The Bullies of Neo-Fascism

[standish]

The Supreme Court decision against New London citizens is one more step toward neo-fascism. We see new forms of public-private hybrids nearly everywhere, with government increasingly employing its coercive prerogative to serve the interests of the powerful. Now, it is deemed by this court as the law of the land. But, does this court still serve our Constitution?

When our antecedents forced Jared Ingersoll, the King's Stamp Act Collector, to resign his commission as such, the townspeople of Wethersfield surrounded him on the Commons with the cry: "Liberty and property!". We fought a revolution over the right to hold private property without continued dispensation from the Monarch. Property rights are so intertwined with every form of liberty described in our founding documents, that eminent domain should only be exercised as the exceptional need rather than the convenient option.

When commoners, the little people, no longer have a stake in the protections afforded by the State, they no longer have a stake in the State itself. Now that property rights only accrue to the more successful, or, those who can produce more tax revenue, such will likely follow. History may repeat itself through this abuse of power. We chose to form a more perfect union. If the courts and goverment continue with this pattern, we may have to choose again.

[SyZyGy]

History may repeat itself through this abuse of power. We chose to form a more perfect union. If the courts and government continue with this pattern, we may have to choose again.

And we will, in November, 2008, ...

...if our Republic is still functioning, if there is still adequate separation among the branches of our Government, and if power has not been irreversibly concentrated among too few.

[oldetowne]

And if you think this discussion is entirely academic and theoretical, take a look at the minutes of the Wethersfield EDIC meeting on April 14, 2005 -

"Discussion with Bond Counsel

Doug Gillette from Day, Berry & Howard LLP discussed alternative financing available to municipalities for special projects. Sometimes alternative financing can help streamline the process, avoid a referendum, and not go against the debt load. TIF and Revenue bonds were two options discussed."
(emphasis added)

Property owners along the Silas Deane and in the Meadows should keep an eye on what's going on because this Council needs to create some visible economic development activity between now and November 8.

[SyZyGy]

Property owners along the Silas Deane and in the Meadows should keep an eye on what's going on because this Council needs to create some visible economic development activity between now and November 8.

OT:
You are absolutely right.

Following the lead of the Bill's P/C-cleanser which transformed Theresa's (PZC) name into "Forsthingy", this Council has done "thingy" to grow our flat-lined Grand List. You are probably right; they are desperate for a grand gesture to convince the public that they are doing something to mitigate their exuberant spending. As shown by the last referendum, there are still sufficiently intelligent voters in Wethersfield who will not be persuaded by the hyperbole put out by Russ, and Bonnie, and Betty (EDIC) and "Fort Trumbull" Peter about all of the businesses opening in Town.

Also, if I am not mistaken, Dr. Ken (on the WCTV program filmed by the vote-NO on question #2 group) alluded to the risks to the residential home owners along (and NEAR) the Silas Deane who might be pushed off their properties when the current, Russ-ian Council cranks up its Eminent-Domain bulldozer.

I'm wondering; what happens when all of the possible land in town is taken and converted to business use where zoning allows, and when most of our elders have been taxed out of their homes, and when small lots are acquired and consolidated for more Amato-Drive styled mansions for the rich and politically connected - and still the taxes continue to rise? When Wethersfield has been converted into an inner-ring Avon, will it still be "Wethersfield?"

[SyZyGy]

If 'standish' wonders where the next generation of 'Neo-Fascists' will come from, he need not look any further than Wethersfield, CT.

Remember all of the repeatedly removed political signs which Town "Manager" Bonnie Therrien blamed on the youth of our town, brushing it off with an existential allusion of ' that's the way it is' . Don't you wonder why the removal of anti-lights/pro-zoning groups' signs far, far outnumbered those of the pro-lights/anti-zoning Volk. She and Danny, et al., just could not get worked up over the trampling of property rights and First Amendment rights; and the WPD just couldn't get worked up over any crime which did not involve muscles, munitions or mayhem.

An op-ed in today's Hartford Courant puts it all in focus. Just as the lights on Cottone Field is not "for the kids" but rather for their parents (etc.), the political vandalism can also be put on the shoulders of the kids' parents too!

www.courant.com/news/opinion/op_ed/hc-asisee0625.artjun25,0,731527.story?coll=hc-headlines-oped

Behave Yourself, And Children Will Follow Suit

Sarah Hager Johnston
June 25 2005

I've read recently about teenagers in Hartford shooting and beating one another; about the practice - statewide and nationwide - of expelling fractious preschoolers; about the need to legislate young Connecticut drivers off the streets in the middle of the night; and about young vandals around the state destroying public and private property with graffiti, arson and the like.

These stories consistently present law enforcement professionals, teachers, school officials and legislators as the adults who must control and correct the young peoples' aberrant behavior. Do you notice what's missing from this picture? The parents. Where are the parents?

The reason young people are out on the streets late at night shooting one another is that they have been allowed to do so. The reason that preschoolers express themselves violently and rudely is that they have been allowed to do so. The reason that some teenagers drive irresponsibly is that they have not been taught - or required - to do otherwise. The reason that graffiti vandals deface public or private property is that they have not been taught that it is wrong to do so. Where are the parents?

These young people apparently have a strongly developed sense of entitlement - they behave in lawless ways simply because they want to and they believe that they have a right to do so. Where are the parents?

By contrast, I've also read about a 13-year-old earning an associate degree at Tunxis Community College. I've perused the honor rolls and graduation rosters of area schools, and I've read about young people volunteering to serve their communities and help their neighbors. I'll bet that the parents of these successful young people are closely involved with their children's lives - establishing realistic rules for living in a household (and, by extension, in society); offering support and encouragement; working with teachers and school leaders; and, most important, serving as role models for responsible, socially healthy behavior.

When I was a kid, my parents imposed curfews and house rules: no phone calls after 9 p.m., and no phone call longer than 10 minutes. No evening activities outside the home on school nights (except for school activities). No disrespectful language or behavior, especially in interactions with adults. Take care of your homework and your animals before you play. Earn your privileges; don't expect them as corollary to your existence.

My parents are loving, warm people, but they also understood that children are not born with innate reason, responsibility or respect. I am now grateful that my parents were, as I considered them then, old-fashioned and (horrors!) strict. But I never doubted that they loved me. They loved me enough to discipline me and teach me the rules for living.

Parents, wake up. The world has rules. Successful adults learn how to lead satisfying, enriching lives by living to the fullest within those rules. Establish rules for your child so that he or she can know what to reasonably expect from society and, equally important, what society will expect from him or her. Enforce the rules, and punish appropriately, so that your child will expect consequences for antisocial, violent or just plain rude behavior.

And think of your own behavior: If you run a red light, you are teaching that it OK to break the law. If you sample grapes from the produce section without paying for them, you are teaching that is OK to steal. (Yes, it is stealing.) If you sabotage your child's teachers in their management of classroom behavior, you are teaching that it is OK to manipulate the rules on your own behalf. If you assault your child's coach with a bat, you are teaching that violence is the way to satisfy a personal disappointment.

Let's teach our children how to play by the rules, and how to be successful and contented adults within that context. Oh yes - let's start by teaching them that there are rules. That would be a good first step.

Sarah Hager Johnston is a research analyst and business writer in Farmington.

Copyright 2005, Hartford Courant

[morganika]

Amen! to the woman who wrote that article. She is 100% correct. I have felt for a long time that parents have stopped parenting. I am not sure if they are lazy, stupid, or afraid of their darlings needing therapy later on. It is not the school systems job to parent, it is their job to teach, period.

[oldetowne]

Monday, August 22 is the chance for Wethersfield citizens and taxpayers to make their views known on the subject of eminent domain for private gain.

The proposed ordinance shown below has been introduced for action by the Wethersfield Town Council. Whether or not it was deliberately done to limit public input, it has been set down for a public hearing at the Council's special meeting on Monday, August 22, rather than at its next regular meeting.

Please make note of this and attend and speak in favor of the proposed ordinance if you are able. If not, consider filing your comments by email through the Town's website. Also, please pass this along to anyone else who might be interested.

Thanks for your consideration of this important issue.



Introduced by: Councilors Czernicki, Hemmann and Cascio



AN ORDINANCE ENACTING CHAPTER 12, PART I, OF THE WETHERSFIELD CODE OF ORDINANCES

(Prohibiting acquisition of certain property by eminent domain for privately held or controlled economic development purposes)

WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Wethersfield wishes to express its respect for the rights of its citizens and taxpayers who own and reside in residential real property in this Town; and

WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Wethersfield believes that a primary responsibility of government is to protect private property and home ownership; and

WHEREAS, the Town Council of the Town of Wethersfield views the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Kelo et al. v. New London et al. as a threat to citizens and taxpayers of the Town of Wethersfield who own residential real estate and live in their homes; and

WHEREAS, it is the intention of this ordinance to prevent the application of the Kelo decision in this community by prohibiting the acquisition of certain owner-occupied residential real property by eminent domain for use in a municipal development project where the property would be privately owned or controlled and where the process would result in the homeowner’s losing his home.

NOW THEREFORE Be It Ordained and Enacted by the Town Council of the Town of Wethersfield that Chapter 12 of the Wethersfield Code of Ordinances is hereby enacted as follows:

CHAPTER 12

EMINENT DOMAIN POWERS LIMITED

§12.1. Eminent Domain Powers Limited

Within the territorial limits of the Town of Wethersfield, no owner-occupied residential real property consisting of four or fewer dwelling units may be acquired by eminent domain for economic development purposes pursuant to General Statutes §8-128 to 8-133 inclusive, if the resulting project will be privately owned or controlled. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to limit the use of eminent domain powers for public purposes including but not limited to the construction of sewers, highways, sidewalks, rights of way, flood and erosion control purposes or for any other transaction where the property rights acquired will be held or controlled by the Town of Wethersfield. This ordinance shall not conflict with any subsequently enacted State law on this subject matter.