Ken Dixon's Blog-O-Rama

While the Blogster was testing the specs on the rip-stop nylon of his tent walls against a sudden onslaught of barn cats in southern Vermont last Friday, the Probate Redistricting Commission was giving a dose of political reality to the troubled Probate Court system. The commission voted to cut the number of probate courts, some of which date back to the Colonial era, from 117 to 50 or 53, depending on whether the Legislature wants to actually follow its own law.

The plan next heads for a vote in the General Assembly, which in recent years was in denial over the flow of red ink that brought the system to the brink of insolvency, thanks in part to the Legislature’s raid on the Probate Court Fund several years back.

The commission decided to include an addendum, suggesting that despite the law requiring a reduction to 50, it’s suggesting 53 districts may work better. Changes from the July 8 map include putting Oxford into a region with Southbury, Woodbury, Roxbury and Watertown; lumping Naugatuck, Beacon Falls, Prospect and Middlebury into a district and combining the Bethany and Hamden courts. Other changes were suggested for the Farmington Valley and the Colchester area .

 “We met the letter of the law in our proposal, but after hearing all of the testimony and reading all of the letters that were sent to us around the state, we came to the realization that a 53-court plan would best serve the spirit of the law, which was to make the probate court system more efficient and less costly,” said state Rep Bob Godfrey, D-Danbury, who served as chairman of the commission.“These are regions of concern because of accessibility,” Godfrey said.  “When it comes to redistricting the courts, the transportation needs of those who are using them are crucial.”

 In a joint statement last week with Godfrey, Probate Court Administrator Judge Paul Knierim praised the action.  “This commission took great pains to solicit input from all parties affected by probate redistricting and worked very hard to build on the Probate Assembly’s work.  I’m looking forward to working with the governor and Legislature to complete this process.”

 Shelton Judge Fred Anthony, President of the Connecticut Probate Assembly: “I’m very pleased that the work of drafting a redistricting plan that addresses the needs of the people of Connecticut and incorporates measures of fiscal responsibility was reviewed and received favorably by the bipartisan redistricting commission.”

Additional information on the Probate Redistricting Commission can be found at http://www.jud.ct.gov/probate/Redistrict/

###

It’s 4:50 p.m. At 5:15, Gov. Rell will announce that the Democrats failed, failed failed to meet her $520-million threshold in spending cuts. But rather than veto the budget, she’ll let it lapse into law. So in two years, when there’s another horrible deficit, without $1.5 billion in federal stimulus case and without the $1.4 billion rainy day fund, voters may remember it was the Democratic majority of 2009 that set the table by actually increasing spending by $800 million during the biennium of 2010-11.

So the Democrats finally got what they wanted and Senate majority came up with 22 votes at about 2:30 this morning for the $37.6-billion budget retroactive to July 1. So what’s next? The Blogster guesses that Republican Gov. Rell either signs it, or doesn’t sign it, and lets the bill become law. She can still veto the so-called budget implementers when the General Assembly returns over the next couple weeks to insert their self-interested parts of the budget with cash for local projects. Traditionally, this budgetary triggers are called pork, but up here in the Capitol, they’re “rats,” because they’re so furry, yellow-toothed and not so cuddly. Anyway, it’s 2ish now and reporters are awaiting some kind of announcement on where Rell stands on a budget that essentially retains state funding at a time when budget cutting seems like the prudent fiscal alternative. If this turkey flies, woe be onto lawmakers in the House, Senate and governor’s office who will have to confront the tsunami of red ink during the budget-planning process as the current two-year budget winds down in the spring of 2011.

So typical of secretive, late-night, need-to-know legislation, Rep. John Geragosian, D-New Britain, the first-year co-chairman of the Appropriations Committee, couldn’t quite explain why the Democratic budget amendment that we all kept waiting for Monday afternoon-into-late-night included a $15-million raid on rail and bus accounts. He became a target of opportunity for House Minority Leader Larry Cafero, R-Norwalk, who also teed off on a supposed, projected, hoped-for $11-million savings in debt service on the controversial New Haven Rail Yard project. Then cafero listed several non-profits that someone got tens of thousands of dollars, including the Bridgeport-based Regional Youth Substance Abuse Program.

It was all part of $26 million Dems were adding to the $37.56-billion bottom line in the legislation that passed just before midnight. It’s now early Tuesday and the Blogster is a bit concerned for the train and bus riders. Well, maybe not the train patrons so much as the bus riders. “That means someone has to pay for it,” Cafero shouted in the House, hinting at higher fares.

 ”Because of the late day and late hour, this is the way we decided to fo with this,” Geragosian said. “There’s winners and losers,” Cafero concluded. “That’s not the way sharing the pain should be.”