Google apps
Main menu

Post a Comment On: "WE THE PEOPLE"

"KIRKLEY-BEY FORCED OUT?"

8 Comments -

1 – 8 of 8
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Um..."Ritter was the driving force that capped tax increases on residential property and taxes as a result of re-val."

Ritter did the bidding of the Metro Chamber so all the big downtown companies could get massive tax cuts. In fact homeowner taxes are going up and the Chamber wants Ritter to do more to lower their taxes next year so homeowners pay even more. I'm sure he will do all he can.

P.S. Ask Kelly if he actually swears to the truth of the property disclosure form he sends into the City Assesor.

http://www.courant.com/business/hc-hartford-business-revaluation-20111203,0,2123797.story?page=1

December 3, 2011 at 10:07 PM

Blogger KEVIN BROOKMAN said...

I could be mistaken, but I don't think Ritter's bill had any impact on commercial properties, they are still assessed at 70% of market value, unlike the 29% for residential properties .

December 4, 2011 at 12:12 AM

Anonymous Bruce Rubenstein said...

The problem with the town committee is at least twofold...outdated local party rules..and its members,many of whom do no work or are so flawed personally..ie felons...that nothing gets done.Because of the incompetance and corrupt nature or depravity of the members many of the statewide officials just avoid Hartford's DTC like the plague.

A good start would be to flush away many of the current DTC members and bring in new young people not bound by the errors of the past.

December 5, 2011 at 10:59 AM

Anonymous Hartford Sandusky said...

let me suggest the following for hartford party officers;

Chair-Angel Morales
Vice Chair-Mamie Bell
Secretary-Ivan Maldonado
Treasurer-Hector Robles

December 5, 2011 at 9:44 PM

Anonymous peter brush said...

http://www.yourpublicmedia.org/content/wnpr/redistricting-means-change-hartford

But Ritter says the message for Hartford is clear.

"What you want to say to Hartford is we want to find a way to make sure we stop losing population.
-----------------------------------
The chances of Hartford's gaining population approximately zero. It's taken decades since WWII to get to the present deteriorated, depleted, position. Theoretically, it could be restored. But it would take a reversal of decades of State education and land use policies. In practice, these policies have left Hartford populated with criminals and illiterates unattractive to potential residents. And, then you have the anti-gentrification notions of folks like Mayor Perez. On the bright side for Connecticut, fewer folks in Hartford and other large towns, means less representation in the State legislature

December 6, 2011 at 8:27 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"And, then you have the anti-gentrification notions of folks like Mayor Perez."

For a newbie, please clarify the anti-gentrification efforts of the former Mayor.

December 6, 2011 at 1:31 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Eddie perez is a loser. Plain and simple. His criminal acts are a thing of the past. .... Sooooo long ...

December 6, 2011 at 10:45 PM

Anonymous peter brush said...

I may have wronged Mayor Eddie. I don't know from whence I derived the notion that he was hot and bothered about gentrification. Does appear, though, that he was ambivalent; bringing in rich ok only if we don't drive out the poor. In any case, the point remains; it would be good for the town if it were to have more civilized guys.
---------------------------------
``Gentrification'' was once a dirty word in American urban politics, but leaders such as Hartford Mayor Eddie A. Perez and civil rights lawyer John C. Brittain now say they are in favor of having more rich people in Hartford.

Perez said that an influx of wealthier residents would not be gentrification unless they displaced poorer residents. The city is building a range of housing for working-class and middle-class residents, and could use more housing in the $350,000 to $750,000 range, Perez said. Even the new luxury housing planned for downtown would still make up only a small portion of the housing stock, he said.

``Diversity is a good thing,'' Perez said, even if it means more Republican voters in Hartford. ``It's OK. We'll finally have an election in town.''
http://articles.courant.com/2005-05-29/news/0505290148_1_greater-hartford-cities-four-homes/2

December 7, 2011 at 12:32 AM

You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
Please prove you're not a robot