeport has made a nice comeback, and Housatonic Community-Technical College is bursting at the seams and has a beautiful, new facility. The ironic part of your snobbery is some elitists in Greenwich and Darien talk like that about Trumbull....
dave wilsoon May 25, 2012 at 12:48 AM
Harboryard Park and Arena were subsidized and built with state tax dollars. Beardsley Zoo sold by WELFARE CITY to the state because we couldn't pay the freight to run it. HCC built and expanded with State tax dollars. Captains Cove , Testos and ferry private and established many moons ago. Tell me what private commerce or industry local government officials. including Antony, have spearheaded the last 30 years? Corporate headquarters like Stamford or Shelton? Retail like Milford or Stratford or Norwalk? Nope , these folks skipped right by us. Don't count projects paid for with handouts from other hardworking taxpayers in other CT towns, but WELFARE CITY citizens. Elitist or reality? For the record I do not support Choci or Antony. Both are proven incompetents.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something