Connect with us

Connecticut

Flush With Cash, This Nonprofit Wants to Rewrite Connecticut’s Fiscal Rules

Published

on

Flush With Cash, This Nonprofit Wants to Rewrite Connecticut’s Fiscal Rules


There’s a powerful, well-funded political machine operating in Connecticut — and it’s not coming from the state Capitol. It’s a private, tax-exempt nonprofit with deep ties to progressive academia, national advocacy movements, and left-leaning foundations. It’s called The Connecticut Project (TCP). With deep financial reserves and influence, this group is spending millions to reshape the state’s policies, politics, and future in its own image. 

Through its 501(c)(3) nonprofit and 501(c)(4) political lobbying arm — The Connecticut Project Action Fund — TCP is funneling millions into advocacy groups to advance a broad progressive agenda.  

The organization describes itself as a “social change organization” focused on overhauling the state’s economy, housing system, and public services.  

Their goals may be well-intended, but they come with a high price tag — including expanded government-subsidized housing, universal pre-K, broader “financial safety net programs,” job subsidies, and so-called “wealth-building supports” 

Advertisement

TCP wants the state’s spending priorities and policymaking to be steered by and for low-income and “asset-limited” households. That includes pushing for expanded access to healthcare, criminal justice reform, and “specific needs of immigrants.” 

The group’s 2024 report lays out their plan.   

They’re not just pushing policy — they’re running a statewide marketing campaign. TCP has poured money into billboards, glossy mailers, bus ads, and even grocery cart ads to push their message. They’re also hiring part-time foot soldiers at $25 an hour to knock on doors and rally support. 

According to their most recent tax filings, TCP spent just over $9 million in Connecticut in 2023 while amassing a $22.7 million war chest. Nearly $6 million in grants went to groups like Husky 4 Immigrants, the Connecticut Tenants Union, and the Partnership for Strong Communities — all pushing policies like rent control, higher taxes, expanded public services, immigration reform, and efforts to dismantle states fiscal guardrails. 

How they’re funded remains unclear. Donor privacy laws shield contributors on both sides of the aisle. But TCP isn’t just bankrolling activism — it’s shaping the policy agenda. Last year, the group partnered with Yale’s Tobin Center to release a study outlining how the state’s fiscal guardrails should be rewritten. 

Advertisement

The report argues that the current guardrails — especially the volatility and spending cap — are too rigid and have put “billions of dollars of revenue out of reach.”  

In a CT Mirror op-ed announcing the release of the paper, they warn that without changes, Connecticut is heading toward a “self-imposed budget cliff,” and that lawmakers will be forced to make “deep cuts to current services” despite projected surpluses.  

Their solution is “redesigning the volatility cap” with a “dynamic” model based on a rolling average of past years, and adjusting the spending cap so it “keeps pace with Connecticut’s economic conditions.” 

The volatility cap, enacted in 2017, was designed to prevent the state from using unpredictable sources of revenues — like capital gains taxes — to fund permanent programs. Instead, surplus revenue is directed toward the rainy-day fund and/or to pay down pension debt.  

TCP’s goal isn’t just budget flexibility — it’s to make room for increased state spending on their priority projects.  

Advertisement

The report was just the beginning. TCP is actively calling on lawmakers to weaken the guardrails.  

In an April 2025 press release, the group responded to proposed federal cuts by urging lawmakers to suspend the rules entirely. “Working class and middle-class people are in a cost-of-living crisis,” said TCP’s Vice President of Advocacy Melvin Medina.  

“If Connecticut doesn’t step up to responsibly adjust the fiscal rules, working people are going to literally pay the price,” Medina added. TCP also called for a budget that’s more “responsive,” urging lawmakers to use an emergency declaration to bypass the caps and unlock more spending on social programs. 

Not Everyone is Convinced This is a Responsible Move 

The Connecticut Business and Industry Association (CBIA) warns that the Tobin Center’s proposed “dynamic cap” could backfire — freeing up revenue in good years but setting the state up for shortfalls when markets take a downturn.  

Advertisement

“These revenues remain volatile and can fluctuate up to 20% in any given year,” CBIA notes, pointing out that capital gains and pass-through entity taxes can drop sharply with little warning.  

The Tobin Center assumes recent boom years are the “new normal,” but CBIA calls that a dangerous form of “recency bias where unusually strong recent performance (like the market gains of 2019-2024) may lead to overly optimistic projections.”  

CBIA states that changing the cap now would come “at the expense of savings,” and highlights that “as a result of the contributions to the pensions system, Connecticut will save $737 million per year for the next 20 years.” 

Public Opinion Echoes the Data 

Connecticut voters overwhelmingly support the fiscal guardrails. A March 2025 poll conducted by Global Strategy Group (GSG) found that “voters are highly supportive of the fiscal guardrails,” and that support goes across party lines.  

Advertisement

According to GSG’s findings “more than two-thirds of voters (69%) support the guardrails, including 65% of Democrats, 73% of Independents, and 73% of Republicans.”  

Voters aren’t asking lawmakers to break the rules. They’re asking them to live within them.  

The survey also found that once voters were told the state had “$900 million in additional spending room below the spending cap,” roughly three-in-four (76%) said that amount should be “enough money for the state to use without changing the guardrails.”  

Even when opponents make their case, voters still want fiscal responsibility.  

“Though hearing a statement from opponents of the guardrails does lower support somewhat, pro-guardrail messaging is highly effective and raises support back to baseline levels, above 80% support,” the study reported.  

Advertisement

The study also notes that “the best reason to support the guardrails is the personal impact they have on Connecticut voters and the state’s fiscal future.” That includes helping the state “pay off interest on debt” and keeping the budget balanced — priorities shared by all three parties. 

This puts TCP and its Yale allies on the wrong side of public opinion. 

While TCP and the Tobin Center insist the guardrails are holding the state back, voters see them as a safeguard against exactly the kind of reckless spending Connecticut used to be known for. The idea that working families want lawmakers to dismantle the very rules that rebuilt the state’s finances just doesn’t hold up.  

If anything, the public is asking lawmakers to do their jobs — not rewrite the rules every time someone wants to launch a new program. 

The guardrails were put in place for a reason. They’ve stopped lawmakers from blowing through our tax dollars, helped pay down billions in pension debt, and brought some stability to a state where running in the red was the norm.  

Advertisement

Adjusting the guardrails now to make room for more programs and bigger government isn’t responsible — it’s exactly what got Connecticut into trouble in the first place. Lawmakers shouldn’t fall for it. They need to stick with what works and not cave every time a well-financed special interest group wants more spending. 





Source link

Connecticut

The Great Westport Sandwich Contest kicks off with event at Old Mill Grocery

Published

on

The Great Westport Sandwich Contest kicks off with event at Old Mill Grocery


People in Westport have the chance to pick the best thing between sliced bread.

The Westport Weston Chamber of Commerce held a kick-off event at Old Mill Grocery on Monday for The Great Westport Sandwich Contest.

The contest runs throughout March with 21 restaurants, delis and markets competing in 10 categories to be crowned the best sandwich maker.

Residents can vote in the following categories: Best chicken, best steak, best vegetarian, best combo, best club, best NY deli, best pressed sandwich, best breakfast sandwich, best wrap, and best fish/seafood sandwich.

Advertisement

After people sample sandwiches, they can vote for their favorites in each category on the chamber’s website. They will also be placed into a drawing to win a free sandwich from one of the 10 winners.

“Of course, the goal is to have people come to Westport and check out restaurants, our markets and our delis. This is a great promotion. I mean it is a competition, but mostly it’s to bring people to the restaurants. It also gives a great community activity because they are the ones who get to vote who makes the best one,” says Matthew Mandell, the chamber’s executive director.

Winners will be announced in April and receive a plaque.

The chamber has held similar contests to determine what establishment has the best pizza, burger, soup and salad.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Connecticut

Lawmakers again push to restore Shore Line East service to 2019 levels

Published

on

Lawmakers again push to restore Shore Line East service to 2019 levels


Connecticut lawmakers are again looking to restore Shore Line East rail service to its pre‑pandemic levels, a proposal that could add about 90 more trains per week.

Lawmakers are also weighing a separate cost‑saving proposal to shift the line from electric rail cars back to diesel.

The plan comes as ridership remains well below 2019 numbers, though state data shows those numbers have begun to climb.

The Department of Transportation provided the General Assembly’s transportation committee with the following data:

Advertisement
  • 132 trains per week today versus 222 trains per week in 2019, according to the CTDOT commissioner.
  • In 2019, most weekday SLE trains traveled between New Haven Union Station and Old Saybrook. This allowed SLE to operate with only five train sets in the morning and four train sets in the afternoon.
  • It should be noted that 2019 SLE service levels were very different due to constrained infrastructure; 2019 service levels had a reduced number of SLE trains serving New London (13 trains per day Monday through Friday, as opposed to 20 today), while other stations had increased service (36 trains per day Monday through Friday, as opposed to 20 today).

“2019 levels beyond Old Saybrook to New London would require more crews and more train sets than were used in 2019, requiring significantly more financial resources,” the department wrote in its written testimony.

The department said the governor’s FY2027 budget does not include funding for a full restoration. In other words, even if the legislature requires additional trains, the funds are not included in the current financial plan.

Governor Lamont said on Monday to remember that the state subsidizes the line more than any other rail right now.

“There’s not as much demand as there are for some of the other rail services in other parts of the state, so that’s the balance we’re trying to get right,” Lamont said.

At a public hearing on Monday, concerns about the line’s reliability and schedule were a central focus in the testimony.

“We’re making the line less attractive, some would say. The schedules are very, very difficult to manage,” said Sen. Christine Cohen of Guilford, the co-chair of the committee.

Advertisement

The current schedule for eastbound morning commuters is difficult. The train either arrives in New London just after 7 a.m. or after 9 a.m.

“So obviously not really … conducive to a typical workday,” Cohen said.

Cohen, who represents communities along the line, said she continues to reintroduce the bill to expand service year after year, pushing the state to do more with the line.

She thanked the department for the work it was able to do with the recent funding to establish a through train to Stamford.

“What do we need to do, and what are the challenges that you face in terms of expansion at this time?” Cohen asked.

Advertisement

Commissioner Garrett Eucalitto responded that the biggest hurdle is the cost of labor and access fees to Amtrak, which owns the territory.

“The cost to provide rail service is very expensive,” Eucalitto said.

He said CTDOT knows the current schedule is “not ideal,” but the economics of a work-from-home society are difficult.

“People expect 100% of the trains that they had in 2019, but they only want to take it two days a week,” Eucalitto said.

Asked about the eastbound schedule, the commissioner explained Shore Line East still operates on a model that sends trains toward New Haven in the morning rather than toward New London.

Advertisement

Changing that would require more equipment, more crews, and a second morning operations base, as well as negotiations with Amtrak, which owns the tracks.

Amtrak is “protecting their slots to be able to run increased Northeast Regional service as well as increased Acela service,” Eucallito said. “They’re going to look at us and question, ‘Well, how does that impact our need for Amtrak services?’ They’ll never give you an answer upfront, it’s always: ‘show us a proposal and then they’ll respond to it.’”

Cohen, who chairs the Transportation Committee, touted how a successful Shoreline East benefits the environment, development along the line, and reduces I-95 congestion.

“We need to start talking about how much money this costs us and think about all of the ancillary benefits,” Cohen said during the hearing.

Cohen said there is multi-state support for extending the line into Rhode Island.

Advertisement

“We will need some federal dollars. But as you say, there are other businesses up the line in New London,” Cohen said. “We’ve got Electric Boat. We’ve got Pfizer up that way. If we can get those employees on the transit line, we’re all the better for it.”

Rider advocates said the issue is familiar.

“I’d rather see solutions, and not things that are holding it back,” said Susan Feaster, founder of the Shore Line East Riders’ Advocacy Group.

She said she worries the line is facing a transit death spiral, with reduced service leading to lower ridership and falling fare revenue.

“They have to give us the money,” Feaster said. “It shouldn’t have to be profitable.”

Advertisement

Like other train lines across the country, Shore Line East relies on subsidies.

“We’re not asking for everything to be done overnight, but just incrementally,” Feaster said.

The line received $5 million two years ago, which increased service levels.

The proposal comes as the state reviews whether to return to diesel rail cars that are more than 30 years old.

The state says the switch would save about $9 million, but riders have said it would worsen the passenger experience.

Advertisement

NBC Connecticut asked Cohen whether she’ll ask DOT to reverse that proposal.

“I really want to,” Cohen said. “I appreciate what CTDOT was trying to do in terms of not cutting service as a result of trying to find savings elsewhere. This isn’t the way to do it.”



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Connecticut

Iranian Yale scholar in Connecticut celebrates fall of regime, calls for free elections

Published

on

Iranian Yale scholar in Connecticut celebrates fall of regime, calls for free elections


HARTFORD, Conn. (WFSB) – Thousands of Connecticut families with ties to Iran are watching and waiting as their home country undergoes a historic change.

Among them is Ramin Ahmadi, a Yale doctor, human rights activist and founder of the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center. He has spent decades advocating for freedom in Iran from his home in Connecticut.

Ahmadi moved to the United States when he was 18. On Saturday morning, he learned of military strikes in Iran and the death of the country’s supreme leader.

Ahmadi said protests for democracy and human rights in Iran intensified in December, drawing millions of participants — including his own family and friends.

Advertisement

“The situation in Iran was a humanitarian emergency and it needed an intervention,” Ahmadi said.

He said he celebrated when he heard the news Saturday morning.

“I was celebrating along with all other Iranians inside and outside the country,” Ahmadi said. “I do regret that we cannot bring him to a trial for crimes that he has committed against humanity.”

Ahmadi said he spoke with his sister in Iran after she celebrated in the streets. She was later told to return home for her safety.

He shared a message she relayed from those around her.

Advertisement

“They said do not let our death be exploited because worse than that is having to live with the criminals who have done this to us for the rest of our lives,” Ahmadi said. “We do not want to do that.”

For those questioning whether the conflict was America’s to engage in, Ahmadi offered a direct response.

“We will all be affected,” he said. “And to those that tell you that the U.S. and Israel are beating the drums of war in Iran, one has to remind them that it was not like before this Iranian people were listening to Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9 in D minor. We had a war already declared on us by this regime. We were being slaughtered on a daily basis.”

Ahmadi said he believes the path forward begins with young military officers forcing out what remains of the regime, followed by free elections.

“Everyone’s life will be safer in the future and not just Iranians,” Ahmadi said.

Advertisement

Connecticut lawmakers are also responding to the U.S. strikes on Iran.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending