Connecticut
CT ‘baby bonds’ program discussed at Federal Reserve conference
Connecticut officials joined advocates and researchers at the Federal Reserve on Thursday to talk about the state’s trailblazing ‘baby bonds’ program, and how it might ultimately serve as a proving ground for efforts around the country.
The program, which launched in July 2024, invests $3,200 on behalf of babies enrolled in Connecticut’s Medicaid program, HUSKY. More than half the babies born in Connecticut are to mothers on Medicaid, and around 15,600 babies are expected by be enrolled in the program annually. Eligible participants live in every one of the state’s cities and towns.
Connecticut is so far unique in passing sustained, state-level support for the concept, but small experiments are popping up around the country, including one through private philanthropy in Georgia and a temporary program for children in foster care in California who were impacted by COVID. Several other states, including New Jersey and Massachusetts, are considering baby bonds-type programs.
The conference Thursday kicked off with a conversation between Connecticut State Treasurer Erick Russell and Darrick Hamilton, a professor at The New School and an economist who is credited with helping to create the concept. They discussed Connecticut’s first in the nation program, and how it may be planting the seeds of a national movement.
“We’re building political momentum, we start local,” said Hamilton, who is the founding director of the Institute on Race, Power and Political Economy at The New School. “But at the end of the day, to make this come into fruition, we’ve really got to get the federal government involved to ensure that all children of the United States will be able to get into that vehicle of wealth building.”
Russell spoke about his childhood growing up in New Haven, sweeping the floor and working the register after school at his parents’ store. No one he knew as a kid owned their own home and working paycheck to paycheck was a way of life.
Russell said he is trying to end poverty in Connecticut, and baby bonds are but one of many strategies required to achieve that goal.
“We understand that baby bonds, by itself, is not the solution to that problem,” Russell said. “This is a piece to the puzzle as we continue to make key investments in things like education and early child care and bringing down the cost of housing.”
Baby bonds can provide funds for a down payment on a home, money to open a business or pay for school. But officials said the existence of the funds may also help in less obvious ways: baby bonds can encourage a family to imagine a child’s future and plan for it. The funds could stave off gentrification by creating a cohort of people who are able to cash in at around the same time and even pool resources to support their neighborhood. And they help link parents to state supports through a positive vehicle.
“There’s a huge lack of trust between members of the community and government,” Russell said. “Now we actually have this positive way of connecting with people, right? Connecting with parents who are saying, ‘My child is going to have access to this resource and this opportunity that I could have never imagined.’”
A recipient must be between 18 and 30 years old to use the funds, pass a financial literacy test, and be a Connecticut resident. That money is expected to eventually be worth at least $11,000 and as much as $24,000, depending when the recipient chooses to cash in the bond.
Though the initiative received strong support from many political leaders, Gov. Ned Lamont nearly killed the program in 2023. The decision to draw from a surplus in Connecticut’s special reserve fund instead of borrowing money, as was originally planned, allowed Lamont and Russell to reach a compromise and the program was finally launched in July 2023. In fact, as Russell mentioned during the conference, the so-called baby bonds ended up not being bonds at all.
At Thursday’s event, the history of political infighting wasn’t discussed. Rather, advocates and researchers focused on the promise of the program and the synergy with another initiative: ‘guaranteed income.’
Stanford University researchers Max Rong and David Grusky explained why, based on their research modeling, simultaneously offering families guaranteed income and baby bonds may be a superior approach to offering a more generous version of only one of these programs.
The researchers said that guaranteed income can prove meaningful to help families from falling into poverty, relieving the stress of financial pressure from caregivers so they can form healthy attachments with their children and afford day to day expenses that keep them healthy and safe. However, just providing that cash is unlikely to allow a family to save the kind of money they need to ultimately open a business, buy a home, afford higher education and ultimately build generational wealth. On the other hand, a single infusion of money — a cashed-in baby bond— cannot undo years of underinvestment.
“You might think it doesn’t matter if you just do one or the other,” Grusky said. “What this suggests is that, given data about how the world works, you actually need both.”
Laura Clancy, the executive director of The Bridge Project, a guaranteed income program for new moms which recently launched in Connecticut, asked the room to simply trust mothers, who tend to have good judgment about what their kids need. She ended her panel by encouraging the audience to consider the power of imagination in initiatives like baby bonds and guaranteed income, and how thinking outside the box might help us upend the inequities we take for granted.
“What have we come to accept that is unacceptable?” she asked.
Connecticut
Man shot, critically injured by police in Hartford; mayor says there will be a ‘full review’
Skip to content
Contact Us
Connecticut
Connecticut moves to crack down on bottle redemption fraud
It’s a scheme made famous by a nearly 30-year-old episode of the sitcom Seinfeld.
Hoping to earn a quick buck, two characters load a mail truck full of soda bottles and beer cans purchased with a redeemable 5-cent deposit in New York, before traveling to Michigan, where they can be recycled for 10 cents apiece. With few thousand cans, they calculate, the trip will earn a decent profit. In the end, the plan fell apart.
But after Connecticut raised the value of its own bottle deposits to 10 cents in 2024, officials say, they were caught off guard by a flood of such fraudulent returns coming in from out of state. Redemption rates have reached 97%, and some beverage distributors have reported millions of dollars in losses as a result of having to pay out for excess returns of their products.
On Thursday, state lawmakers passed an emergency bill to crack down on illegal returns by increasing fines, requiring redemption centers to keep track of bulk drop-offs and allowing local police to go after out-of-state violators.
“I’m heartbroken,” said House Speaker Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, who supported the effort to increase deposits to 10 cents and expand the number of items eligible for redemption. “I spent a lot of political capital to get the bottle bill passed in 2021, and never in a million years did I think that New York, New Jersey and Rhode Island residents would return so many bottles.”
The legislation, Senate Bill 299, would increase fines for violating the bottle bill law from $50 to $500 on a first offense. For third and subsequent offenses, the penalty would increase from $250 to $2,000 and misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in prison.
In addition, it requires redemption centers to be licensed by the state’s Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (previously, those businesses were only required to register with DEEP). As a condition of their license, redemption centers must keep records of anyone seeking to redeem more than 1,000 bottles and cans in a single day.
Anyone not affiliated with a qualified nonprofit would be prohibited from redeeming more than 4,000 bottles a day, down from the previous limit of 5,000.
The bill also seeks to pressure some larger redemption centers into adopting automated scanning technologies, such as reverse vending machines, by temporarily lowering the handling fee that is paid on each beverage container processed by those centers.
The bill easily passed the Senate on Wednesday and the House on Thursday on its way to Gov. Ned Lamont.
While the bill drew bipartisan support, Republicans described it as a temporary fix to a growing problem.
House Minority Leader Vincent Candelora, R-North Branford, called the switch to 10-cent deposits an “unmitigated disaster” and said he believed out-of-state redemption centers were offloading much of their inventory within Connecticut.
“The sheer quantity that is being redeemed in the state of Connecticut, this isn’t two people putting cans into a post office truck,” Candelora said. “This is far more organized than that.”
The impact of those excess returns is felt mostly by the state’s wholesale beverage distributors, who initiate the redemption process by collecting an additional 10 cents on every eligible bottle and can they sell to supermarkets, liquor stores and other retailers within Connecticut. The distributors are required to pay that money back — plus a handling fee — once the containers are returned to the store or a redemption center.
According to the state’s Department of Revenue Services, nearly 12% of wholesalers reported having to pay out more redemptions than they collected in deposits in 2025. Those losses totaled $11.3 million.
Peter Gallo, the vice president of Star Distributors in West Haven, said his company’s losses alone have totaled more than $2 million since the increase on deposits went into effect two years ago. As time goes on, he said, the deficit has only grown.
“We’re hoping we can get something fixed here, because it’s a tough pill to be holding on to debt that we should get paid for,” Gallo said.
Still, officials say they have no way of tracking precisely how many of the roughly 2 billion containers that were redeemed in the state last year were illegally brought in from other states. That’s because most products lack any kind of identifiable marking indicating where they were sold.
“There’s no way to tell right now. That’s one of the core issues here,” said state Rep. John-Michael Parker, D-Madison, who co-chairs the legislature’s Environment Committee.
Parker said the issue could be solved if product labels were printed with a specific barcode or other feature that would be unique to Connecticut. Such a solution, for now, has faced technological challenges and pushback from the beverage industry, he said.
Not everyone involved in the handling, sorting and redemption of bottles is happy about the upcoming changes — or the process by which they were approved.
Francis Bartolomeo, the owner of a Fran’s Cans and Bart’s Bottles in Watertown, said he was only made aware of the legislation on Monday from a fellow redemption center owner. Since then, he said, he’s been contacting his legislators to oppose the bill and was frustrated by the lack of a public hearing.
“I know other people are as flabbergasted as I am because they don’t know where it comes out of,” Bartolomeo said “It’s a one sided affair, really.”
Bartolomeo said one of his biggest concerns with the bill is the $2,500 annual licensing fee that it would place on redemption centers. While he agreed that out-of-state redemptions are a problem, he said it should be up to the state to improve enforcement.
“We’re cleaning up the mess, and we’re going to end up being penalized,” Bartolomeo said. “Get rid of it and go back to 5 cents if it’s that big of a hindrance, but don’t penalize the redemption centers for what you imposed.”
Lynn Little of New Milford Redemption Center supports the increased penalties but believes the solution ultimately lies with better labeling by the distributors. She is also frustrated by the volume caps after the state initially gave grants to residents looking to open their own bottle redemption businesses.
“They’re taking a volume business, because any business where you make 3 cents per unit (the average handling fee) is a volume business, and limiting the volume we can take in, you’re crushing small businesses,” Little said.
Ritter said that he opposed a move back to the 5-cent deposit, which he noted was increased to encourage recycling. However, he said the current situation has become politically untenable and puts the state at risk of a lawsuit from distributors.
“We’re getting to a point where we’re going to lose the bottle bill,” Ritter said. “If we got sued in court, I think we’d lose.”
Connecticut
Stanley Black & Decker To Shutter New Britain Manufacturing Facility
NEW BRITAIN, CT — Stanley Black & Decker on Thursday said it has decided to close its manufacturing facility in New Britain.
Debora Raymond, vice president of external communications for the manufacturer, said the decision is a result of a “structural decline in demand for single-sided tape measures.”
The New Britain facility predominantly makes these products, according to Raymond.
“These products are quickly becoming obsolete in the markets we serve,” Raymond said, via an emailed statement Thursday.
The decision is expected to impact approximately 300 employees, according to Raymond.
“We are focused on supporting impacted employees through this transition, including providing options for employment at other facilities, severance, and job placement support services for both salaried and hourly employees,” Raymond said.
As of Thursday at 4:30 p.m., no Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act notice had been filed with the state Department of Labor.
The company’s corporate headquarters remains at 1000 Stanley Dr., New Britain.
Gov. Ned Lamont released the following statement on the decision:
“Although Stanley has made the decision to discontinue operations for manufacturing outdated products, a change in workforce opportunities is difficult for employees, their families, and any community.,” Lamont said. “However, I am hopeful that these skilled workers will be repurposed with the help of Stanley Black & Decker, a company that will still proudly be headquartered here in Connecticut. My administration is working closely with local and state leaders to support affected workers and to reimagine the factory site so it can continue to create opportunity and strengthen New Britain’s economic future.”
New Britain Mayor Bobby Sanchez said he is “deeply disappointed” the company will be closing its Myrtle Street operations.
“For generations, Stanley Works has been part of the fabric of our city, providing good-paying jobs, supporting families, and helping build New Britain’s proud reputation as the ‘Hardware City,’” Sanchez said.
According to the mayor, his office’s immediate focus is on helping affected workers and their families. The mayor has been in contact with Lamont’s office, and they will be working closely to make sure employees have access to job placement services, retraining opportunities and support, Sanchez said.
“We will continue aggressively pursuing economic development opportunities and attracting businesses that are looking for a true community partner, a city ready to collaborate, innovate and grow alongside them,” Sanchez said. “New Britain has reinvented itself before, and we will do so again.”
Stanley Black & Decker, founded in 1843, operates manufacturing facilities worldwide, according to its website. It reports having 43,500 employees globally, and makes an array of products, such as power tools and equipment, hand tools, and fasteners.
-
World2 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts3 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Montana1 week ago2026 MHSA Montana Wrestling State Championship Brackets And Results – FloWrestling
-
Louisiana5 days agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Denver, CO2 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Technology7 days agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Technology7 days agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
Politics7 days agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT