[DigitalMilford]

Originally Posted by BobNJ1960

My only major issue with Lamont (and he will win) is we are doomed to be dealing with ever escalating violent juvenile crime, due to the liberals making the concept of punishing the vile creatures a thing of the past. That also means, at some point, even in solid blue Ct, someone will remind us of the concept of self defense.

Lamont lacks the guts to go against the party line on this vital issue.

Annual CT crime statistics report released; violent, property crimes down: https://www.wfsb.com/2022/09/26/watc...t-be-released/

I'm not prepared to point to all juveniles who commit a crime as "vile creatures."

[Freesponge]

Originally Posted by CTartist

I think Lamont is doing a good job. If I were the Governor and there was any surplus, I would put that to pay down the debt and that is what Lamont is doing. To me he is more like an Independent like myself becuase.....

Democrats want more stuff with the surplus money &
Republicans want the money to go back to the people.

My dad was a businessman and he always taught me if you have debt you live as frugal as possible to get rid of it. That is what Lamont is doing.





I am a somewhat skeptical Independent, but I think both Lamont and Stefanowski both have good intentions in wanting to help our state. They just have a difference of opinion in how it should be done. I also think the majority of politicians from both sides IN CT that I have observed are not running for office for selfish purposes but becuase they genuinely want to help our area/state also.



Do you live in Trumbull? If not what town is it?
My taxes went up about $80 a month but I have to pay for the escrow shortage on top of that for a year so my taxes in the next year will be up $125 a month. Maybe that happened to you too.

I was also thinking that some of the people in the Stefanowski ad might not realize that part of thier property tax increase includes the escrow shortage. And one again the escrow shortage is not Lamont's fault. That is how a bank functions.

Definitely if there’s surplus pay debt down now because that surplus is short-lived , very short lived . It’s the funny money of early phase of inflation and pandemic stimulus transfers of wealth to states …. It is not going to last and all states saw surpluses it’s not a Connecticut exclusive. Pay down debt mess … actually clear the mess .

But In actuality saying and doing are different things. I’m seeing plenty of rebates and I see Connecticut removed it’s gas tax , paid rebate checks to state taxpayers, payments to local businesses … but this is great but it’s not paying the debt down …. So eventhough Lamont says let’s pay the debt down hold him
To do what he says he’s doing.

[BobNJ1960]

Originally Posted by DigitalMilford

Annual CT crime statistics report released; violent, property crimes down: https://www.wfsb.com/2022/09/26/watc...t-be-released/

I'm not prepared to point to all juveniles who commit a crime as "vile creatures."

You left out my qualifying word "Violent" before the word crime.

Not talking about stealing a pack of gum here.

[WouldLoveTo]

Originally Posted by CTartist

Do you live in Trumbull? If not what town is it?
My taxes went up about $80 a month but I have to pay for the escrow shortage on top of that for a year so my taxes in the next year will be up $125 a month. Maybe that happened to you too.

I was also thinking that some of the people in the Stefanowski ad might not realize that part of thier property tax increase includes the escrow shortage. And one again the escrow shortage is not Lamont's fault. That is how a bank functions.

Property tax and escrow shortage are two different things.

If you look at your tax owed by year with your town, the escrow shortage isn't included. The bills that come from the town don't say anything about your mortgage or escrow.

I have a small shortage nearly every year because my insurance goes up. This year it was a larger shortage due to the taxes.

[MikefromCT]

Originally Posted by Stylo

Property taxes went up due to inflation. Lamont didn't engineer that.

I do agree that being soft on crime is a truly puzzling stance of the Democratic party these days.

They view being soft on crime as a form of reparation. Of course it isn't, the adults know this, and why they perpetuate this woke nonsense is moronic and, to the law-abiding citizens such as myself, very frustrating. The Democrats in this state may sail to an easy victory next month, but that will be largely due to the political climate nationally. They really are in no position to be complacent, even in this state, and they need to drop this laissez faire attitude about crime and convey the message that it's the adults in charge here. Thus far, they have chosen not to to do so. Look at the mayors of Hartford and New Haven. You really think they're tough? Please.

Oh, and while you're at it, Democrats? Put an end to the stalling with marijuana dispensaries in this state. Every single CT Republican lawmaker voted against it, the vast majority of Democrats voted in favor of it, and now you're dragging your feet on it. Enough of this nonsense. Get it done.

[robr2]

Could these tax increases be due to increase in value?

[MikefromCT]

Originally Posted by BobNJ1960

My only major issue with Lamont (and he will win) is we are doomed to be dealing with ever escalating violent juvenile crime, due to the liberals making the concept of punishing the vile creatures a thing of the past. That also means, at some point, even in solid blue Ct, someone will remind us of the concept of self defense.

It's already happened. There was a botched home invasion in East Hartford where the homeowner fatally shot two juveniles who broke into his home, assaulted him, and attempted to burglarize his home. In this case, the man exercised his rights under CT's castle doctrine, and defended himself. I fully support this, and if more of this needs to happen to drive home the point that this is illegal, unacceptable, and actions have consequences, then so be it.

[WouldLoveTo]

Originally Posted by robr2

Could these tax increases be due to increase in value?

Many towns had re-evals done after the market went up. When people got their new assessment numbers, they were told that when the budget was done the mill rate would be adjusted and it should all work out. Except it didn't. Mill rates mostly went down but not enough to counteract the full increase in value. I did hear of one town where taxes went down, Hampton maybe?

[CTartist]

Originally Posted by WouldLoveTo

Property tax and escrow shortage are two different things.

If you look at your tax owed by year with your town, the escrow shortage isn't included. The bills that come from the town don't say anything about your mortgage or escrow.

I have a small shortage nearly every year because my insurance goes up. This year it was a larger shortage due to the taxes.

That is my point exactly.

I have a mortgage and my taxes are paid by the bank. I worked in a banks mortgage department so I knew right away that I would have to pay the tax increase PLUS the escrow shortage.

Many people don't understand all that. So when they see thier taxes going up so much a lot of people don't understand a good portion of that monthy increase INCLUDES the escrow shortage.

I am just about positive that the people in the Stefanowski ad whose taxes went so high don't realize part of that increase is the escrow increase which will be paid in a year.

That escrow shortage is a b**ch. But once again an escrow shortage is not Lamont's fault.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A town document presented during last week’s Board of Finance meeting showed that, in 2022, an average house in Trumbull was assessed at $234,430. In 2023, that same house would be assessed at $284,620. Under the new mill rate, the document showed, taxes would increase by an average of about 15 percent.
https://www.trumbulltimes.com/news/a...y-17238986.php

“A lot of people’s home values went up,” she said. “On the one hand, it’s bad that taxes are going up. But the equity in your home is going up, too.”--a Democrat in the Trumbull Town Hall.

So that tells me that the Democrats in my town hall probably don't understand the concept of revenue neutral tax increase after a reval and the fact that MY SALARY DID NOT GO UP 15%.

We can't blame Lamont for a 15% tax increase in Trumbull. That "honor" goes to the nutty Democrats in my Town Hall and they all need to be kicked out on thier fannies.

[DigitalMilford]

Originally Posted by BobNJ1960

You left out my qualifying word "Violent" before the word crime.

Not talking about stealing a pack of gum here.

I'm glad your concerned about violent crime. That's down 9%. Property crimes are down 3%.

We're not talking about stealing a pack of gum here.

From the report on Channel 3:
The report compiled data on crimes reported to law enforcement agencies in the state for the 2021 calendar year. It also looked at a 10 year period.

It suggested that overall crime dropped 30 percent since 2012.

For 2020 and 2021, there was a 3 percent reduction in overall crime, a 9 percent drop in violent crime, and a 2 percent reduction in property crimes.. (https://www.wfsb.com/2022/09/26/watc...t-be-released/)