Testimony submitted on behalf of the Chamber opposing a bill to make recreational use of marijuana legal for adults (21 and over). One major issue with the bill is it would make recreational and medical marijuana users a protected class, meaning businesses could not discriminate against hiring someone who uses marijuana. At the bottom of my testimony is a link to a U.S. National HIghway Transportation Safety Administration report to Congress from July 2017 on Marijuana-impaired driving. This report should be required reading for all legislators. It explains why setting a legal limit for THC (the chemical in marijuana that causes impairment) is virtually impossible, because unlike alcohol, there is not a direct relationship between how much THC is in a person's system and how impaired they are. 

March 2, 2020
STATEMENT OF THE WATERBURY REGIONAL CHAMBER TO THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE OPPOSING RAISED SENATE BILL 16 (LCO 724): AN ACT CONCERNING THE ADULT USE OF CANNABIS.
Senator Winfield, Representative Stafstrom, and members of the Judiciary Committee, my name is David Krechevsky and I am the Director of Public Policy & Economic Development for the Waterbury Regional Chamber. Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on this legislation.

The Waterbury Regional Chamber, which serves 14 communities in Greater Waterbury and represents the interests of nearly 1,000 member businesses on matters of public policy, strongly opposes Senate Bill 16 (LCO 724), An Act Concerning the Adult Use of Cannabis.

The bill attempts to address the concerns of employers by stating in Section 45 that, “No employer shall be required to make accommodations for an employee or be required to allow an employee to: (1) Perform his or her duties while under the influence of cannabis, or (2) possess, use or otherwise consume cannabis while performing such duties.”

This provision, however, is flawed because the bill does not define what “under the influence of cannabis” means. Unlike alcohol, for which the state has set a legal blood alcohol limit of 0.08, no such blood level has been defined or established for impairment by THC, the psychoactive substance in cannabis. In addition, I refer the committee to a report to Congress issued in July 2017 by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) titled “Marijuana-Impaired Driving,” which states that, unlike alcohol, which has a direct correlation between the level of alcohol in the blood stream and the level of impairment, there is no such correlation for THC and impairment. The report states, “As expected, the peak THC level is reached soon after smoking ends. However, peak performance deficits are observed long after the peak THC level occurs.” The report adds, “THC level in blood (or oral fluid) does not appear to be an accurate and reliable predictor of impairment from THC.” (Pages 7-8)

Given that there is no reliable way to determine an individual’s level of impairment, this becomes a subjective exercise that will lead to disputes between employers and their employees who ingest cannabis outside of work. Such potential impairment can have a negative effect on productivity, and could be especially troublesome for manufacturers, particularly those producing parts with high tolerances, such as parts for medical or aerospace use, and who utilize equipment that can be dangerous if operated while impaired. The bill attempts to address this by allowing employers to conduct screening tests of employees in certain jobs where the need for safety is at a premium – such as medical careers, caring for children, driving, or operating dangerous equipment – but the value of such screening tests is questionable, as presented in the NHTSA report.

This leads to a larger point: There still is a tremendous amount that we don’t know about cannabis. Because it is still categorized as a Schedule 1 substance by the federal government, cannabis and THC have not been as thoroughly tested as other substances to determine their long-term health effects. Many of our Chamber’s healthcare-related organizations have raised serious questions about allowing recreational use of cannabis/marijuana, citing the potential for abuse and the unknown long-term physical and mental health impacts, especially on our youth. U.S. Surgeon General Vice Admiral Jerome Adams has issued an advisory warning that the level of THC in marijuana increased three-fold from 1995 to 2014, and that as the TCH increases, so does the risk of addiction. He also noted that edible marijuana takes time to be absorbed, increasing the risk of unintentional overdoses, as well as accidental ingestion by children and adolescents.

The Chamber shares these concerns, and believes it defies logic to expand the legal use of cannabis at a time when the state is dealing with the public health crisis of opioid abuse, as well as at a time when efforts are being made to limit the use of electronic cigarettes, especially among teens and young adults. The legislature’s focus should be on what is best for the health of the citizens of Connecticut, and we believe legalizing the recreational use of cannabis does not meet that standard.

For these reasons, the Chamber urges the committee to reject SB 16.
Thank you.
David Krechevsky
Director of Public Policy
Waterbury Regional Chamber
​
NHSA Report: Marijuana-Impaired Driving: https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/812440-marijuana-impaired-driving-report-to-congress.pdf

Testimony submitted on behalf of the Chamber to the Commerce Committee in support of extending the Manufacturing Apprenticeship Tax Credit to pass-through entities, which has been included in our Annual Legislative Agenda for the past several years:

STATEMENT OF THE WATERBURY REGIONAL CHAMBER TO THE COMMERCE COMMITTEE SUPPORTING RAISED HOUSE BILL 5212: AN ACT EXTENDING THE MANUFACTURING APPRENTICESHIP TAX CREDIT TO PASS-THROUGH ENTITIES
Senator Hartley, Representative Simmons, and members of the Commerce Committee, my name is David Krechevsky and I am the Director of Public Policy & Economic Development for the Waterbury Regional Chamber. Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on this legislation.

The Waterbury Regional Chamber, which serves 14 communities in Greater Waterbury and represents the interests of nearly 1,000 member businesses on matters of public policy, strongly supports Raised House Bill 5212 (LCO 1432), An Act Extending the Manufacturing Apprenticeship Tax Credit to Pass-Through Entities.
This legislation addresses an issue that is important to many of the Chamber’s smaller manufacturing members. It is a way to address the ever-growing need in the state for trained, skilled workers in manufacturing. Our state’s major defense contractors — General Dynamics Electric Boat, Pratt & Whitney, and Sikorsky Aircraft — are seeking to hire tens of thousands of workers to meet production needs over the next decade or more.

Unfortunately, Connecticut continues to have a shortage of people with such skills, despite the state’s best efforts to train new workers. In addition, according to the state Department of Labor, more than 35 percent of workers in the state’s manufacturing industry are over the age of 54, the largest cohort of older workers for any industry sector in Connecticut. With so many workers enticed to work for larger manufacturers, while others are nearing retirement age, it leaves smaller manufactures — many of which are pass-through entities, such as subchapter S and limited liability corporations — to wonder where they will find the skilled staff they need, both now and in the future.

One way to address this is for the state to reduce the cost for smaller manufacturers to hire and train apprentices. Training apprentices is costly — they are paid while they learn and are not as productive at the start as they will be when their training is completed.

Additionally, trained workers must devote time to training apprentices, which adversely affects productivity. Providing smaller manufacturers with the opportunity to use the apprenticeship tax credit will encourage them to hire and train the workers they need, while easing the effect on their bottom lines.
Currently, pass-through entities cannot utilize this tax credit, which is available to larger firms. It doesn’t make sense to prohibit smaller manufacturers from doing what larger firms can do. Approving this legislation will level the playing field for all manufacturers.

The Chamber and our members understand there is a cost associated with this bill, in the form of lost tax revenue. We argue, however, that the financial return to the state in the form of income taxes paid as a result of the new jobs created, as well as the increased economic output that will result, outweighs the initial cost.
In 2017, both houses of the state legislature approved a bill to extend the tax credit to pass-through entities, but it was vetoed by then-Gov. Malloy. The Chamber hopes the General Assembly will send this bill to Gov. Lamont and convince him of the need to sign it into law.

For these reasons, the Chamber asks the committee to approve HB 5212.
Thank you.
David Krechevsky
Director of Public Policy
Waterbury Regional Chamber

Here is the testimony I submitted to the Transportation Committee on behalf of the Chamber:

February 24, 2020
STATEMENT OF THE WATERBURY REGIONAL CHAMBER TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REGARDING RAISED SENATE BILL 155 (LCO 1588), AN ACT CONCERNING RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS
Senator Leone, Representative Lemar, and members of the Transportation Committee, my name is David Krechevsky and I am the Director of Public Policy and Economic Development for the Waterbury Regional Chamber. Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony on this bill.
 
The Chamber, which serves 14 communities in Greater Waterbury and represents the interests of more than 1,000 member businesses in matters of public policy, strongly supports rail infrastructure improvements, and specifically those that target the Waterbury Rail Line.
 
The Waterbury line is the longest of Metro-North’s three branch lines, running 27 miles from Waterbury to the mainline in Bridgeport, with stops in Naugatuck, Beacon Falls, Seymour, Ansonia and Derby. Despite this, ridership is generally low, about 1,000 passengers a day. You might think that makes the case for not improving the line, but the truth is just the opposite. As the saying goes, build it and they will come. The reason for low ridership levels is that service on the line is abysmal. That’s in part because only one train at a time can operate on the line, in either direction — and that’s when the train is operating at all. All too frequently, aging engines on the line break down, or worse, are removed from the line to serve the main line when a locomotive on that line breaks down. That relegates service on the Waterbury line to buses, with drivers who don’t know the stops — which, not surprisingly, has helped to produce an on-time performance as low as 75 percent.
 
Waterbury Mayor Neil O’Leary and Naugatuck Mayor Pete Hess have worked hard to remediate and develop brownfield sites, and both municipalities are poised for a renaissance and would benefit from improved rail service. Naugatuck has a plan for transportation-oriented design that would include an inland port, offering vastly increased property tax revenue and hundreds of new jobs, if only the improvements were completed and the rolling stock acquired. And Waterbury and Naugatuck are not alone; Naugatuck Valley communities along the line will benefit from the immense economic development opportunities created by a revitalized Waterbury Rail Line. Improving the line’s infrastructure also will alleviate traffic on Route 8 and the Mixmaster, easing the burden on its roadways and bridges.
 
Various studies also show that a dollar invested in improving transportation infrastructure creates three dollars of new economic activity. For all of these reasons, the Chamber asks the committee to support investing in improvements to the Waterbury Rail Line and to support LCO 1588.
 
David Krechevsky
Director of Public Policy
Waterbury Regional Chamber

The Connecticut State Legislature is back in business. 

The General Assembly opened at noon today, with Gov. Ned Lamont presenting his State of the State address, which included providing his proposed revisions to the budget. 

Among other things, he proposed pursuing recreational marijuana, debt-free community college, and an effort to reign in vaping. You can read about that here.

Meanwhile, CTMIrror.org says Lamont's revised budget keeps state spending lean while rebuilding reserves. You can read that here.

HBJ.com, meanwhile, says Lamont's revised budget cancels or slows some promised tax breaks for business. You can read that here. 

The Yankee Institute for Public Policy issued a statement on Lamont's budget. You can read that here.

This may be a short session (it's set to end May 6), but the list of proposals that are bad for business is long and growing longer. So stay tuned.

The state legislature isn't scheduled to open for its 2020 "short session" (so-called because it's only supposed to be 3-months long) until Wednesday, Feb. 5. 

But with Gov. Ned Lamont still trying to wrangle a vote on tolls, you can expect a special session to be held right before the official session begins. 

To that end, Democrats have developed a draft bill; you can read that here. They plan to hold a public hearing on the draft legislation on Friday. Here's more on that, and how to register to testify, from Sen. Len Fasano, the Senate minority leader:

The hearing will be held Friday, Jan. 31, starting at 1 p.m. You can testify by going to the hearing, but you can also submit testimony online.
 
To testify in Hartford:

• Come to the Legislative Office Building on Friday, January 31
• Signups will likely be held early in the day to testify later at the 1 p.m. hearing in Room 1E
• Tips and FAQs about testifying are available by clicking here.

 
To submit testimony online:

• Send a brief email to TRAtestimony@cga.ct.gov
• Make sure you identify that your testimony is related to Draft Bill LCO No. 373 in the subject line.
• Include your name and town in the email.
• Even if you submit testimony in advance, you may still attend the hearing on Friday

Here's what we know, and don't know, about the draft bill:
What we don't know:

• Tolls are proposed for at least 12 locations throughout the state, but the bill does not include anything to prevent the state from building additional toll locations in the future.
• Big trucks will have to pay tolls once the gantries are built.
• Democrats say the bill includes protections to prevent cars from being tolled in the future. Republicans say the protections in the bill are not sufficient to prevent future car tolling.
• Republicans said the draft plan would borrow more than the Republican no-tolls transportation plan, putting more debt on future generations and still requiring tolls. 
• Lawmakers will not have to hold a vote to increase toll rates. The ability to raise rates would be given to a new state transportation council.

What we don't know:

• No details on the numbers
• No details on which transportation projects will be funded, and which projects included in earlier proposals will be cut.
• No evidence to support how much revenue tolls will create.
• No calculations showing the impact of toll avoidance.
• No analysis of how toll avoidance would impact local roadways.
• No explanation of if and how the Special Transportation Fund would remain in balance.

 
If you want to learn more about the Republican transportation plan, you can learn more at www.ctsenaterepublicans.com/FASTRCT.

We're still analyzing what the General Assembly did during the 2019 session, and will pass along a summary of the new bills soon. Gov. Lamont's office is still reviewing legislation that was approved by both the House and Senate, but is not expected to veto any of them.

What is certain is that there will be at least two special sessions, one to deal with bonding issues and another to address tolls and economic development. Exactly when those sessions will be held is unclear.

For an early look at the results of the regular session, which ended June 5, you can read these summaries:


Republican-American summary is here.

CT Post summary is here.

Courant analysis is here.

​The Connecticut Business & Industry Association's summary is here.

Christine Stuart of CTNewsJunkie.com reports that the Paid Family & Medical Leave bill approved by the Senate last week remains in limbo in the House. The problem is that Gov. Ned Lamont has not provided specifics for changes to the bill, which he said he would veto in its current form.

You can read the story here. You can read the bill, as passed by the Senate, here.

Meanwhile, the Public Option Bill (HB 7267), which would create a Connecticut version of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), appears to be dead ... for now.

You can read CTNewsJunkie.com's story about that here.

The state House and Senate have both now approved legislation (HB 5004) to increase the state's current $10.10 minimum wage to $15/hour by June 1, 2023. Gov. Ned Lamont has said he will sign the bill.

​Below are the provisions of the bill. The following is based on an analysis prepared for legislators:
 
HB 5004 An Act Concerning Minimum Fair Wage
This bill increases the state’s minimum hourly wage from its current $10.10 per hour to:
(1) $11.00 on October 1, 2019;
(2) $12.00 on September 1, 2020;
(3) $13.00 on August 1, 2021;
(4) $14.00 on July 1, 2022, and
(5) $15.00 on June 1, 2023.
Beginning January 1, 2024, it indexes future annual minimum wage changes to the federal Employment Cost Index (ECI).
 
Tip Credit
The bill freezes the employer’s share at its current $6.38 for hotel and restaurant staff and $8.23 for bartenders. It does so, starting on July 1, 2019, by requiring the labor commissioner to recognize a tip credit that equals the difference between the applicable minimum wage and the “employer’s share,” which the bills sets as $6.38 for hotel and restaurant staff and $8.23 for bartenders (the same amounts as required under the current $10.10 minimum wage).
Table 1: Hotel and Restaurant Employees’ Tip Credit under the Bill
(the Tip Credit is the difference between the minimum wage and the employer's share)
Effective Date             Minimum Wage             Tip Credit          Employer’s Share
Current Law                     $10.10                           $3.72                        $6.38
10/1/19                             $11.00                           $4.62                        $6.38
9/1/20                              $12.00                           $5.62                        $6.38
8/1/21                               $13.00                           $6.62                        $6.38
7/1/22                               $14.00                          $7.62                         $6.38
6/1/23                               $15.00                          $8.62                         $6.38

Table 2: Bartenders’ Tip Credit under the Bill
Effective Date             Minimum Wage             Tip Credit          Employer’s Share                                      
Current Law                      $10.10                         $1.87                         $8.23
10/1/19                              $11.00                         $2.77                         $8.23
9/1/20                               $12.00                         $3.77                         $8.23
8/1/21                                $13.00                        $4.77                         $8.23
7/1/22                               $14.00                         $5.77                         $8.23
6/1/23                               $15.00                         $6.77                         $8.23
 
Training Wage
The bill also changes the “training wage” that employers may pay to learners, beginners, and people under age 18. Current law generally allows employers to pay these employees as low as 85% of the regular minimum wage for their first 200 hours of employment.
 
The bill eliminates the training wage exceptions for learners and beginners — and limits the training wage to only people under age 18, except emancipated minors. Thus, it requires learners and beginners who are at least age 18 to be paid the full minimum wage. It also requires the training wage to be the greater of $10.10 or 85% of the minimum wage and allows employers to pay the training wage to people under age 18 for the first 90 days, rather than 200 hours, of their employment.

IT’S CRUNCH TIME! Just four weeks remain in the state legislative session and a number of bills that could negatively affect your business are still on track.
 
State lawmakers will soon act on bills related to:

• Paid Family & Medical Leave (SB 001 & 881, HB 5003), which would provide up to 12 weeks paid leave at 100% of salary capped at $1,000 per week for all private-sector workers in Connecticut, who will have 0.5% of their wages deducted from their paychecks to support the program. The bill also broadly defines a “family member.” Employers will shoulder the additional administrative burdens involved with juggling new workforce demands to accommodate employees on leave, while continuing to provide non-wage benefits for employees absent for up to three months annually. 
• Increasing the Minimum Wage to $15/hour (SB 002, HB 5004 & 7191). Two of these bills would increase the current $10.10/hour wage to $15 over a three-year period, while the other will increase it over four years.  
• “On-Call” Shift Scheduling (SB 764; HB 6924), which would prohibit employers from cancelling an employee’s shift without 72-hours‘ notice and require paying half the salary or wages lost to any employee whose shift is cancelled within that time-frame.

With so few weeks left in the session, lawmakers need to hear directly from you! Whether you choose to send an email or call state lawmakers, tell them Connecticut’s small businesses — especially your business —cannot afford these job-killing bills. Tell them specifically how each of the bills above would hurt your business. If one or more of the bills above does not directly affect you, talk about the bill or bills that will. But don't wait! 
 
Act now and make your voice heard!

Below is the contact list (with emails & phone numbers) for members of the local legislative delegation. Be sure to reach out to all of them!

Rep. Larry Butler, D-72nd District (which includes the eastern & northern sections of Waterbury): Larry.Butler@cga.ct.gov; 860-245-8585
Rep. Stephanie Cummings, R-74th District (which includes the East Mountain area): Stephanie.Cummings@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700
Rep. Anthony D'Amelio, R-71st District (which includes the Town Plot area and a portion of Middlebury): anthony.damelio@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700
Rep. Ron Napoli Jr., D-73rd District (which includes the Bunker Hill area and western portion of Waterbury): ron.napoli@cga.ct.gov; 860-240-8585
Rep. Geraldo Reyes Jr., D-75th District (which includes the Central Business District):
Geraldo.Reyes@cga.ct.gov; 860-240-8585
Sen. Joan Hartley, D-15th District (Waterbury, Naugatuck, Prospect): Hartley@senatedems.ct.gov; 860-240-0006
Sen. Rob Sampson, R-16th District (Cheshire, Prospect, Southington, Waterbury, Wolcott); Rob.Sampson@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8800
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rep. David Labriola, R-131st District (Naugatuck, Oxford, Southbury): David.Labriola@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700
Sen. George Logan, R-17th District (Ansonia, Beacon Falls, Bethany, Derby, Hamden, Naugatuck, Woodbridge): George.Logan@cga.ct.gov; 860-240-8800
Rep. Nicole Klarides-Ditria, R-105th District (Beacon Falls, Derby, Seymour): 
Nicole.Klarides-Ditria@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700
Rep. Rosa Rebimbas, R-70th District (Naugatuck): Rosa.Rebimbas@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700

Sen. Eric Berthel, R-32nd District (Watertown, Bethlehem, Bridgewater, Middlebury, Oxford, Roxbury, Seymour, Southbury, Washington, Woodbury): Eric.Berthel@cga.ct.gov; 860-240-8800
Rep. Joe Polletta, R-68th District (Watertown, Woodbury): joe.polletta@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700

Sen. Mary Abrams, D-13th District (Cheshire, Meriden, Middlefield, Middletown):  
mary.abrams@cga.ct.gov; 860-240-8800
Rep. Craig Fishbein, R-90th District (Cheshire, Wallingford): Craig.Fishbein@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700​
Rep. Liz Linehan, D-103rd District (Cheshire, Southington, Wallingford): liz.Linehan@cga.ct.gov; 
860-240-8585
Rep. Gale Mastrofrancesco, R-80th District (Southington, Wolcott): 
gale.mastrofrancesco@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700
Rep. Lezlye Zupkus, R-89th District (Bethany, Cheshire, Prospect): Lezlye.Zupkus@housegop.ct.gov; 
860-240-8700

Sen. Henri Martin, R-31st District (Bristol, Harwinton, Plainville, Plymouth, Thomaston):
Henri.Martin@cga.ct.gov; 860-240-8800

Rep. Arthur O'Neill, R-69th District (Bridgewater, Roxbury, Southbury, Washington): 
arthur.oneill@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700

Rep. John Piscopo, R-76th District (Burlington, Harwinton, Litchfield and Thomaston):
john.piscopo@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700

Rep. David Wilson, R-66th District (Bethlehem, Litchfield, Morris, Warren, Woodbury):
David.Wilson@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700

Two of the three bills proposing a paid family & medical leave program were approved by the Finance, Revenue & Bonding Committee on Monday.

The two bills, Senate Bill 1 and House Bill 5003, were each approved by the committee by a vote of 27-21, mostly along party lines. It is noteworthy, though, that two freshman Democrats — Rep. Jill Barry of Glastonbury and Rep. Kerry Wood of Rocky Hill — voted against the bills, citing concerns that the numbers for the program do not add up. 

You can read about the vote here.

Six legislators from the Greater Waterbury delegation are members of the Finance, Revenue & Bonding Committee, including 5 Republicans and 1 Democrat. All 5 Republicans — Rep. Nicole Klarides Ditria of Ansonia, Rep. John Piscopo of Thomaston, Rep. Joe Polletta of Watertown, Sen. George Logan of Ansonia, Sen. Henri Martin of Bristol and Sen. Rob Sampson of Wolcott — all voted no.

The sixth member from the region — Rep. Larry Butler, D-Waterbury — was absent and did not vote. He has, however, previously stated his support for paid FMLA.

You can see the vote tally sheet for SB 1 here, and for HB 5003 here.

There are 7 weeks left in the legislative session, so it is urgent that business owners who have concerns about these bills contact legislators, either by phone or by email. Once again, here is the contact list for local legislators:

Rep. Larry Butler, D-72nd District (which includes the eastern & northern sections of Waterbury): Larry.Butler@cga.ct.gov; 860-245-8585
Rep. Stephanie Cummings, R-74th District (which includes the East Mountain area): Stephanie.Cummings@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700
Rep. Anthony D'Amelio, R-71st District (which includes the Town Plot area and a portion of Middlebury): anthony.damelio@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700
Rep. Ron Napoli Jr., D-73rd District (which includes the Bunker Hill area and western portion of Waterbury): ron.napoli@cga.ct.gov; 860-240-8585
Rep. Geraldo Reyes Jr., D-75th District (which includes the Central Business District):
Geraldo.Reyes@cga.ct.gov; 860-240-8585
Sen. Joan Hartley, D-15th District (Waterbury, Naugatuck, Prospect): Hartley@senatedems.ct.gov; 860-240-0006
Sen. Rob Sampson, D-16th District (Cheshire, Prospect, Southington, Waterbury, Wolcott); Rob.Sampson@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8800
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rep. David Labriola, R-131st District (Naugatuck, Oxford, Southbury): David.Labriola@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700
Sen. George Logan, R-17th District (Ansonia, Beacon Falls, Bethany, Derby, Hamden, Naugatuck, Woodbridge): George.Logan@cga.ct.gov; 860-240-8800
Rep. Nicole Klarides-Ditria, R-105th District (Beacon Falls, Derby, Seymour): 
Nicole.Klarides-Ditria@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700
Rep. Rosa Rebimbas, R-70th District (Naugatuck): Rosa.Rebimbas@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700

Sen. Eric Berthel, R-32nd District (Watertown, Bethlehem, Bridgewater, Middlebury, Oxford, Roxbury, Seymour, Southbury, Washington, Woodbury): Eric.Berthel@cga.ct.gov; 860-240-8800
Rep. Joe Polletta, R-68th District (Watertown, Woodbury): joe.polletta@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700

Sen. Mary Abrams, D-13th District (Cheshire, Meriden, Middlefield, Mddletown):  
mary.abrams@cga.ct.gov; 860-240-8800
Rep. Craig Fishbein, R-90th District (Cheshire, Wallingford): Craig.Fishbein@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700​
Rep. Liz Linehan, D-103rd District (Cheshire, Southington, Wallingford): liz.Linehan@cga.ct.gov; 
860-240-8585
Rep. Gale Mastrofrancesco, R-80th District (Southington, Wolcott): 
gale.mastrofrancesco@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700
Rep. Lezlye Zupkus, R-89th District (Bethany, Cheshire, Prospect): Lezlye.Zupkus@housegop.ct.gov; 
860-240-8700

Sen. Henri Martin, R-31st District (Bristol, Harwinton, Plainville, Plymouth, Thomaston):
Henri.Martin@cga.ct.gov; 860-240-8800

Rep. Arthur O'Neill, R-69th District (Bridgewater, Roxbury, Southbury, Washington): 
arthur.oneill@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700

Rep. John Piscopo, R-76th District (Burlington, Harwinton, Litchfield and Thomaston):
john.piscopo@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700

Rep. David Wilson, R-66th District (Bethlehem, Litchfield, Morris, Warren, Woodbury):
David.Wilson@housegop.ct.gov; 860-240-8700