In election years, the Connecticut League of Conservation Voters surveys candidates for state office about their positions on pressing environmental issues. We consider candidate responses to our survey in our endorsement process. Our questionnaire and instructions were emailed to all candidates running for the Connecticut General Assembly.
Candidates must submit our questionnaire via our online form. To request a link to the survey, please send an email to [email protected], specifying the name of the candidate and their district, and confirm the email the candidate will use to respond.
Open Question
What environmental issues have you worked on the most? What will be your top environmental priority for the 2023 legislative session? Why does the environment matter to you?
Environmental Justice
In 2008, Connecticut passed a landmark environmental justice law to prevent polluting power plants, incinerators, and similar facilities from being disproportionately sited in low-income or communities of color. In recent years, the legislature considered bills to strengthen the law by giving a greater voice to at-risk communities, protecting public health, increasing transparency, and addressing a systemic pattern of racial inequity in siting decisions. The legislature has yet to act. Will you support changes to the state’s permitting process that would deny permits to build a new polluting facility in an Environmental Justice community?
Yes
No
Uncertain
Waste management
Connecticut is facing a waste management crisis. One of Connecticut’s largest municipal waste facilities (the MIRA plant in Hartford) is closing, leaving few environmentally responsible options for disposing of our garbage. Burning, landfilling, or trucking our refuse out of state are all bad for our environment and increase the cost to municipalities. Our state must dramatically step up our recycling rates, divert compostable food waste, and help to stop creating new waste at the source. In 2021, DEEP worked with a collaboration of 80 municipalities to produce the “CT Coalition for Sustainable Materials Management” report. Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). was among the many recommendations to get products out of the waste stream. To date, the legislature has passed EPR laws for mattresses, paint, and gas cylinders. Would you support EPR legislation for tires and packaging waste?
Yes
No
Uncertain
Polystyrene
Single-use plastics and expanded polystyrene ( better known as “styrofoam”) are detrimental to the environment and wildlife. Many seabirds, sea turtles, seals and other marine mammals are killed each year after ingestion or entanglement. This waste also holds toxins such as PCBs, which are released when the foam is broken up or ingested. Will you support legislation to reduce polystyren pollution by requiring restaurants, caterers, and most schools to stop using styrofoam trays and single-use styrofoam food containers by 2024?
Yes
No
Uncertain
PFAS
Per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) refers to a class of over 10,000 chemical variations, known as “forever” chemicals because they all have carbon-fluorine bonds that don't break down, even during incineration. Once in the environment, they contaminate water, soil, plants, and groundwater sources. Water across the state is testing above acceptable levels. They are linked to cancers, liver damage, reproductive disorders, and impaired immune function. PFAS chemicals are used in many consumer and industrial products and we must do more to "turn off the tap" of these toxic chemicals. There is some federal funding, but not enough, and we don't have enough earmarked in CT for testing and remediation. Will you support a ban to restrict PFAS chemicals in textiles, upholstered furniture, carpets, and cookware similar to what is being done in other states like New York, Maine, and Colorado?
Yes
No
Uncertain
Neonics
Neonicotinoids, known as “neonics,” are now the most widely used class of pesticides in the country. They have been linked to massive bee, insect, and bird deaths. They are increasingly responsible for vast water and soil contamination, ecosystem-wide harms, and human health concerns. Because the federal government has abdicated its duty to adequately regulate these chemicals, states have taken steps to ban them. Will you support legislation to ban the sale and use of neonicotinoids in CT?
Yes
No
Uncertain
Rodenticides
Wildlife rehabilitators and biologists are seeing Connecticut’s Birds of Prey dying from rodenticide poisoning at alarming rates. Over the years, rats and mice have built up a tolerance and can consume many of them without dying right away. However, hawks, owls, raptors, pets, and other animals unknowingly consume this poisoned prey and suffer painful side effects or death. A recent study at TUFTS University Wildlife Clinic tested 43 red tailed hawks and found 100% tested positive for rodenticides. Will you support restricting the use of certain rodenticides in outdoor areas like parks and other public spaces?
Yes
No
Uncertain
Diesel generators/data centers
In 2021, the General Assembly passed legislation to incentivize construction of new, highly polluting data centers to be built in Connecticut without any committee review or public hearing. Data Centers consume 10 to 50 times the energy per floor space of a typical commercial office building. As our country's use of information technology grows, Data Center and server energy use is expected to grow as well. Because data centers are one of the most energy-intensive building types, it is critical that the legislature take steps to mitigate the energy and emissions impacts that these facilities can cause. Will you support establishing emission and exhaust standards for certain diesel generators that Data Centers are currently allowed to use?
Yes
No
Uncertain
Bears
Science shows that wildlife conflicts are best managed through public education on removing food attractants, protective measures (e.g., electric fencing around beehives, properly secured chicken coops, keeping dogs on leashes), and aversive conditioning by trained professionals. A recent study found the Connecticut public prefers humane responses to conflicts with wildlife over lethal measures that promote killing "nuisance" wildlife, including bears and other protected species. Will you support legislation that creates a working group, composed of environmental and animal welfare groups, to make policy recommendations on humane, long-term solutions to conflicts with wildlife?
Yes
No
Uncertain
Tree Cutting Protocols
DEEP’s extensive cutting of old growth trees at Housatonic Meadows State Park caused huge public outcry and the call for changes to the agency’s policy on “hazard trees.” Similar concerns about overly aggressive tree cutting policies by DOT and our state’s utility companies (Eversource and UI) can only be addressed by legislative action. Will you support a bill to require stronger science-based tree cutting protocols based on conservation values?
Yes
No
Uncertain
Community Sustainability
Municipalities need a consistent local source of revenue to invest in community sustainability projects and to match local, state and federal grants in support of such projects, without impacting the municipal mill rate or requiring bonding. Will you support legislation to allow, but not require, municipalities to establish a dedicated fund for community sustainability projects including support for parks and green spaces, tree planting, farmland preservation, protection of water resources, climate resilience & mitigation, and housing assistance through a limited conveyance fee on buyers of real estate? (If opposed or undecided, please provide a comment on your preferred method for towns to raise revenue, including necessary matching funds, for the purposes listed.)
Yes
No
Uncertain
Riparian Buffers
For many years environmental advocates have tried to pass legislation to protect riparian corridors (buffers) along Connecticut’s rivers and streams. Recently the Western Connecticut Council of Government’s Plan of Conservation and Development endorsed such a proposal. Last year, Connecticut celebrated the 50th Anniversary of the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act but has not yet created mandatory riparian buffers. Will you support state-level legislation that would mandate the creation of riparian buffer areas (especially in the headwaters of such riverine systems)?
Yes
No
Uncertain
Ranked Choice Voting
CTLCV’s work depends on voter engagement. Our support for pro-environment candidates includes removing any unnecessary obstacles or impediments to voting at election time. The more constituents see that their vote matters, the more they will be engaged in our democratic process, which can only strengthen support for the environment. Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) has been shown to increase voter choice and turnout, reduce partisanship and polarization, and eliminate the "spoiler" argument as the basis for voter concern about wasting their vote. RCV allows voters the option to rank candidates in order of preference. If a candidate receives more than half of the first choices in races where voters elect one winner, that candidate wins, just like in a single-choice election. However, if there is no majority winner after counting first choices, the race is decided by an "instant runoff." The candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and voters who picked that candidate as ‘number 1’ will have their votes count for their next choice. This process continues until a candidate wins with more than half of the vote. Should CT pursue Ranked Choice Voting?
