Recent Comments

City Hall Watch wrote:
Local Officials to Lawmakers: Don't Cut State Aid
& Give Us Choices
: “When New Haven went through re…”
cedarhillresident wrote:
Local Officials to Lawmakers: Don't Cut State Aid
& Give Us Choices
: “Walt thanks and doug too. I kn…”
Walt wrote:
Local Officials to Lawmakers: Don't Cut State Aid
& Give Us Choices
: “"Legitimatically".WOW, I inve…”
Walt wrote:
Local Officials to Lawmakers: Don't Cut State Aid
& Give Us Choices
: “Reevaluation means different…”

Categories

  • CT Elections 2006
    • Closure on 2006 Democratic Primary
    • Daily Kos Poll Finds Many in CT Would Change Vote
    • Edited: Waxing Nostalgic
  • Cartoons
    • Rowland Gives Blago Some Advice
    • Rell's Deposit
    • The Fate of Newspapers
  • Corporate Watch
    • Big Oil Drank Your Stimulus Check
    • Blumenthal Tells Internet Company to Stop Snooping
    • Public's Right-to-Know Prevails
  • Courts
    • Terror Case Convict Appeals To Judge
    • Atlantic Wire Pleads Guilty To Polluting Branford River
    • Hunger Striking Prisoner's Dream of a
      New Trial Won't Come True This Year
  • Education
    • Lobbying Season Starts Early At Capitol
    • UConn Hires Alternative Energy Experts
    • Cosby's message: Responsible parenting
      wrapped in hope and empowerment
  • Election 2008
    • Connecticut Dems Vent Against Lieberman
    • No Censure, Just A Letter Of Disapproval
    • Dems Expected to Scold Lieberman Today
  • Environment
    • Hartford Landfill Closes
    • Is That Toy Safe?
    • Hartford Marathon Goes Orange and Green
  • General News
    • 35 Cents An Hour = Cleaner Dishes
    • Memories From 2008: A Year In Review
    • We Know We Promised
  • Health Care
    • Quizzed on Health Care
    • State Officials Insist Husky Network Is Adequate
    • All They Want For Christmas Is Health Care
  • Iraq at Home
    • West Hartford Movie Night
    • Five Years of War
    • Hartford Passes Anti-War Resolution...5 Years Too Late?
  • Labor
    • All They Want For Christmas Is Health Care
    • Jobless Numbers Are Up And The Phone Keeps Ringing
    • Union Members Honor State Veterans
  • Legal
    • Terror Case Convict Appeals To Judge
    • Lawmaker Requests Inmate Information
    • Blumenthal May Stop Suing
  • Local Politics
    • WPCA Urged To Tackle Marshal Fees
    • Who Has The Power To Appoint?
    • Marshals' Sweetheart Deals Targeted
  • Media Matters
    • Governing Magazine: Connecticut's Capitol Coverage
    • WTIC Layoffs Have One Sponsor
      Questioning His Support
    • New Blog Emerges In Troubled Times
  • News Links
    • State Government Home Page
  • Opinion
    • CTNewsJunkie wants your opinions
    • Curious Delivery Made To Press Room
    • Op-Ed: Speaking Out Against A Constitutional Convention
  • State Capitol
    • Local Officials to Lawmakers: Don't Cut State Aid
      & Give Us Choices
    • Governing Magazine: Connecticut's Capitol Coverage
    • Majority Still Cryptic About Special Session
      But Finally Decide On a Date
  • Transportation
    • Rell: Scale Back Rail Project
    • TSB To Study Tolls

Compromise on Ethics?

by Christine Stuart | June 11, 2008 6:04 PM
Posted to State Capitol

(Updated: 7:55 p.m.) State lawmakers in the House and the Senate like what they saw yesterday when Rep. Diana Urban, D-North Stonington and Sen. Gayle Slossberg, D-Milford, unveiled their plan to solve the pension revocation portion of the ethics reform bill.

During the regular legislative session, the House and Senate couldn’t agree on whether a judge should be able to revoke the pension of a state employee because some lawmakers believed the pension was protected under a collective bargaining agreement, while others felt if a state employee violates the law then their pension should be taken away.

The bill as it is currently drafted for Wednesday’s special session would allow a judge to revoke the pensions of public officials, municipal officials, and state employees. The new twist is that the judge will be given discretion to determine if a state employee’s pension should be entirely revoked or partially revoked.

By putting the ball in the judge’s court, it puts the unions on notice that their pensions can be revoked when their contracts expire in 2017, Rep. Chris Caruso, D-Bridgeport, said.

Sen. Slossberg said Connecticut is the only state that negotiates its pensions in its collective bargaining agreements. She said the new bill acknowledges that those agreements exist and sets one standard for both public employees and elected officials.

Slossberg said she expects the Attorney General to argue in court that a state employee by committing a crime breached the collective bargaining agreement with the state making it possible for the revocation of an entire pension based on the mutual breach of the contract.

Slossberg said the bill sends a strong message that “if you’re convicted of corruption, you don’t receive a public pension.”

Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero, R-Norwalk, said the draft language he was handed at 5 p.m. Tuesday is “good if not better than what we had.” He said he would be in favor of it, if it remains the same.

Rep. Urban, using a football analogy, said “We were at fourth and goal and the quarterback gave me the ball.” The quarterback in this analogy would be Caruso, who stepped back and let Urban negotiate the draft bill.

The draft language of the bill was negotiated between Urban and Slossberg.

Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz said Wednesday “see what happens when women are in charge.”

Of course, none of the lawmakers are counting their ethical eggs before they hatch because they all know a deal could fall through at any moment, so many are reluctant to talk about specifics or hedge their bets. For the past four years the legislature has failed to pass an ethics reform package.