To start off I was wondering if you might tell readers a little bit about yourself (Your background, what town you currently reside in, experience and qualifications, maybe some of your interests that type of thing)?
I have lived continuously in Glastonbury for over 30 years. My wife, Joyce, and I have been married 48 years have 5 children 14 grandchildren and served as foster
parents for 3 siblings. I graduated from Xavier High School and earned a BA from Dartmouth College and an MBA from Duke University. I have held managerial
positions in purchasing, materials management, manufacturing, sales, distribution, insurance and food and beverage with a focus on strategic planning, budget
preparation, loss/profit turn around and training.
My volunteer activities have been focused on opportunities to serve others including being active at parishes in faith, liturgical and social action roles, serving
with the Glastonbury Dept of Emergency Management, being a Board Member of Glastonbury Interfaith Housing Corp, volunteering for ImmaCare Housing Shelter
and working with intellectually and physically impaired individuals. My hobbies include family time, gardening and travel.
What made you decide to run for office this November?
I have always been interested in following politics and always enjoyed engaging in political discussions. However, I was not interested in running for an elected
office. Over the past decade or more I feel that many of the values I was raised with have become less important to too many citizens. Too many people focus on
the things that divide us instead of focusing on the things that we have in common. Too many politicians forget that they are there to serve the needs of the
people, the greater common good, not their own needs. I believe we need to reverse these trends, the sooner the better, and I would like to be part of the
group the brings about that change. I am committed to making CT a more affordable state to live in by lowering taxes, reducing the burden on businesses
and limiting the overreach of government. You can’t ask others to do something that you believe should be done but you’re not willing to do yourself. So, I decided to step up and run for office this November
If elected what issues would you like to focus on and prioritize while in the state legislature or what pressing issues in the state do you feel need to be addressed and how would you work to address them?
The issues which I hear from voters the most include inflation/cost of living, parental rights/ school curriculum, and public safety,. Connecticut is consistently
one of the states with the highest cost of living, the highest tax burden and the highest energy costs in the country. Inflation is out of control in Connecticut and
shrinking our savings and paychecks.
During the last legislative session and again during the summer Senate and House Republicans proposed reductions in the state income tax and the sales and use tax,
the elimination of the meals and prepared food tax, the expansion of the gas tax holiday to include diesel fuel, the elimination of the highway use tax (Truck Tax),
expand eligibility of heating oil assistance and the extension of the current bond law. Their proposals would have provided tax relief to our citizens and would have
helped reduce inflationary pressure by using state surplus funds without any additional budget cuts. The Democrat legislature rejected it. I will work in support of these Republican proposals.
Parents of school age children are realizing that recently passed laws by the Democrat controlled legislature have taken away their parental rights and given
them to non-parents. These laws empower someone other than the parents to take their minor child, without notifying them and without their consent for
various treatments.
Are these the types of laws you want your elected representative to be passing? I pledge to work to reverse these laws and restore parental rights to the parent.
Parents I speak with want schools to focus on academics not political or social agendas. They want schools and school boards to treat them the parent and tax
payers with respect. They want schools to treat all of the students with respect but not to choose one set of opinions, views or beliefs over another one. I agree
with and support this common-sense approach and will promote full transparency in the laws we vote on.
Citizens are increasingly concerned about their personal safety and respect for the rule of law. The car jackings of the last several years, the continued
shootings in our cities and the loss of life among police officers frightens citizens.
They don’t feel safe in their own homes and communities. The lower threshold of qualified immunity for police officers and the general lack of respect for them has
created low morale, and made it harder to recruit and retain officers. This has resulted in an atmosphere that emboldens the criminal and makes it harder for
police to do their job and keep the public safe. I will work to restore qualified immunity for police officers. I will work to show them the respect they deserve
and not place unnecessary burdens on them. I will work to reestablish consent searches on individuals to help with investigations and to help reduce the number
of drugs and weapons on the street.
Why should voters cast their ballot for you this November rather than for your opponent?
Throughout this campaign I have tried to identify to the voters the issues I feel are important to you and to me. I have not stuck to general ideology or political
themes but have tried to deal with the specifics of each issue. I have done this in my conversations with voters of all political persuasions. I believe every voter
should know in advance what I will support and what I won’t support for legislation and the reason why or why not. I have not avoided any of the
controversial issues of this election cycle. And have attempted to inform voters of what is actually in the laws that our legislators passed.
It is critically important to me that I be as open, transparent and available to you the citizens. I pledge to you that if elected I will continue to do so. If elected
I will commit to having frequent open informal meetings here in Glastonbury so that I am available on a weekly or biweekly schedule for you to meet with me in
person. I will commit to informing you of all legislation coming up for vote and how and why I intend to vote on it.
I will be a strong and proactive voice bringing to your attention events and laws that have an effect on your lives. You shouldn’t have to wait 30 years to be
informed of laws like the 8-30g Affordable Housing and its effect on local zoning or wait till shots are fired to have a public meeting to address car thefts that had
been escalating for 18 months or more. You shouldn’t have to ask what is in a bill I voted on because I should have told you up front.
My goal this campaign was to give you the voters a clear and articulated choice between myself and my opponent. I hope I have done just that. If you
feel my opponent best represents your views than you should vote for her.
However, if you feel that you identify more with my views and desire change in who controls the Connecticut State Legislature than you should vote for me. I
ask for you vote on November 8th .
Do you support modifications to the state’s 8-30g affordable housing statute? If so what modifications do you believe should be made to the law?
I do support modifications to the Affordable Housing Land Use appeals Act, known as 8-30g. This act allows developers to bypass local zoning regulations governing
height, setbacks, traffic congestion, impact on neighboring property values, etc. in municipalities which have less than 10% of their housing stock classified as
“affordable” per statute definition, as long as 30% of the developer’s housing units are either deed restricted or government subsidized. This act became law in 1990
and earlier this year only 31 out of 169 municipalities met the 10% moratorium trigger. The 10% ratio is calculated on the federal decennial census which means
municipalities must recalculate their total housing units every 10 years. If 8-30g requires 30% of housing units to qualify as affordable development then 70%
would not be considered “affordable”. This means that the total number of housing units in a community is increasing faster than the number of “affordable
units” is increasing. This makes it very difficult for municipalities to reach “affordable housing” goals. Modifications to this law could include the
establishment of the baseline to the 1990 numbers and to redefine “affordable” to include naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH’s) that are neither deed
restricted or subsidized and the inclusion of accessary dwelling units (ADU’s).
I do support the expansion of affordable housing in Glastonbury but not at the expense of local zoning controls. I am disappointed that our town has not been
more proactive over the past 30 years in promoting ways to increase affordable housing. I look forward to hearing more about recently announced plans by the
town council for a proposed affordable housing program.
How do you believe the state’s response has been to the Covid 19 pandemic? Looking back is there anything you think should have been done differently?
There were many things about Connecticut’s response to the Covid 19 pandemic that I question. Governor Lamont’s governing through Executive Orders lasted
too long, resulting in our state being ruled by one person without the checks and balances of the legislative and judicial branches. The suspension of
constitutional rights, for example the right to practice religious services, freedom to assemble, the right to a speedy trial, should be troublesome to all citizens.
The closing and lockdowns of businesses and the confusing classification of essential and nonessential businesses caused great economic harm. School
closings and the forced and prolonged masking of children, a group which studies consistently showed were the least infected by and the least likely to spread
Covid 19, caused great emotional stress and set back education. The end of the religious exemption for vaccines and the forced vaccination for many workers
seemed like government overreach.
Prior to Covid 19 we had a history of responding to this type of medical pandemic by quarantining the sick and treating their infection. We didn’t lock
down the entire population and shut down the economy as we did this time.
Throughout the Covid 19 pandemic there were many qualified doctors and medical experts that questioned this approach and other areas of government’s
Covid 19 responses. This should have led to genuine and fruitful scientific and medical debate. Instead, these dissenting voices were either ignored or
portrayed in negative ways. There was much confusion and mixed messaging from the National Institute of Health (NIH) and the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC). Many studies including one by John Hopkins University comparing the lockdown approach by states and countries to the no lock down
approach, shows that the no lock down approach did better both medically, economically and emotionally. Even now the head of Pfizer tells us that their
vaccine was never intended to prevent people from getting Covid-19 but was designed to help lesson symptoms.
All of these should make us very reluctant to give these rights and freedoms away and be very vigilant in demanding true transparency in our government’s
actions.
Do you support the recently passed police accountability bill? Do you believe it should be modified?
I would not have voted for the police accountability law. No one wants to employ a police officer who betrays the public trust or abuses the authority their
badge gives them. Everyone wants to see their police officers adhere to the highest standards of ethical, professional and legal accountability. This bill has
46 sections of new laws that make it harder for police to do the job of maintaining public safety.
This bill prohibits consent searches of individuals and limits searches of motor vehicles which were stopped solely for a motor vehicle violation. Yet consent
searches have been upheld as lawful by the courts. The bill requires all police officers, even those who only deal with the public from behind a desk, to wear a
body camera. The bill changes the legal requirement for justified use of deadly force and requires the police officer to exhaust all reasonable alternatives
including trying to arrest the person before deadly force can be used. This may very well put the officer and the public at risk when a fraction of a second is all
you have to make a decision. The removal of governmental qualified immunity leaves police officers and municipalities vulnerable to lawsuits even if their
actions are in accordance with departmental policies.
Do you believe the state legislature should do more to crack down on repeat juvenile offenders involved in motor vehicle thefts and break ins? What measures would you support the state legislature doing to curb such crimes?
Juvenile offenders should be held accountable for their offenses whether the offense involves motor vehicle thefts and break ins or other offenses. If these is
no accountability for or consequences for their offenses then there is no reason for the person to stop committing the offense. This permissive “slap-on the-
wrist” treatment can lead to the committing of even more serious offenses.
I support full disclosure and availability of juvenile records to the appropriate authorities, such as the police, so that the police and judge would have a
complete picture of the individual when deciding to recommend juvenile detention or public release. I support longer detaining time to allow family
background checks to determine if there is responsible family support and supervision of the juvenile offender. I support finger printing and GPS
monitoring of juvenile offenders and the transfer of jurisdiction from juvenile court to criminal court for more serious offenders and repeat offenders. Public
Act 22-15 which was recently passed included some of the measures and should be continually reviewed and amended.
I do believe that everyone deserves a second chance and would distinguish between first time offenders and repeat offenders. I support programs which
try to rehabilitate, divert and refocus juvenile offenders to responsible lawful behavior. There are many programs out there and they should be reviewed so
that the most successful ones are being used to help our juvenile offenders. I would involve youth specialists in the Judicial Branch, DCF and community
based non- government organizations, to assist in rehabilitation programs, especially for 1st time offenders and for at risk youths, preferably before their
first arrest. I do not support placing juvenile offenders in homes meant for younger children with behavior issues. I would prefer instead to have juvenile
offenders in other facilities where rehabilitative programs could be offered to them.
What action if any do you believe the state legislature can take to address inflation in the state? Do you think the legislature has done enough to address
this issue?
As I stated earlier CT is consistently one of the states with the highest cost of living, the highest tax burden, the highest energy cost and the lowest personal
income growth in the country, with inflation overall at 8%-9%. This is a terrible combination for our citizens.
We need to get serious about lowering the tax burden. Congressional Republicans this past session and again this summer proposed using the state’s
surplus funds to provide for relief to working- and middle-class residents by using only state surplus funds and requiring no additional budget cuts. It would
have provided tax relief without disturbing the $2.85 billion in pension debt payments or decreasing the $3.3 billion-dollar rainy day fund. No action was
taken on this proposal. This proposal included reduction of the 5% income tax rate to 4%, reducing the sales and use tax to 5.99%, expanding the gas tax
holiday to include diesel fuel, eliminating the Highway Use Tax (Truck Tax) , extending our current bond lock for another 5 years and, expanding eligibility for
heating oil assistance.
If we are serious about combating inflation and the high cost of living in CT than the state must start by lowering over taxing and reduce our spending. With
new revenue sources like medical marijuana, online gambling, and recreational marijuana coming on line now is the time to send a message that we are serious
about changing our tendency to constantly increase taxes and spending at the same time.
Ct is one of 15 states that does not index tax brackets to inflation. We should change this to allow indexing of Income Thresholds for Personal Income Tax.
The state should stop the mandates and burdens we place on businesses, especially our small businesses. These additional taxes and burdens can’t all be
absorbed by the businesses and ultimately get passed on to the consumer.
The state needs to review all departmental budgets to determine what is truly necessary and what is not. The state needs to move away from the budgeting
belief that you have to spend all of your allotted budget to qualify for next years budget allocation. During the beginning of the 2021 session Governor Lamont
established a study on government efficiency. The resulting CREATES report found 200 opportunities across 28 agencies that could save $600-$900 million
dollars each year. No action was taken on this report.
Glastonbury Citizen Interview
These questions Gary answered in The Glastonbury Citizen. While we provide the questions here, we suggest getting a subscription to the paper — as a good citizen is a well read citizen.
If the early voting referendum passes, what measures would you support or oppose for early voting, and how would you address the impact on local election officials?
If the early voting referendum passes, I would recommend that a one-week period immediately prior to Election Day be allowed. I would recommend that one polling place be established in each municipality for the purpose of in-person early voting. This would lessen the impact on local election officials. The same checks and balances that are currently used in our same-day election voting must be followed to ensure voter integrity.
Would you support or oppose a bill providing for aid in dying for terminally ill patients similar to what was passed by the Public Health Committee last year? Please explain.
I would not support a bill providing for aid in dying for terminal ill patients. The science of end-of-life patient care, such as palliative care and hospice care, has improved tremendously during the last 10 years. These options should be utilized for all terminally ill patients. Aid-in-dying legislation ignores the possibility of error on both the patient and the doctor in requesting deadly assistance. Such errors may result in decreased trust and professionalism in the medical profession, the possibility of making the wrong decision for the wrong reason by the patient and an unnecessary or early death for the patient.