CT News Junkie | Malloy, Foley Both Promise To Hold Towns Harmless

Social Networks We Use

Connecticut Network

Categories

Our Partners

Malloy, Foley Both Promise To Hold Towns Harmless

by | Oct 21, 2014 11:54am
() Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Election 2014, Town News, Hartford, Convention Center, State Budget, Taxes

Christine Stuart photo

Republican Tom Foley

Tom Foley, the Republican gubernatorial nominee, told hundreds of municipal leaders Tuesday at their annual convention that he would hold municipalities harmless when putting together the state budget.

Democratic Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, a mayor for 14 years before becoming governor, made the same promise at the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities annual convention. It’s a promise he made in 2010 and followed through with when he took office in January 2011.

In his prepared remarks, Malloy reminded local leaders Tuesday that they would have lost $270 million in education funds in 2011 if his administration hadn’t decided to hold towns harmless for the loss of federal stimulus funds.

“If I lose this election it’s because I kept my fidelity to you,” Malloy told local municipal leaders.

Malloy said he’s proud that Connecticut took a different path to dealing with its budget even though he isn’t quite sure the general public understands how the decision impacted them.

“The reality is we settled our budget difficulties in a different manner than every other state government that faced the kinds of problems that we did,” Malloy said.

Foley, who was supposed to address the crowd at 9:05 a.m., but didn’t arrive at the Connecticut Convention Center until around 9:30 a.m., was the first to tell the crowd that he will hold municipalities harmless.

“I’m not going to reduce funding to cities and towns,” Foley said. “You’ll have the same level of support you’ve had under Gov. Malloy.”

The statement received applause.

Christine Stuart photo

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy

Foley said he wanted to work with local leaders to roll back unfunded state mandates, but couldn’t offer any specifics.

“I’d like to look at them and see which ones are supported by good public policy and the ones that are we’ll figure out how to fund them. The ones that aren’t supported by good public policy we’ll get rid of,” Foley said.

Malloy reminded the friendly crowd that he did not balance the state budget on the backs of local communities even when he was staring down a $3.67 billion budget deficit.

“The difference between us and other states is that we did not balance our budget on the back of local communities,” Malloy said.

The statement received a round of applause.

Foley also told municipal leaders that if he was governor things would be different.

“I am a person who listens,” Foley said. “I am a person who likes working with people to solve problems and I’ve gotten pretty good at it over 35 years in the business world.”

However, Malloy wondered after the event how Foley could make such a statement based on the track record of laying off workers at various companies his private equity group has owned. Foley has disputed the job creation numbers at the Bibb Co., a Georgia textile mill he owned before he sold it in 1996 to its creditors.

“There’s a resounding sense that Connecticut is not faring very well,” Foley said. “People, I think like they’ve lost something. I think they feel like they’ve lost future prospects they thought they had as recently as four or five years ago.”

Foley said Malloy is trying to hide from talking about the real issues by bringing up Foley’s tax returns and his past business dealings.

“You mean I’m trying to hide the fact that we saw 11,000 jobs created last month,” Malloy said. “Or that we’ve seen 70,000 jobs created over the last four years or that every month on a year-to-year basis we’ve seen job growth in the state of Connecticut?...I’m not trying to hide that.”

Malloy pointed out that Foley could end the narrative about his tax returns by releasing them.

Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton said he doesn’t believe the public really cares about Foley’s state tax returns. He said the public wants to know they’ll be able to go back to work and have job security. “Those are the issues he should be talking about,” Boughton said.

Click here to watch Foley and Malloy’s remarks.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Share this story with others.

Share | |

Comments

(9) Archived Comments

posted by: Salmo | October 21, 2014  1:06pm

Neither one of these men are being forthcoming. There is no way the towns can be held “Harmless” in this current national environment.

posted by: ConnVoter | October 21, 2014  2:10pm

With regard to his tax returns, Tom Foley has committed the following crimes:

 

 


...

posted by: CT Jim | October 21, 2014  2:25pm

So Foley is going to cut taxes not cut any workers or services and cut spending to balance the budget? If you take 2/3rds of the budget off the table to cut it only leave the third that entails municipal aid. He sure seems like something doesn’t add up in his plan. Look no further than NJ where Christie went after every bodies pays and their Health care and their pensions. And he still devastated local cities and towns but cutting aid to their budgets leaving massive municipal lay offs, the gutting of their pensions and health care and a 25% increase in property taxes.@Salmo why is it every time Foley throws the BULL you guys on the right say “oh they both are lying? Well that’s bull. Both nationally and in the state the economy is starting to turn and jobs are being created. And during the 4 worst years of this horrible recession Malloy has either kept or increased municipal aid. He has a record, one that delivers jobs and money for our schools. So why are we supposed to take a chance on a millionaire who doesn’t pay taxes again?

posted by: Joebigjoe | October 21, 2014  3:59pm

Woweeeee Jim, I want some of what you’re taking. I’m all stressed looking at my customers being stressed. I’m all stressed looking at my own situation and wondering how even with making a really good living I will ever retire.

You just think things are hunky dory, and I need some of that.

posted by: whatsprogressiveaboutprogressives? | October 21, 2014  6:21pm

So @ctjim, i ask you what’s wrong with Christie going after everyone’s healthcare and pensions? Or did you really mean the public employees’ pension’s and healthcare.Why is it okay, that working for a Fortune 75 company, that I pay $284 dollar for an inhaler and someone I know gets it for FREE as a retired state of CT employee under a 90 day maintenance drug agreement that was brokered two years ago as part of the budget?It’s okay in your mind because all of the private sector taxpayers will subsidize the government employee for it. But yet no one is subsidizing me for it. And that;s fair how? This being the same budget that gave state employees another 4 years of guaranteed no layoffs on top of Rells already 2 year agreement. So my math has it at 6 years of guaranteed no layoffs during what many labeled the worst recession since the great Depression. So I’m still trying to figure out what state employees supposedly gave back during those negotiations, you know from our transparent administration. I’m not for layoffs because families get hurt, but at the same time I look around and see government growing. Just look at the Jurassic monster called UCONN. I would like to think that attrition would be a really good viable option. Let’s say maybe a thousand state employee’s leave/retire every year. Well after 4 -5 years, you have upwards of 5k off the books. People in the public sector say boo about all of the private sector job layoffs,because they know the legislature will just raise taxes to makeup for the loss. But when somebody starts talking layoffs to the public sector, the rank and file start crying to the afl/cio leaders. You can’t have it both ways. You should embrace attrition to a more sustainable level, or suffer the alternative.

posted by: art vandelay | October 21, 2014  9:49pm

art vandelay

@CT Jim,

The problem of solving municipal/state pensions and health care is simple.  Abolish pensions in leu of self directed 401K’s w/small state matching contributions and switch the health care plans into Obamacare.  It’s that simple.  It’s done in the private sector why not the public.  What makes public sector employees any different than private sector ones.  Oh yes that’s right! UNIONS!  Guess what, no need for those either.

posted by: shinningstars122 | October 22, 2014  5:21am

shinningstars122

@Art most folks do not know but pensions are not being offered to new hires in the majority of town in Connecticut.

As for new teacher I am not sure on this fact.

Plus you need to put in 25 years or more to become fully vested and for many workers they may not come close to that anymore because folks change jobs much more often these days.

@Joe you always want to blame the government for the economy and that is so ignorant of the facts of how our actually economic works.

If you are crying into your beer everyday about flat wages, no raises, inflation, energy prices and higher insurance costs look no further than corporate America.

The business world for year after year has taken, taken, and taken, and given back the very least and they still cry…more than you do buddy.

@joe I mean it was not big bad government who let the manufacturing base just evaporate over the last 40 years.

It was the profit driven model sir who destroyed the middle class in Ct with out a slap on the wrist.

Your continual expressions of distress directed at government is misguided and helps perpetuates this dysfunctional complacency of our two party system which is solely beholden to the all mighty dollar.

America is out of balance and I hate to break your bubble but that includes business, if not more, as well as government.

posted by: Joebigjoe | October 22, 2014  8:03am

Shining Stars you said “@joe I mean it was not big bad government who let the manufacturing base
just evaporate over the last 40 years.

It was the profit driven model sir who destroyed the middle class in Ct with
out a slap on the wrist.”

Sorry but business is based on profit and as someone who for years was involved in outsourcing I can explain why government screwed up arm and arm with business.

For years people have been telling government not to be so easy with allowing our manufacturing jobs to leave. Put tariffs or other rules in place so its attractive to look at another country as part of a global economy, but not so attractive that you shutter entire businesses here.

Businesses wanted it and government said “put money into my campaign or my cause and I’ll vote in your favor or block bills from even hitting the floor” that would make it just a little bit harder to move everything overseas.

To me moving some is very good business and good for America, but not to the extent that we have now.

I was in Guangzhou China and saw a building that was beyond anything we have in CT for manufacturing. I asked my host what that was because its size was indescribable to me. It was a toy factory. Can you imagine the buildings I didnt see, many of them housing jobs that Americans used to do?

posted by: Salmo | October 23, 2014  11:38am

Hey CT Jim: I don’t know why you are hammering me. I’m more with you than against you. I’m no fan of Tom Foley. I’ve had to deal with people like him all my life. The trouble is Mr. Malloy isn’t all that much better.