Woodbridge experienced a historic blizzard of 38 inches of snow in less than 24 hours and drifts of more than 5 feet earlier this month.
Plowing was difficult and time consuming. I met daily before, during and after the storm with the public works director, fire chief, police chief, superintendent of schools, human services director and others to assess the conditions and oversee removal efforts.
The town public works crews along with several private contractors worked continuously through the night since the beginning of the storm to clear town roads and make them safe for passage.
All town roads were passable on Tuesday, Feb. 12, and safe for school bus travel and for students on the roadways on Thursday, Feb. 14, when schools reopened.
Town roads were clear and made safe for travel in an expeditious manner. We opened our emergency shelter on Friday, Feb. 9, which was kept open until Feb. 11.
I would like to thank Warren Connors, our public works director, Chief of Police Gene Marcucci, Deputy Chief Ray Stuart, Fire Chief Sean Rowland, Human Services Director Mary Ellen LaRocca and their staffs for all the work they did before, during and after the storm and also for the residents for their cooperation and patience during the storm.
Edward Maum Sheehy
First Selectman
Woodbridge

Why do we put our hand over our hearts when saying the Pledge of Allegiance? Why do we stand and remove our hats while facing the American flag to sing the National Anthem? Why do servicemen and women salute when in the presence of the sitting president? Why do we remain standing when a president enters the room until he signals to sit? It’s called RESPECT, if not for the man, than for the office he holds.
It’s called being a proud American. Well, last night I was once again an embarrassed American. Embarrassed by a member of the sitting president’s family. The First Lady!
Who thought it appropriate to be a (live-stream) presenter from the White House at the 85th Academy Awards Show? Using one of their constants, (children or servicemen and women) to cover whatever inappropriate act they see fit to commit. Where has the dignity of the officeholders gone? Why is it no longer a shock to see the sitting president’s or his wife’s name on the description of a day or late night talk show line up?
It made me feel totally uncomfortable the few times we had to witness President Clinton hanging with Barbara Streisand. But hey we all were aware of his hidden agenda, not that it made it OK.
However, the current White House family seems to be hedging their way to be the next Kardashians. One might think in the current disgrace this country is in that one of them would have better things to do with their time. Looking back on my lifetime, I don’t remember ever seeing Queen Elizabeth appearing on Ali G, or the X-Factor, nor any member of the Royal Family. I assure you it wasn’t for their lack of asking, or maybe it was. Maybe they knew that it would be totally disrespectful to even ask such request of the most respected royal family.
Adding insult to injury was the First Lady’s little speech. "These nine movies took us back in time and all around the world," she said. "They made us laugh, they made us weep, and they made us grip our armrests just a little tighter. They taught us that love can endure against all odds and transform our lives in the most surprising ways and they reminded us that we can overcome any obstacle if we can dig deep enough and fight hard enough and find the courage to believe in ourselves."
It appears she was out of the room when one of the winners of the visual effects award, Bill Westenhofer, distinctly said in no uncertain terms, “The ironies not lost on any of us up here, that in a film who’s central premise is to ask an audience what they believe is real and what is not real. What you see is well – It’s Fake! The magic of visual effects.” What seems to be fake here is any attempt at the First Family to convey they have respect for America, Americans or the future of our country.
I, for one, thank God for the two-term rule for presidents. I only hope there is an America left to recover, from this atrocity we call the Obamas.
Linda Connors
Hamden

Dr. C. Everett Koop will be greatly missed.
I met him when he was the chief of surgery at the Philadelphia Children's Hospital. I was seeking a position as chief pediatric surgical resident and felt very anxious when I walked into his office. Here sat an austere Dutchman. He looked at my record and said, "I see you were born the same day as a famous American. " "Yes, Dwight Eisenhower." "There's another one." "Really, who is it?" "Me." Then we both laughed and became friends for life.
It turns out we have the same day of birth, both born in Brooklyn, N.Y., and both attended Cornell University Medical School and were invited to be guest speakers at the same graduation years later. I always sent him birthday cards during his tenure in Washington.
Bernie Siegel, M.D.
Woodbridge

A recent New Haven Register editorial supported a bill now before the legislature concerning assisted suicide. It was selective is its support, agreeing only when so-called pain and physical suffering are involved.
Shouldn’t mental suffering or “quality of life” be a consideration in which assisted suicide is a reasonable course of action? My wife was in a nursing home in bed, her pain sometimes uncontrolled, for almost four years. She voiced on several occasions that she wished she could die. Granted, it was followed by some life affirming periods, but the wish was strong and long-lasting. It was a quality of life issue with her, not just her pain.
I have a living will stating that I want no efforts to extend my life in the event of major accident or illness that would make me unable to enjoy the quality of live I am willing to accept. But under current law, and the law under consideration, I must be given life-sustaining care, not just comfort care, unless I am diagnosed as having a death probability within six months (making me eligible for hospice care). Without that diagnosis I could be forced to endure the angst and enormous cost of unwanted hospital or home care, rehabilitation procedures and a probable life of being immobilized, incoherent, incontinent, force fed, and monitored with multiple needles and devices.
I attended a legislative hearing some 25 years ago in Hartford that I believe was the occasion for the drafting of the current law. I recall that there was discussion about life being sacred and that one must await God’s timing for death to take place. Religious support for the bill was a major factor in the wording of the legislation. Do we really believe that God decides when we die? Did God on 9/11 create the circumstance for 3,000 people to die horrible deaths in the World Trade Center?
My individual right to choose should not be based on some arbitrarily imposed legal (or religious) view, but on my own spiritual understanding of when it is appropriate and reasonable to let go. There are many people with religious beliefs who accept the right to die philosophy. We should have every right to determine our own fate.
Geary Corves
New Haven

I'd like to offer my sincere appreciation and heartfelt thanks to Fairfield Fire Department Assistant Chief Chris Stacy.
On Feb. 25, I was traveling to work on English Drive, considered East Rock Park's "back road." While en route, I encountered a patch of "black ice," causing me to spin out and strike the curb in the opposite lane, resulting in a driver's side front flat tire. I am grateful that the damage was minimal. One gentleman alerted me to the fact that my vehicle was incapacitated, I thank him as well. Chief Tracy pulled up alongside of my Jeep, unaware that he was helping a fellow firefighter. This was refreshing because it proves that he will unselfishly go above and beyond to help anyone in need, no matter what.
Not only did Chief Tracy attempt to bring me to work, he also returned to my vehicle and changed my tire, all while wearing his "whites," the term civil servants use for those of higher rank.
From one firefighter to another, thank you Chief Tracy, you really made my day!
Linda D. Cohens
Firefighter/Paramedic, New Haven Fire Department
Hamden

Much has been said about gifting tables recently. Your Feb. 24 headline read, "Gifting Tables Saga Far From Over - US Attorneys Office Continues to Investigate." I wrote a letter myself just a few weeks ago, saying that informed adults ought to be able to "gift" as they wish as long as they follow the existing gifting laws.
I saw this entire effort on the part of the IRS as an out-of-control agency overstepping its authority, and making an example of two innocent women. We have serious crime going on that requires incredible resources, and the government is spending our tax dollars prosecuting housewives who meet weekly at wine and cheese parties. There was nothing sinister about these meetings. Prominent attorneys said no problem, “continue what you’re doing.” The gifting table participants were given clear guidelines, knew exactly what they were doing, and loved the camaraderie. Thousands of dollars was given to charities.
There certainly was no criminal intent. And yet, the jury of 12 took just 90 minutes to come up with a guilty verdict on 17 counts for two women. I spent 18 hours in that federal courtroom, including the summation, and there was no doubt in my mind that the government did not prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. This was a total miscarriage of justice, and one can only hope that federal judge Alvin Thompson sees it that way at sentencing on May 15.
Fred Vigorito
Guilford

Isn’t it time the Catholic high schools formed their own league?
Catholic schools recruit athletes from all over, often offering scholarships to athletes far from their location. They take star athletes from local public schools and then compete against those same public schools, which are limited as to where their players must live to determine what school they can attend.
Hamden for years was the breeding ground for star hockey players until Fairfield Prep and Notre Dame started recruiting them.
To ask the players in public schools, depleted of their best athletes, to compete against schools able to recruit from anywhere is just plain wrong and unfair to the public school kids.
The Catholic schools profit from the added publicity championship teams warrant, using this as an inducement to entice other kids to attend.
The father of a Hamden High School star hockey player told me years ago that despite he wanting his son to play for Hamden High, he had to give in to his playing for Fairfield Prep since the likelihood of his son getting a college scholarship was greater there, something that would determine whether he could attend college or not.
The recent publicity of a star player on the Fairfield Prep Hockey Team as living in New Haven is an example of what I’ve just related. Why is it that the private schools compete against themselves, but Catholic schools have the privilege of being allowed to compete against public schools and have this privilege extended to even being declared champions in the same league the depleted, athletically public schools are forced to compete in?
Alton Eliason
Northford

I used to enjoy New Haven. Nearly everything about it from the artistic and educational to the homeless and student drunkenness was uniquely New Haven.
Until the end of 2012 that is ... I was in town for a haircut. It had snowed. Place was closed so I ate on Broadway for my holiday treat. So far, so good.
Then I was approached by a person with a tale of woe. No gas! A long way to travel! And no wallet? I trusted him enough to accept a phone and his number for $20. I contacted him within a day. No problem. Two days, no worries. Three days, yes I'd lost my $20.
How to find the owner of the phone? Charge it, call the phone companies. Finally reach the owners within a week or two. He described the con-artist. He reported the theft to the New Haven Police.
I reported this to the New Haven Tourism Department, the mayor's office, the tip line for the New Haven Police and the Yale Police Department. No one has responded. I doubt anyone has followed up on the original complaint.
I'd felt good helping someone during the holidays. I'd felt OK reporting a vagrant who caused grief to myself and a family I don't even know. I do not feel good that at least five to six people now know this story and am realizing they care very little for myself, for the original victim, even for the perpetrator who is almost certainly maintaining his facade because of his own suffering and building a larger list of Samaritans who'll wish they'd stopped caring for humanity just as the five to six people who no longer care, period.
Why in a town of such liberal actions and intentions is charity and good will so hard to find?
David Gademan
Merrimack, N.H.

I want to congratulate the president on his "State of the Illusion" speech the other night.
For those who missed it because they voted for the president but they were too busy watching The X Factor, Dancing with the Stars, or Two and a Half Men, here is a quick summary.
First, we need to spend more. We don't need to cut spending because we only owe about $330,000 in debt and unfunded liabilities for every man woman and child in the country, and our kids will have to pay for it anyway.
Our national credit rating has already been lowered and will probably be lowered again. Gas prices have doubled, real individual family income has dropped 5 percent, and our economy shrank by 1 percent last quarter, but we must keep spending.
Second, it used to be Bush's fault that we have economic trouble, but now it is the entire Republican Party's fault.
Oh, and don't forget the the rich people and the evil business owners who are refusing to spend money and refusing to hire people. It's not the increases in taxes, the uncertainty caused by poor leadership or the thousands of pages of regulations that is holding back the hiring.
Third, if we pass a law that makes it harder for law abiding citizens to get a gun it will prevent gun violence by the mentally ill and criminals. I am going to stop. I feel my IQ dropping. Let me go back to Two and a Half Men.
Wally Hauck
Milford

Our senator, Ed Meyer, is sponsoring a bill (SB 48) with a stated purpose “to permit a competent person who is suffering from a terminal illness to take his or her life through the self-administration of prescribed medication.”
Speaking on behalf of the Community Baptist Church, we are saddened by this proposed legislation. We view this not only as an affront against the sanctity of life, but also against the proper recognition of the sovereignty of God over life and death.
For many, physician-assisted suicide is seen as an act of mercy. It is perceived as another form of palliative care. We understand fully the motive to help people relieve their pain. It is our contention, though, that life and death are issues relating to the purview of God’s authority. We also contend that the objective and eternal standard of the sanctity of human life is of much greater value than that of any subjective and existential measure of the quality of life or temporary desire to be released from suffering.
Not only do we find this bill wrong, but also we find it to be ambiguous. Who is a “competent person?” To what degree of “suffering” does this bill refer? Who decides what constitutes a true “terminal illness?”
We have seen people who have been deemed “terminal” miraculously recover. What about a person who cannot perform the “self-administration” described?
This bill is full of loose and “gray” language. It will eventually lead to the expanded practice of euthanasia in many forms.
We are calling on all like-minded citizens of the 12th district to ask Sen. Meyer to reconsider his sponsorship of this bill and rescind it.
Pastor Tim Zacharias
Community Baptist Church
Branford

Each day the editorial page of The New Haven Register has been publishing photos of the children who were slain on Dec. 14 in Newtown. It’s heartbreaking to see these young faces and to read “what might have been.”
No matter how one feels about the issue of gun control, the “26 Reasons to Act” series is not only a call for action, but a reminder that we should never forget the 20 children and six adults whose lives were taken that morning in the second deadliest school shooting in the history of our country.
The Register is doing the right thing.
Richard Hodes
Hamden

Mental health experts like Dr. Sledge (New Haven Register, Feb. 5, 2013) worry about the stigma of mental with good reason. Mental health care practitioners routinely work with clients and families who have eschewed care for years or even decades rather than risk being "labelled" with a psychiatric diagnosis.

Most of these patients would not hesitate to seek medical attention for a physical illness; nor an illness that is attributable to lifestyle choices, and therefore preventable.  Most mental illnesses are not easily preventable; our clients don't choose to be ill, and their illnesses ought not to be stigmatized. 

Neither should our profession.  Psychiatric care practitioners are among the lowest paid care providers, along with pediatricians and primary/preventive caregivers.  

Across this country in the wake of Newtown and Virginia Tech and Columbine has risen a chorus of acknowledgement that the populace in under-served by our mental health care systems.  Sadly, those voices are not echoed by the corporations that set the reimbursement rates for most of the mental health care delivery in this country and in our state.   

Consider the devaluation of psychiatric care by one of the nation's leading private insurance corporations, which controls a significant share of the commercially insured market in Connecticut.  Their reimbursement rate for a widely practiced treatment, the 45-minute office visit with a medicated patient, remained flat between 2007 and 2012.  This is in fact a yearly decrease when adjusted for inflation and cost of living increases.  That company took advantage of an updated national protocol for coding healthcare that went into effect Jan. 1, 2013 to cut the 2007 rate for a 45-minute service by an additional 15 percent. Meanwhile, up-front deductibles and patient co-payments, both of which are disincentives to seeking care, have steadily increased.

Yet some treatment modalities have become more profitable. Short visits, with minimal if any meaningful clinical interaction, where prescriptions for psychiatric medications are provided, remain lucrative.  For those of us with DEA numbers, the economic signaling toward a factory-based model of care is unmistakeable.  Talk is cheap. "Therapy" takes place down the hall by allied professionals, or across town at a reduced hourly rate, and sometimes not at all.  "Coordination of care" among disparate practitioners at distant locations who share a client's care with a prescriber who is medicating 5 to 8 clients per hour, sometimes more, is a far-fetched notion.  Many of us who engage in it know better.  But the opportunity to double or quadruple one's income by abiding a profit-driven care model is difficult to resist, even among professionals whose original interest in mental health was to serve those in need.

Insurers regulate the practice of medicine de facto. They are neither legislative nor regulatory entities, yet we have allowed them to act with that authority.

If, as we profess, particularly in the aftermath of a crisis, this country values a competent mental health system whose interests are aligned with those of the public it serves, we should demand from our legislators and from the regulatory bodies they entrust to act on our behalf, that the economic signals of the profit-makers truly align with the delivery of efficacious care to the public.    

John M Roy

North Haven

Rarely have we experienced such a confluence of arguments in favor of making it easier for U.S. manufacturers to export reactor components and equipment for nuclear power plants being built around the world.
According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, the global market for nuclear supplies will reach $500 billion to $740 billion over the next decade. If they can capture even a quarter of that market, U.S. nuclear manufacturers – including a number of suppliers in Connecticut ‒ could generate new business on a game-changing scale, and that would be a great thing. It would stimulate our economy, while generating billions of dollars in tax revenues and creating or sustaining up to 185,000 American jobs, the Nuclear Energy Institute says.
What’s more, raising the level of U.S. exports might go a long way toward righting our nation’s lopsided balance of trade – a ballooning deficit in which imports of goods and services exceeded exports by a whopping $20 billion just in January. On top of that, nuclear power is increasingly important in the battle against air pollution and global climate change.
Nearly 70 nuclear plants are being built around the world to meet growing demand for clean energy. Another 150 reactors are planned, and over 340 more are proposed. That’s in addition to 435 operating nuclear plants, including 104 in the United States, which must be kept in excellent working order.
China, India and other countries hoping to reduce their use of coal in electricity generation have multiple reactors under construction. These countries need everything from reactor components to pumps, piping and valves. Depending on the design, a single reactor requires 300 miles of electric wiring and 30,000 electrical components. And reactors planned in small developing countries like Jordan, Vietnam and Malaysia won’t get built without these and other equipment from industrialized countries.
There’s one problem for U.S. companies: They may be left out of the parade. The United States will watch from the sidelines if it doesn’t streamline export regulations for nuclear technology. Currently it takes a year or more for federal agencies to process applications for nuclear export licenses, whereas other countries with nuclear industries like France, Germany and South Korea issue licenses in a few weeks.
In the competition for contracts, such delays place U.S. companies at a disadvantage that’s hard to overcome. Most countries have a single agency responsible for issuing export licenses, but in the United States license applications must be approved by four agencies – the departments of State, Energy and Commerce as well as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Consequently, the U.S. licensing process is more complex, time-consuming and restrictive than those in other countries.
The delays cost U.S. companies billions of dollars a year in business. Reforming our export policy for nuclear goods and services is in the national interest. For the next few decades at least, the increasing need for electricity and the unfolding environmental saga on climate change will continue to make nuclear technology a global growth business.
K. Paul Steinmeyer
Hebron

I am writing to strongly urge the Connecticut state legislature to pass Bill 5838 to ban gestation crates in the state of Connecticut.  Gestation crates are a cruel and inhumane agricultural method that crams breeding pigs for their entire lives into cages so small that the pigs can barely move and cannot turn around.  It is obvious that this method inflicts great misery on the pigs.

For those pet owners out there, I urge you to imagine your dog being stuck in a cage narrowly fitted to his or her body for his or her whole life.  Pigs have been consistently found to be as intelligent and social as dogs.  If we would object to our dogs being so abused, why tolerate it when it comes to pigs?

One reason people might claim gestation crates are necessary is because of their economic efficiency.  This, however, is plainly false.  An Iowa State University study, among other studies, found gestation crates to be actually inefficient next to more humane alternatives.  Moreover, if gestation crates are so economically necessary, then why have dozens of food companies, from McDonald’s to Costco, decided to stop using gestation crates?

Ample polling evidence indicates that the public strongly supports animal protection.  Gestation crates are a clear example of animal mistreatment, and polling evidence shows that the public firmly opposes gestation crates.  I have little doubt that, were this bill to be put to a referendum, the public would support it overwhelmingly.  If the members of the Connecticut state legislature seek to represent their constituents, then the answer is clear: support Bill 5838.

Zachary Groff

New Haven

After reading several articles from your publication, I have yet to see an unbiased piece on gun control.
Many of the reports seem to have a political propaganda purpose with a goal to sway the readers' minds to a view based on opinions and not facts.
I cannot support news publications that do not report truth over opinion. Myself and others will no longer support any business or organization that advertises or affiliates itsself with such publications and its partners.
This is not about the left or right politics as a balance of both will always be needed. It's about truth, facts and the balance of your coverage. I read/watch the new to see what's going on around me. It would be nice to somewhat trust the information.
John LeBlanc
West Haven

As I watched a recent snowstorm unfolding, after the governor's request for road closings, we watched Channel 8 - on the road - under dangerous road conditions.
Why would it make any sense to have Channel 8’s employees out on the road? This after Malloy closed roads. They appeared to be going too fast for road conditions.
Is the TV media immune to road closures? I think not. Not only did they put themselves in danger, but any first responders in danger. I would strongly suggest TV crews obey road closure instructions.
There are enough cameras to provide conditions on the roadways. Keep your mobile crews off the roads. Use common sense, which seems to be lacking.
Ron Chirgwin
Derby

The Second Amendment, contrary to what pro-gun owners would have you believe, is NOT an 11th Commandment written on the stone tablet by God. It is the second of 27 amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America - the first ten called “the Bill of Rights” - submitted in 1789.
These amendments clarify in a practical and more workable way the intension of the Constitution.
Here is the Second Amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
All of the amendments have been and are subject to interpretation and some have been challenged. One has been repealed. None have been more hotly debated than the second. It’s most recent challenge came in 2002, when the Supreme Court of the time “concluded” an interpretation more to its liking and MUCH more to the liking of the National Rifle Association.
The “militia” was out as a reason to possess guns and, somehow, “rights” was in. The American people weren’t too surprised at anything that particular Supreme Court would do after its dramatic role and performance two years before during the 2000 elections.
This particular piece of legislation just seemed to slip by without much fanfare (at least I do not remember it). But that was then; this is now. Today I do not believe that the American people, including myself, will ever again just roll over and look the other way.
Guns have got to go - and the Second Amendment along with all its baggage must be repealed. Ironically, some of the best arguments for this come from the NRA itself. It is they who oppose any and all restrictions on any and all guns. They say because nothing would work. Their own solution to this immediate and terrifying problem of habitual murder and mass murder by gunfire in this country is to arm every man, woman and child to the teeth - irrespective, for once, of their favorite red herring, “mental health,” because, of course, the next potential killers would be and are among us.
The unspoken and oddly naive rational behind this potentially cataclysmic solution is that by giving a gun to someone, he or she automatically becomes - as they call them - “a good guy.” This theory certainly did not hold true in New Mexico last month where a man gave his (angelic looking) teenage son a gun and with that gun the son shot and killed every member of his family, including the father.
For many, repealing the Second Amendment would be a shock, and for many, indeed, a sacrifice. But time is not on our side. My dear friends - with or without guns, I know you to be loyal and loving people and ever faithful to our wonderful country. Now it is up to you.
Maria Elena Pignatelli
East Haven

People need to realize that aggression is a normal component of our personalities.
Psychiatrist Karl Menninger discussed this with me years ago.
The pictures of the Boston Bruins hockey team visiting the Newtown kids touched my heart, but when I see them on the ice kicking, punching and knocking their opponents all over the place, I don't feel so good.
Watching someone with a knife in their hand attack another person who annoys them would be very upsetting to me. But as a surgeon I cut people open every day and was rewarded for it.
As Menninger said, maybe my becoming a surgeon was a reaction formation to my destructive tendencies. So no jail time for me.
We need to understand and point out to our children and the world that aggression can be used in constructive and life-enhancing ways. In sports, like the Bruins, we can unload our aggression, and then be gentle souls away from the ice or playing fields. We can hammer nails, hunt, cut up people or cut down trees, knock down houses and make a living at it.
So please provide your children with healthy ways to compete and release their aggression so they can find inner peace when they have to confront the realities and difficulties of life. I doubt that the TV games can do this for them since they are not dealing with reality on the screen they are watching. So turn it off and get them out in the street shoveling snow or weeding the garden and something good will come of it for all of us.
Bernie Siegel, MD
Woodbridge

The State of Connecticut continues in a deficit spending mode, as the  State Bonding Commission just put $575.5 million on the state credit card on top of a projected state budget defitcit of  near $1 billion for the year.  It's no wonder that our state leadership is not developing new state  business, as they can't run the state as a successful business themselves. The more the state borrows, the more taxes all taxpayers must pay.

Stan Muzyk

Derby

Every day the newspaper publishes a picture of one of the Newtown children who was killed. Every day we read about the dreams they wanted when they got older. Their dreams were shattered in only a few minutes. They will never come true. Parents, take advantage and hug your child and tell them you love them. This is all free. There is no price on this but it is worth its weight in gold. Let your child know how much you love them because tomorrow may be too late.

Ann Sampson

New Haven