A West Deer Township woman captured video of an Amazon driver illegally passing a school bus on Saxonburg Boulevard, saying it’s not the first time it has happened. 

“They act like it’s a racetrack,” Carley Gavulich said of Tuesday’s incident. “What if there was multiple children? What if you were to hit my child, anyone’s child?”

It felt too close to home for Gavulich. She was waiting for her son to come off the bus from Curtisville Primary Center when it happened on Tuesday. 

“He actually was getting his new dirt bike delivered, so that’s why we were even recording,” she said.

She wanted to get his reaction to the dirt bike. Instead, the bus driver pulled up, and the Amazon Prime truck blew past the stop-arm.

“The Deer Lakes School District’s top priority is always the safety, security, and wellbeing of its students,” a spokesperson for the district said on Friday. “The District is aware of the situation and is taking all steps to address any concerns.”

A spokesperson for Amazon told KDKA it is looking into the incident and will take appropriate actions after a review.

“Amazon should hold him 100% accountable,” Gavulich said.

But whoever was driving is not the only person Gavulich believes needs a bus safety refresher. She said her husband has witnessed vehicles blowing by the stop-arm at least seven times.

Both are grateful that the bus driver saw the delivery truck coming and stopped her son from getting off.

“She is amazing, 100 percent props to her. If she would have let him off that bus, we would be having a different conversation,” Gavulich said.

The chief of the West Deer Police Department told KDKA that someone in the community had notified him about this. He added that all the district’s buses have cameras and that an officer will review the video and approve the violation.

That video from the bus has not come in yet, though, the chief said on Friday, adding that it can take a few days.

Connecticut may become a ghost town if lawmakers fail to address affordability concerns — and the warning signs are becoming harder to ignore. 

A new AARP survey of residents aged 45 and older shows deep concern about rising living costs. Respondents cited housing, utilities, and medical care as major financial pressures, fueling broader worries about long-term financial security and the ability to afford retirement in Connecticut. 

The numbers are sobering: 72% of respondents say they are concerned about the cost-of-living, up from 66% in 2023; more than half worry about being able to retire in Connecticut; and 33% report difficulty affording healthcare.  

Those anxieties are translating into real financial strain. Nearly half say they have tapped into savings to cover rising costs. Forty-two percent have stopped saving for retirement altogether. Thirty-six percent struggle with monthly bills. Thirty percent have difficulty affording food. Thirteen percent report skipping medications due to cost. 

These are not marginal concerns. They represent warning signals from a key demographic in one of the nation’s oldest states. Connecticut’s median age is 41.2, the seventh highest in the country. Meanwhile, the 35-to-49 age group declined by 13.1 percent between 2010 and 2022 — more than any other age group. 

Older residents are increasingly relocating to states such as North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida, and Texas. The reasons are familiar: lower taxes, lower housing costs, and lower energy bills. 

Despite a relatively high average annual income, Connecticut residents face some of the highest property taxes, income taxes, and corporate taxes in the country. At the same time, the state struggles with elevated housing costs and some of the highest utility rates nationwide. For retirees, the financial math often simply doesn’t work. 

In the AARP survey, 92% of respondents agreed that the state government should prioritize utility rate and regulatory changes. That is telling. 

Energy policy illustrates the broader challenge. Over the past several decades, Connecticut has adopted increasingly ambitious renewable energy mandates, including Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS). This measure severely restricts utilities’ ability to find the cleanest and most efficient means of providing electricity. While environmental goals are important, restricting utilities’ energy sourcing options has contributed to higher costs. 

The Public Benefits Charge, a state-imposed fee on electric bills that funds various renewable energy programs, has become another driver of high rates. When policy costs are layered onto utility bills, households feel it immediately. 

Connecticut’s long-term emissions goals are ambitious. But energy policy must balance environmental objectives with cost and reliability. In Alternatives to New England’s Affordability Crisis, a coalition study of New England’s energy market found that a more diversified portfolio, including nuclear and natural gas, could significantly lower costs while maintaining reliability and reducing emissions. 

The General Assembly is currently considering a bill to establish a workforce that would advance nuclear energy technologies. That is a conversation worth having. Energy decisions that improve affordability and reliability would directly address the concerns raised in the AARP survey. 

Affordability, however, extends beyond energy. Government spending and taxation play a central role in everyday costs. When taxes and regulatory burdens increase, those costs ripple outward — affecting housing prices, transportation costs, and grocery bills.  

Even proposals framed as targeting large corporations can affect consumers. For example, H.B. 5156, would impose retroactive costs on fossil-fuel producers. Industry groups estimate it could raise gasoline prices by nearly 33 cents per gallon. For families already struggling with food and medical bills, even incremental increases matter. 

Gov. Ned Lamont has spoken about the need for growth and reform to strengthen Connecticut’s future. Growth, however, requires a competitive cost structure. 

If lawmakers truly believe affordability is the top issue this session, structural reform, not temporary rebates, is required. That means reassessing the tax and regulatory environment that drives costs higher. 

Connecticut’s affordability challenge is not inevitable. It is the cumulative result of policy choices. If those choices are not revisited, the state will continue to lose residents, particularly those in their prime earning years and those approaching retirement, to more affordable alternatives. 

The survey results are not just statistics. They are signals. Lawmakers would be wise to take them seriously. 

PORTLAND, Maine — Maine’s catch of lobsters declined for the fourth straight year, state fishing regulators said Friday, as the industry continued to grapple with soaring business costs, inflation and a changing ocean.

The haul of lobsters, Maine’s best known export and a key piece of the state’s identity and culture, has declined every year since 2021, and some scientists have cited as a reason warming oceans that spur migration to Canadian waters.

The sector brought in 78.8 million pounds (35.7 million kilograms) of lobsters in 2025, down from more than 110 million pounds (49.9 million kilograms) in 2021, regulators said. It was the lowest total since 2008.

Inflation hit the industry hard last year, and there were more than 21,000 fewer fishing trips than in 2024, according to Carl Wilson, commissioner of the Maine Department of Marine Resources. Market uncertainty due to tariffs and a late start to the busy portion of the fishing season also played roles, he said.

“This combination of factors likely contributed to the decline from 2024 to 2025 in the lobster harvest of more than eight million pounds and a decrease in the overall value of more than $75 million,” Wilson said in a statement.

The vast majority of the country’s lobsters are caught in waters off Maine, though they are also trapped elsewhere in New England.

The overall catch, among the most lucrative in the U.S., is frequently worth more than $500 million at the docks each year. Last year it was more than $461 million.

The southern New England lobster fishery has been declared depleted by regulators for years. That decline happened as waters warmed off Rhode Island and southern Massachusetts, and scientists have warned that the trend could be repeating off Maine. The crustaceans are sensitive to changes in temperature, particularly when young but also throughout their lives.

Last year the regulatory Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission said lobster populations have shown “rapid decline in abundance in recent years” in key areas and declared the species to be experiencing overfishing. Environmental groups have called for tighter regulation of the fishery.

Some members of the industry have pushed back on that assessment and say fishermen are already restricted by regulations meant to conserve the lobsters and save endangered whales.

Last year’s catch was still relatively high compared with historic numbers, up from typically 50 million to 70 million pounds (about 23 million to 32 million kilograms) in the 2000s and even less in the decade before that.

The industry saw a boom in the 2010s, when hauls were over 100 million pounds (45 million kilograms) per year, topping out at more than 132 million pounds (60 million kilograms) in 2016.

While prices remained high for both consumers and dealers, the high cost of necessities such as fuel and gear made for “not a very profitable season,” said John Drouin, who fishes out of Cutler.

But it was not all bad news, as lobsters were trapped more consistently than the prior year, said Steve Train, who is based out of Long Island.

“Hauling was more consistent, with less peaks and valleys, and the price was higher in the summer months,” Train said. “But I think I landed a little less.”

Lobsters remain readily available in restaurants and seafood markets, though prices have been high. They typically sold for $3 to $5 per pound at the dock in the 2010s and have been more than $6 per pound in some recent years. Last year the price at the dock was $5.85 per pound.