New Lon­don should not go Cal­i­for­nia

The Day - - OPINION -

Con­cern­ing story, “New Lon­don con­sid­ers sanc­tu­ary city” on April 11.

For a city that has strug­gled for decades to dig out of the “grimy lit­tle city” im­age, with some suc­cess, the prospect of be­com­ing a sanc­tu­ary city is in­sane. You need not go far to see the dele­te­ri­ous ef­fects of this lib­er­ally in­spired folly on pop­u­la­tions in Cal­i­for­nia. Los An­ge­les County now has 55,000 home­less, up 13,000 in 2017 alone, and there is a pub­lished “Poop Map” in San Fran­cisco to alert trav­el­ers to pos­si­ble soiled shoes.

The re­cent, and grow­ing re­volt by coun­ties against the sanc­tu­ary city leg­is­la­tion im­posed by the lib­eral wingnut Cal­i­fornida Gov­er­nor “Moon­beam” Brown should be a guide­post for any city con­sid­er­ing such non­sense.

Per­haps New Lon­don’s gov­ern­ing body should fo­cus on el­e­vat­ing the stan­dard of liv­ing of its tax-pay­ing res­i­dents with more em­pha­sis on fill­ing the decade long de­ba­cle that is Fort Trum­bull with rev­enue gen­er­at­ing de­vel­op­ment, while eas­ing the tax load on res­i­dents.

Our es­teemed gov­er­nor, a pro­po­nent of this mad­ness, re­cently gained sta­tus as the least pop­u­lar gov­er­nor in the en­tire coun­try, and this sanc­tu­ary pol­icy, along with fis­cal stu­pid­ity, got him there. Some­one once said, “The path to hell is paved with good in­ten­tions.” Don’t go there, New Lon­don. Jim Baker Mys­tic

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.