Election Day Registration & Voting

 

If you meet certain criteria you can register to vote on ELECTION DAY. But you do have to meet certain criteria.

First of all, you ARE eligible to do Election Day Registration if you are not currently registered and you meet the following:

• New Connecticut Voter
• Never Been Registered
• Purged From Voter Lists
• Currently Registered In a Different Town But Now Live in Cheshire

Second, you DO NOT register at the voting locations. You have to go to the Town Hall to register first and then you go to the voting location for your address.

Click Here for more details.

 

 

Vote for Jim Jinks! Vote Democratic!

This Tuesday, November 7th Cheshire has a consequential choice to make.

The right choice is to vote for the candidates that have a clear understanding of the challenges we face as a community (unclouded by party ideology and ”the way things have always been done.”)

The right choice is to vote for the candidates that believe Cheshire’s best days are ahead of us rather than choose to exist in a defensive crouch year after year after year.

The right choice is to vote for the candidates that give voice to all of our concerns – the business community, parents and seniors alike.

In Cheshire we have to stop standing in place. Our failure to focus on economic development over the past decade, at least, has us in a very tough spot and playing from behind. Make no mistake, even now, the powers that be have no intention of moving more quickly and making development and growth their responsibility.

We also have to cut capital expenditures and the operating budget over the next two years (or longer) and we need to get serious about regionalizing some services and costs.

Finally, let’s stop spending on our school buildings until we have an agreed upon long-term plan in place for our schools. We have to stop throwing good money after bad. But in the meantime let’s continue to improve the education we’re providing our kids. It’s the right thing to do.

Please join me in moving Cheshire forward and let’s make good things happen!

Vote for Jim Jinks! Vote Democratic! #CheshireVotes2017

 

 

 

 

Local Paper Grants Jinks An ”Honorable Mention” (unofficially)

In today’s Cheshire Herald: ”Once again, there is a good crop of at-large contenders. Democrat Jim Jinks, a current alternate on the PZC, has stated that he wants to present a positive attitude when it comes to business growth and is right to suggest that the Council must show leadership in that area.”

I appreciate the Herald’s ”honorable mention” today. I really do. The paper understands we need to focus more on economic development and how this issue is a lynch pin for Cheshire going forward. But I disagree that the At-Large candidates are simply echoing the words of the current Council incumbents.

My reason for running is to increase business activity and property values in Cheshire. No one else has stated this to be their main focus.

I have said my plan is for Cheshire to be much more aggressive in our marketing and development incentive structure. No one in the current leadership on the Council has said this is their focus.

I have said we need to get serious about regionalizing some of our town services. None of the other candidates have mentioned this as part of their plan (despite the fact that our new Charter will make inter-municipal agreements easier to engineer and the state’s new budget is encouraging regionalism by lifting some mandates on towns.)

I have said we need to cut capital expenses and stop spending on the schools until we have an agreed upon long-term plan for the school buildings. None of the other candidates have outlined this in their plan (or any plan at all!)

I’m not being critical of the other candidates. I’m simply stating the facts of the case.

Keeping the status quo on the Council is a short-cut to more of the same. If you agree we need new faces and voices on the Council please vote for me on November 7th.

Jim Jinks

Candidate, Council At-Large

 

 

 

 

Jim Jinks for Town Council At-Large

Election Day is in a few days. See (and hear) for yourself why I’m running for town council. (Hint: It’s about making good things happen.)

Click here:

Jim Jinks for Town Council

Tax Increment Financing (TIF)

Tax increment financing (TIF) is a phrase you’ll likely be hearing more often in Cheshire. It’s a tool municipalities have increasingly been using to incentivize economic development. The way it works, in simple terms, is the incrementally higher property tax revenue (and other tax revenue if applicable) from a newly developed property (i.e. a ”district”) is split between the municipality and the developer. The developer then uses the incremental revenue to reinvest back into the property or district.

The devil is in the details but Cheshire should certainly look at all available tools in our efforts to grow our tax base, especially one with a proven track record like tax increment financing (TIF.)

Click here to read the article from the Cheshire Herald:

Cheshire Herald – TIF (page 1)

Cheshire Herald – TIF (cont.)

Also, you can click this link for an informative video of how TIFs work:

YouTube – Explanation of Tax Increment Financing

 

 

 

 

Democrats vs. Republicans: Big Differences

This is another letter that appeared in the Cheshire Herald on October 26, 2017. In Cheshire I often hear from voters that they don’t see the differences between the parties. But now as much as ever, there are BIG differences between the parties. Please read. Click this link or read below.

Democrats Are The Party Of Fiscal Prudence

 

Jim Jinks Is An Old-School Candidate With Fresh Ideas

Here’s a Letter to the Editor that appeared in the Cheshire Herald on October 26, 2017. Joe Clerkin is a good friend, yes, but he’s also a devoted family man, a person of integrity, professionalism and has over thirty years of experience in municipal finance and management at the highest levels in Connecticut.

I am honored that he took the time to write this letter and to have his endorsement.

Please read. Click the link or see below.

Jim Jinks Is An Old-School Candidate With Fresh Ideas

 

Regionalism: The Time Is Now

My plan to protect Cheshire’s young families and seniors from the state budget and to chart a course toward local tax relief includes several efforts we need to pursue concurrently:

1. Be much more aggressive about economic development and business retention.
2. Cut capital expenditures and the operating budget in the short term,
3. Finally get serious about regionalizing some of our costs and service delivery with inter-municipal arrangements.

In terms of regionalizing costs and service delivery, I’m not referring to municipal mergers (like the article below) or bringing back county governments. I’m referring to cooperative arrangements between municipalities that create economies of scale that allow for significant overall cost savings.

We can’t simply brush aside the notion of regionalism anymore. Our tradition of ”home rule” is not a symbol of self-reliance as much as it is our stubborn tradition and a reluctance to think about solutions in new ways.

Republicans have long argued that the rising costs of government threatens our liberty. But when it comes to regionalism (an effort to increase government efficiency and reduce costs), Republicans (and some Democrats) argue that a loss of local control is also a loss of liberty. One can’t have it both ways.

The state’s fiscal crisis will continue for years to come. It’s time for Connecticut municipalities to take a more enterprising approach for cost-sharing and service delivery.

Here’s a link to a good opinion piece in this week’s Hartford Business Journal

 

Jim Jinks

Town Council Candidate At-Large

Schools: Stop Spending On Buildings Until We Have A Long-Term Plan

Below is an article that ran recently in the Waterbury Republican-American about the League of Women Voters Forum last week in Cheshire.

The format is all the candidates get a timed one minute opening and closing statement and then over the course of an hour the candidates get a cumulative total of five minutes to respond to ten different questions. Naturally, given the time constraints, all the candidates have to be judicious with their answers.

One of the questions asked was what each candidate would suggest in terms of upgrades and updates to the schools.

My answer, partially quoted below, was that we have earmarked dollars over the next several years to update bathrooms and cafeterias and to replace windows and roofs. [It was rightly pointed out that some of these are driven by mandates to make facilities compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.] This is correct for some of the planned upgrades but not all. My comment was that we need to come to a community-wide agreement or long-term plan for our old and outdated schools before we continue to make big and costly repairs and updates. Otherwise we are continuing to throw good money after bad.

The Council voted in June to deny voters in Cheshire the chance (and I’d argue their right) to vote on the new middle school proposal. It’s been nearly four months and the Council is still dragging their feet on starting moving the discussion about our schools forward in a meaningful way.

Read on. Thanks.

 

CHESHIRE – At a Town Council candidate forum Wednesday night, political hopefuls weighed in on several issues facing the town in the years to come.

The event, hosted by the Cheshire-Wallingford League of Women Voters at Town Hall, discussed ways to grow the town’s grand list, develop the north end of town, and use cost-effective solutions to fight through a looming budget crisis.

A total of 18 candidates hope to fill nine council seats; eight for four district seats and 10 for five at-large seats. Republican Tom Selmont, a political newcomer, will challenge Democrat incumbent Peter Talbot in District 4; Republican newcomer Don Walsh will challenge Democrat incumbent Jeffrey Falk in District 3; Derek Gromko, a Democrat, will challenge Republican incumbent Thomas Ruocco in District 2; and David Veleber, a Republican, will challenge Democrat incumbent Michael G. Ecke in District 1.

The eight district candidates took to the stage first. Gromko, when asked about solutions to boost the town’s economic development, spoke in favor of a proactive economic strategy that includes retaining and attracting businesses by creating a floating zone in the town’s north end and creating an economic development authority.

Many candidates agreed. “We need to be working with the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Economic Development Commission to entice businesses to come here, the north end is an area that we really need to be working on,” Walsh said. Selmont agreed, adding that Cheshire has set the stage for growth, and said he would be ready to execute a plan if elected.

One question on November’s ballot will ask voters whether to extend water lines to the north end for about $1 million. Ecke said he will support the extension and also said “this is our way out of the fiscal mess, economic development is the way to get out of this mess.”

Constructing a new $106 million middle school was a hot topic on Board of Education and Town Council agendas last budget season. The new school was the first step in realizing a districtwide $423 million facility master plan to refurbish, construct and revitalize the aging schools in the in the district. The council rejected the plan at the end of the last school year.

Veleber said the plan is too big and it would place too much burden on taxpayers, even though he agreed “the buildings need to be updated to teach students in the 21st century.” Talbot and at-large incumbent Patti Flynn-Harris, a Democrat, voted to send the plan to referendum. “I wanted the town to decide on the plan – we need to think outside the box, something needs to be done but not at the burden of taxpayers,” Talbot said.

Jim Jinks, a Democrat who now sits on the Planning and Zoning Commission and is seeking an at-large council seat, said “we need to figure out what needs to be done with the schools before spending any money.”

Republican incumbents Timothy Slocum and council Chairman Robert Oris, Republican Jim Sima, Democrat Kim Cangiano, Republican incumbent and council Vice-Chairman Paul Bowman, Republican incumbent Sylvia Nichols and Democrats Ron Gagliardi and Jim McKenney are seeking to fill at-large council seats.

Contact Ajhani Ayres at aayres@rep-am.com.

Town Clerk: Elected or Appointed?

On November 7th, Cheshire gets to decide if we continue to have an elected or an appointed Town Clerk.

The question on the ballot will be simply:  Shall Sections 2-2(b) and 6-14 changing the Town Clerk from an elected to an appointed position be approved?

How are we to decide?

Let’s start with a little background about the position.

In our history, the town clerk position is among the earliest statutes on the books in colonial America. Colonists understood the need and value in keeping accurate records of births and deaths and perhaps most important then and now, keeping detailed land records and agreements. Today, the town clerk position also includes issuing licenses, managing all official records of the town and playing an important role in our elections.

According to Connecticut Statutes, this is the list of town clerk responsibilities with regard to local elections:

1. Attend bi-annual conferences hosted by the secretary of the state to discuss election laws, procedures, or related matters

2. Examine and approve applications for admission as an elector

3. Distribute campaign finance forms upon request

4. Act as filing repository for municipal office candidates’ campaign finance statements

5. Notify the secretary of the state of campaign finance statement filing violations

6. Certify nominating petitions

7. Issue absentee ballot applications, direct the preparation of absentee ballots, and maintain permanent absentee ballot records

8. Compile election results and forward them to the Office of the Secretary of the State

9. Submit up-to-date voting district maps and reports on the number of registered and party-enrolled voters to the secretary of the state

10. Keep custody of voting machine keys and other election materials

11. Prepare the explanatory text for a local referendum question.

As you can see, the town clerk is a powerful and important administrative role in our local elections.

In my view, the argument against an appointed town clerk is less than compelling, especially in Cheshire. The argument is that an appointed town clerk would somehow be less responsive to the public (merely because the person would be appointed rather than elected.) In Cheshire and elsewhere there are many dedicated civil servants that regularly go above and beyond in doing their jobs. One need not be elected to be especially responsive. Professionals will get the job done.

The other argument is that an appointed town clerk introduces ”cronyism” into our local politics; as if we’re still living in the Tammany Hall or ”political machine” era of local politics. But first of all, Cheshire doesn’t have an elected Mayor or First Selectman, so there isn’t anyone handing out patronage jobs.  Second, the town clerk would be hired by our professional Town Manager. Cheshire will always attract a competent and professional town manager. A professional administrator (like our town manager) is only going to hire other professional and competent staff. There’s no reason to think an appointed town clerk would not be responsive.

So why should we have an appointed town clerk?

Due to the demands of new technology, like many careers, the role of the town clerk requires more technical skills and professional training. Our current town clerk is very professional. But in the event we ever need to select a new town clerk, the position should be filled by another professional -a person with all the necessary expertise and experience. In short, an appointed town clerk.

Why not an elected town clerk?

An elected town clerk is basically a role of the dice – which is an odd way to choose a person to fill an important administrative role in our local elections. Now more than ever, we should have supreme confidence in the professionalism of our town clerk’s office, especially with regard to safeguarding our election process.

Really, when one thinks about it, our elected town clerk model is more prone to favoritism (if not ”cronyism.”) I mean anyone can run for the position…and if that person has the support of the majority party, they are likely to win whether they’re qualified or not.

Not convinced yet we should have an appointed town clerk?

There is an ever growing list of towns in Connecticut switching to an appointed town clerk. Currently thirty-eight of our one-hundred and sixty-nine towns have chosen to shed an old tradition (the elected town clerk) in favor of a more professional and forward-looking approach (an appointed town clerk.)

The thirty-eight towns that have chosen the forward-looking option include many towns that I would argue we should want to emulate in as many ways as possible – Glastonbury, Simsbury, Avon, Guilford, Madison, Woodbridge, Westport, Wilton, Canton and others. These towns are at or near the top of most lists in Connecticut; tops for income, jobs, educational achievement, safety, property values, etc. etc. These towns appear to be very successful – without having an elected town clerk. I’m not saying there’s a direct link between success and having an appointed town clerk but it certainly doesn’t appear to hurt either.

In my view, the benefits of having an appointed town clerk far outweigh the cons, especially now when our election process is under attack from internal and external forces.

On November 7th, I urge you to vote YES on Question 8. Let’s make good things happen!

Jim Jinks

Council Candidate At-Large