Letters to the Editor: Stratfield needs a food market...
Updated 3:42 pm, Friday, August 18, 2017
In the course of expressing their support for Kevin Kiley in the June special election, two of our more vocal town Democrats presented us with remarkable revelations about town Republicans that town Republicans themselves were likely unaware.
For example there was much ado about the fact that the Republican Town Committee threw its support to Laurie McArdle over Kevin Kiley to run for selectman with Chris Tymniak in 2015. RTC members who cast their votes in favor of McArdle likely believed they were doing so because Laurie’s qualifications as a former teacher would complement Chris’s qualifications in a way in which Kevin Kiley’s could not, but according to RTM member Heather Dean that was not the case.
We encourage letters to the editor and support an open exchange of ideas. Letters about local community issues are given preference.
Length and identification: Letters should be no more than 500 words, and each must include the writer’s name, full address and daytime telephone number for verification purposes. Only name and town of residence are published.
How to submit: Letters must be sent by the writer directly to the editor; letters sent through third parties will not be accepted. We prefer email to email@example.com. Letters also may be mailed to: Attn: Jarrod Ferrari, Letters to the Editor, 410 State St., Bridgeport, CT 06604.
Rights we reserve: We reserve the right to reject letters or edit them for taste, length, clarity and legality.
As Dean explained in her letter, the process was actually hijacked by a clandestine ultra-right wing fringe group which somehow infiltrated the RTC for the purpose of throwing Kevin under the bus. Who knew?
From RTM member Elizabeth Zezima we have learned that Republican RTM Caucus is now answering to a “special interest group” with a “dogmatic policy of austerity” again who knew? Clearly this “special interest group” must be running a covert operation as well. They are so secretive, we didn’t even know about them!
In her letter, Zezima tells us that holding the contingency line flat year over year is a budget cut. It is not. She tells us that not increasing contingency is the same as cutting Education and Libraries. They are unrelated. She says that the Democratic caucus was not made aware of budgetary actions under consideration by the Republican Caucus. The Democratic Minority Leader was told days in advance of the budget vote that reductions would be proposed to contingency as well as reductions in hours for specific departments.
Zezima does deserve credit for actually attempting to characterize “decreased spending” as “unsustainable”. That may sound like a contradiction to many of us, but in as much as an annual budget increase is Zezima’s expectation, in her mind a zero percent increase is synonymous with a budget “cut”, and cautioning us all that we just can’t keep on not spending at this rate doesn’t seem at all like a paradox... to her.
Francis “Hank” Ference
RTM District #8, Deputy Moderator
To the Editor:
I hope it's true that a food market will open at the old IGA market and I for one can't wait to start shopping there.
And I know many in our community will be glad to have our own local food market once again too.
To the Editor:
While running for state representative last year in Fairfield’s 133rd District, I was overwhelmed by the amount of people yielding unwavering support for Cristin McCarthy Vahey despite the fact she had just voted for a state budget that contributed to driving GE out of Fairfield and one that put each and every business in Connecticut at risk of relocating. With a deep respect for Cristin’s public service, I’d be remiss, however, and doing our citizens a disservice by not raising awareness.
The first transgression against the people of Fairfield was when she voted against an inherently flawed budget and then voted for the implementer necessary to enact that very same budget. For those paying attention, it was blatantly obvious that McCarthy Vahey put politics over policy while she waited for the Legislature’s vote to see if she would be afforded the opportunity to vote for a disingenuous implementer that would devastate her very own constituents and cripple business, large and small, across the state.
Now, McCarthy Vahey has rubberstamped a 10-year union concession deal that the nonpartisan Office of Fiscal Analysis didn’t even have enough time to examine given how quickly it was pushed through the CT General Assembly for approval by the Democrats. At a time when our virtually bankrupt state needs concessions from our already exorbitant union contracts, once again, partisan politics takes precedence in the 133rd District.
To the Blue Dog loyalists set in their ways and far too stubborn to change, your beloved blue state is now split 18-18 in the Senate and 79-72 in the House. The rest of the state recognizes the failed initiatives of Malloy and his rubberstamping, partisan Legislature. It’s time for the 133rd to follow suit.
To the Editor:
Labor Day is both a national toast to the American worker and farewell to the summer season. As Summer Fridays and weekend trips to the beach wind down, it’s a great time to celebrate all the hard work we do every day.
So if you’re cracking open a cold one with friends or family this Labor Day, we encourage you to celebrate responsibly and plan ahead to get home safely.
Over the past 35 years, Anheuser-Busch and its wholesaler partners have invested more than $1 billion in the United States to promote alcohol responsibility and help prevent drunk driving. As the local Anheuser-Busch distributor, Dichello Distributors, Inc. is committed to helping keep the local roads safe this Labor Day weekend.
This Labor Day, we’re reminding everyone to designate a driver, get a ride, or take public transport if your celebrations involve alcohol. Whatever you do, care enough to get home safely and help keep our whole community safe.
“Give a Damn. Don’t Drive Drunk. No excuses.”
Alcohol Awareness Coordinator
Dichello Distributors, Inc.
To the Editor:
It should come as no surprise to the hundreds of patrons of the main branch of Fairfield’s Public Libraries and its board that our prestigious and well used libraries, in part due to its many services, as well as to being home to many who spend their day comfortably working, reading, or resting at our library, that there is too little parking space or none at all available. It is not enough to say that parking is less than superfluous on most days when its programs invite a great many visitors.
There are too few handicapped parking spaces available. The lot, on busy mornings, particularly, which is almost every day of the week, presents visitors hoping, just by chance to find a patron to leave, or who patiently wait in line for one hopefully, exit the side entrance’s exit for their car, becomes a blocking game, with entrance and round the lot exit for lack of a space.
I protest, in the main, for the lack of handicapped spaces. And I consider it particularly dire when I see someone, not all, exit the vehicle, having affixed the proper handicapped, display card to the rearview mirror affixer where it can be clearly visible. I am, particularly, vexed by people who take advantage of the permit issued to the owner and or driver of the vehicle who is handicapped when I see the driver and only passenger, leave the car without need of assistance or some other form of aid. But parking lots everywhere, with or without sufficient parking taking advantage of what the permit to be displayed affords.
While I understand that parking is extremely limited, and that after fifty years of residency and having seen many modifications to the main library, no additional parking has been supplied, quite simple because none has been found. For years, when I was still able to walk well and with élan I have parked in the adjacent commercial lot under frightened away by new promises to tow signs for violators. Although, I do not know how such signage could be enforced. Even so, I have never been one to tempt fate.
Except, I no longer want to tempt fate by parking in the lot across the street owned by a bank and signed, bank patrons, only. Nor do I wish to park in the town lot, the next street over where I fear that overstaying my two hour library visit might result in a ticket. So far I have been lucky, but the walk, although it provides my legs with some needed exercise, it does nothing to relieve my anxiety, although a ticket is better than a tow to an unknown holding pen.
I was recently demonstrated my annoyance, well, anger, at the main desk to a lady who was only trying to be helpful, explaining how busy the library was with the programs they have, particularly those for children. And for this, I am truly sorry. I hope she learns of this letter and accepts my apology, for I am unlikely to ever see her again.
However, years and years ago, the talent at Town Hall had to have appreciated the dilemma. But, apparently, there was no solution other than to rebuild on a new site. Well, the last is a fairy tale. A great library on a small footprint can only entertain so many visitors after all local parking up and down the street is occupied by parents on mornings sporting great programs for parents or nannies with small children, such as the ones I thoroughly enjoy watching, when I stop by on the second floor on my way to a writing class at the children’s library room or all-purpose room where often, mornings, the kids, parents, and care-givers assemble for happy jump-up-and-down dancing classes to happy, cheery tunes. How, can one not enjoy seeing so many, kids, toddlers, babies and their grown-ups being so merry?
I decry a major fault in our town, that our forefathers, along the way, could not have found a solution to a blatantly, never-ending problem in our so popular and, enriching town?