Connecticut Earns A+ in Government Data Transparency

Connecticut is one of five states providing state residents with the most comprehensive online access to government spending data, according to an analysis by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (USPIRG). Nationwide, government spending transparency is improving, but many states still lag far behind, according to “Following the Money 2016: How the 50 States Rate in Providing Online Access to Government Spending Data,” the sixth annual report by the organization’s Education Fund.  Some states have improved their spending transparency web portals significantly, earning perfect scores in this year’s report, while others are still barely achieving the minimum standards.

Based on an inventory of the content and ease-of-use of states' transparency websites, the report assigns each state a grade of “A+” to “F.” The leading states with the most comprehensive transparency websites are Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Oregon, and Connecticut, with each receiving an A+ grade.

“This A+ is great news – and comes at an important time as Connecticut navigates new fiscal challenges and prickly public policy debates. Facts and truth – not shadowy special interests – should be driving our discussions here at the capitol. The only way to ensure an honest discussion about our financial future is to open government and deliver the truth to the public," said State Comptroller Kevin Lembo. "We are doing everything we can to deliver state financial information in bigger and better ways each year. With a few keystrokes, all of us can find out where state money is going and where it came from. Most recently we have been working to extend that transparency to our quasi-public agencies, as well as towns and cities across the state. We are grateful that ConnPIRG recognized our efforts – and promise that we will treat this grade as a starting point, not a finish line, in making Connecticut the most open and accountable state in the country.”

The Comptroller’s Office website providing state government financial data is www.osc.ct.gov/openCT

The report indicates the cost to maintain the website at $18,000, with start-up costs from existing budgetary resources.  Among the state programs cited as providing easily accessible data to the public are the Enterprise Zone and Urban Jobs Tax Credit, Film and Digital Media Tax Credits, Jobs Creation Tax Credit, Manufacturing Assistance Act, and Small Business Express programs.

Connecticut’s most significant improvements include the addition of a page that details what data is excluded from the site, allowing citizens to better understand the universe of information the state is providing, according to the state Comptroller's Office. The state also added more information about the projected and actual public benefits of some of its largest subsidy programs. The state could continue to improve its transparency efforts by expanding its site to include spending information from municipalities and more local government bodies, the report noted.

USPIRG officials point out that states that have created or improved their online transparency have typically done so with little upfront cost. Top-flight transparency web portals can save money for taxpayers, while also restoring public confidence in government and preventing misspending and pay-to-play contracts.

“Citizens deserve to be able to follow their tax dollars, from the most minor state expenditures to the most major development subsidies,” said Michelle Surka, program associate with U.S. Public Interest Research Group Education Fund. “This year, it’s clear that several states made a commitment to meeting the high national standards for spending transparency. Other states continue to lag behind, unable to overcome some of the barriers that prevent comprehensive spending disclosures.”

“States’ online spending transparency efforts are paying off in better informed citizens and a more efficient government,” said Elizabeth Ridlington, policy analyst with Frontier Group and co-author of the report. “Our research found that top-ranked states have been making steady improvements to their transparency websites over the years, giving citizens in most states unprecedented access to information on where their tax money goes.”

While many states continue to improve, the states that most distinguished themselves as leaders in spending transparency are those that provide access to types of expenditures that otherwise receive little public scrutiny. Only 11 states- including Connecticut - provide checkbook-level information that includes the recipients of each of the state’s most important subsidy programs.

This year, most states have met basic standards for providing online access to information about state contracting and an increasing number provide information about economic development subsidies and off-budget agencies.  Several states have made substantive upgrades to their transparency sites or added new features that give the public unprecedented ability to monitor how their government allocates resources. Of particular note, as highlighted in the report:

• Michigan streamlined its transparency data and added functionality to its transparency website, including allowing bulk download of all its data.
• West Virginia launched a new site with data on projected and actual public benefits of the state’s major subsidy programs.
• Utah and Arizona have joined several other states in adding data from localities, municipalities and school districts to their state transparency portals. This provides an inexpensive way to improve the transparency of the spending that often affects ordinary citizens most directly.
• Indiana, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Hampshire and Washington now prominently feature data on quasi-public entities with web pages dedicated solely to these agencies, boards, authorities and commissions.

State spending transparency is a non-partisan issue, USPIRG stressed. The report compared transparency scores against party control of Governors’ offices and the state legislatures. For neither measure did higher levels of spending transparency correspond to Republican or Democratic control, according to the report.

Structural Problems Seen in the Connecticut Economy

In an analysis highlighted by the Connecticut Institute for the 21^st Century, well-known economist Don Klepper-Smith, in a newsletter to clients of economic forecasting consultancy DataCore Partners, is voicing concerns about Connecticut’s economic prospects, short and long-term.  His views come as the legislature grapples with approximately a billion dollars in projected deficit, and the Institute is signaling a heightened profile in the state, with a new director visibly sharing the organization’s economic concerns. Klepper-Smith’s latest findings, headlined “Troubling Trends,” are the result of comparisons between economic activity in different parts of Connecticut and Massachusetts conducted over the last several years, the Institute website reports. Although both states share many of the same characteristics, Klepper-Smith notes the Massachusetts labor market is notably healthier than the Connecticut market and that seems to be a key factor holding back the Connecticut economy.

The job recovery rate in Connecticut since 2006 is 76.6 percent, according to DataCore, compared with the Massachusetts job recovery rate of 240.3 percent. The significantly lagging job recovery rate in Connecticut has “led to negative impacts in other parts of the Connecticut economy.” Examples cited include that the median price for single family homes in Connecticut dropped 3 percent in 2015, while it went up by 3 percent in Massachusetts during the same period.

Similarly, over the last six months, Connecticut’s unemployment rate has edged upwards, while the Massachusetts rate has dropped slightly. Technically, according to DataCore, this is a sign of a growth recession in which the local economy is not strong enough to prevent a rise in the jobless rate, the Institute indicates.

The website goes on to state that “The DataCorp findings, when combined with other recently published reports, provides continuing evidence of a fundamental shift in the basic foundations of the Connecticut economy.”

Scott Bates, a Connecticut native, has recently been named as executive director of the Connecticut Institute for the 21^st Century.  He previously served in the administration of Virginia’s Governor, for the U.S. House Select Committee on Homeland Security, and as president of The Center for National Policy in Washington.

In an article appearing in this week’s Hartford Business Journal, Bates describes Connecticut’s fiscal dilemma as both a spending problem and revenue problem, indicating that “our state will only return to a sustainable fiscal model when incremental changes - taken together – substantially reduce the cost of government.”

Bates adds that “the tax problem is a major issue that may take years to sort out,” suggesting that available savings be pursued immediately.  Among the suggestions, moving to embrace a policy of “aging in place,” a change in approach that could save more than $650 million over the next 20 years according to a recent report from the Institute and the Connecticut Economic Resource Center.

The Connecticut Institute for the 21st Century is a non-partisan non-profit organization of businesses and civic groups dedicated to identifying effective and efficient ways for state and local government to deliver services while reducing cost to the taxpayer and making Connecticut’s economy strong.

The organization researches best practices, publishes reports, and educates policymakers and the public on key spending and policy issues including transportation, public pensions, smart growth and social service spending.

Connecticut Tax Bite on Powerball Big Winner Would Be 15th Highest in US

If you happen to win a $1.5 billion Powerball lottery jackpot, you’d be well advised to be a resident of one of nine states that do not tax such winnings.  Connecticut is not among them. Connecticut’s take on such a jackpot would be 15^th highest in the nation, among the states that do tax such winnings at various income tax rates.  An analysis by Bloomberg found that the amount of state income taxes owed would be highest for residents of Oregon, Minnesota, Iowa, New Jersey, Washington D.C., Vermont, New York, Maine and Wisconsin.

Connecticut residents would need to pay the state $62.3 million, which, when combined with the federal tax bite, would leave the Powerball winner with just under $500 million of the $1.5 billion jackpot.

According to the analysis, the IRS takes 25 percent off the top. The winner will then have to pay the federal government an additional 14.6 percent at tax time, for a total of 39.6 percent–the maximum individual tax rate. That means the most a winner can hope to take home is $561.7 million.

Then the home state – with the exception of the nine states that don't go after such winnings – take their share, ranging from $92.1 million for an Oregon resident to $29.9 million for a North Dakota resident.  Connecticut is approximately in the middle of the pack.

States can also receive a revenue boost when there isn't a Powerball winner for quite awhile, as happened between November 2015 and January 2016.  As the jackpot grew each week, sales of tickets increased.  According to published reports,  the state of Connecticut received more than $20 million out of the $50.1 million in Powerball tickets sold.

Increased Municipal Burden, Disproportionate Impact on Low-Income Drivers Among Possible Effects of Highway Tolls, Report Finds

If Connecticut opts to introduce a system of tolls on the state’s roads to help fund a significant expansion of transportation infrastructure projects in the years ahead, the toll system instituted could run the risk of causing an increased use of local roadways that “could shift the burden of maintenance and congestion to municipalities,” and lower income residents in the state could be faced with “a higher burden relative to their incomes than wealthier Connecticut residents.” Those warnings to policy makers are included in an Issue Brief  by Inform CT that reviews the various tolling options and respective challenges posed.  Connecticut eliminated tolls more than 30 years ago in the aftermath of a horrific accident at the Stratford toll plaza, and state leaders have been in a “perpetual debate about whether to reinstate them ever since,” the paper points out.

With overhauling the state’s transportation system is a leading element in Governor Malloy’s agenda to boost the state’s economy, renewed attention is being paid to methods of generating sufficient revenue to support those initiatives, and to issues raised in the 2015 policy brief.  Spurred by advances in technology, the possibility of imposing a system of electronic tolls, such as those in use in other states, are among the considerations, with border tolling, distance tolling and congestion pricing among the options.

The issue brief indicated that a disadvantage of a distance toll system on all limited access highways in Connecticut would be that it “could create an incentive for people to use alternative roadways. The increased use of these roadways could shift the burden of maintenance and congestion to municipalities.” The advantage would be that distance tolls “could help to more efficiently allocate the cost of these roadways to drivers who use them the most.”

In analyzing the potential impact of tolls placed at Connecticut’s borders, the policy paper notes that while such an approach would “help to ensure that out-of-state residents driving through Connecticut pay for their use of Connecticut’s roadways,” border tolls “place a disproportionate burden on residents of Connecticut who commute out-of-state to work. This burden is further amplified if we believe that, on average, these out-of-state commuters use a smaller share of the roadways than their in-state commuting counterparts.”

Congestion pricing, which provides for higher toll charges at peak traffic times, “helps to limit traffic on major roadways and create an incentive for people to use more environmentally friendly forms of public transportation,” the policy paper indicates.  However, a congestion pricing system “could polarize roadway use by displacing low income commuters during peak driving hours. Congestion pricing could also create displacement effects whereby the increased use of local roadways could shift the burden of maintenance and congestion to municipalities.”

The report suggests that “congestion pricing and distance tolls could become more affordable for low income residents if electronic payment systems were implemented that allow for income-based rate reductions.”

Earlier this year, a study panel recommended installing tolls and raising taxes in order to pay for Malloy's 30-year, $100 billion transportation program.  Legislators have said that any decision on the imposition of tolls is at least a year away, as attention focuses during the current session on establishing a method to assure that money allocated to transportation is not redirected to other areas of government.

The issue brief also stress that “a key consideration when trying to outweigh the benefits and costs of implementing tolling in Connecticut is how the revenue from the tax will be redistributed to the residents of the state.” It goes on to highlight that “as the bill stands, the monies raised would go into the Special Transportation Fund but allocation of the monies from there is not specified. The allocation of these funds is an important discussion that needs to take place before the impact of the legislation can be considered in earnest.”

InformCT is a public-private partnership that currently includes staff from the Connecticut Economic Resource Center and the Connecticut Data Collaborative. The mission of InformCT is to provide independent, non-partisan research, analysis, and public outreach focused on issues in Connecticut, and to act as the convener for fact-based dialogue and action.

Award-Winning Start-Up Accelerator to Launch Largest Class of Social Enterprises, Fledgling Businesses

When the Hartford-based Social Enterprise Trust, known as reSET, was among the winners of the U.S Small Business Administration’s Growth Accelerator Competition last year – the only Connecticut organization to do so and one of 80 nationwide – it was not known what earning that designation, and  the $50,000 that came with it, would mean for reSET’s Impact Accelerator program. Now, the picture is becoming clearer – and boosting Hartford’s reputation as a city for socially committed entrepreneurial start-up businesses.  The expanding initiative is attracting not only home grown companies, but start-ups from elsewhere across the country, including as far away as California.

Tailored for impact-driven businesses but available to all early-stage ventures, reSET’s Impact Accelerator, now beginning its fourth year, has as its primary objective to test and hone entrepreneurs’ models, and to connect them to networks, mentors, customers, and resources.

A cohort of 22 businesses have been accepted to the program and most of their models are impact focused, serving the educational technology, health and health tech, energy, and agriculture industries. More than 60 percent of them are already generating revenue.  It is the largest group of companies to take part in the accelerator program at reSET, and the first to include a handful of out-of-state participants.

Running from January 20 to June 2, reSET’s accelerator will feature a more flexible program designed for busy, full-time entrepreneurs, as well as a ‘pay what you can’ model.  Entrepreneurial teams will attend five weekend summits, with 30+ optional workshops, mentor office hours, and consultations with an Entrepreneur in Residence conducted during the week.

At program’s end, a $25,000 accelerator funding pool will be available to the cohort, and they'll have priority access to reSET’s investment fund as well, via mentors and advisors that can help them put their best foot forward with their applications, according to reSET officials.

The 2016 cohort includes: Agyncy (www.agyncy.com), AmRide (www.amride.com), Asarasi (www.asarasi.com), BLT Robotics (www.bltrobotics.com), Doors to Explore (www.doorstoexplore.com), DopaFit (www.mydopafit.com), Enviro Power, LLC (www.enviropowertec.com), Keep Sight (www.keepsight.com), Lion’s Heart (www.lionsheartservice.org), Mivy (www.mivyapp.com), Movia Robotics (www.moviarobotics.com), Muni (www.muni.info), myHomeProNetwork (https://myhomepronetwork.com), Plucked (www.pluckedadmissions.org), RepVisits (www.repvisits.com), ScripFlip (www.scriptflip.org), SnapSeat (www.snapseatbooths.com), Tainted Inc. (www.tainted-beauty.com), Text Engine (www.textengine.info), The TubieGuard (the-tubieguard.myshopify.com), Trekeffect (https://trekeffect.com), and Untapped Potential (www.upotential.org).

“We’ve made a strategic shift with our accelerator model so it can accommodate more participants at one time, which we feel will really encourage more collaboration,” said Rosie Gallant, reSET’s Director of Programs. “The shift will help tee up the accelerator for our annual Impact Challenge as well, since the program will wrap in the spring right around when applications will open for the competition in which participants will vie for this year’s $100,000 prize purse.”

reSET is a non-profit organization whose mission is to advance the social enterprise sector.  Its strategic goals are threefold: to be the “go-to” place for impact entrepreneurs, to make Hartford the Impact City, and Connecticut the social enterprise state.  reSET aims to inspire innovation and community collaboration, and to support entrepreneurs in creating market-based solutions to community challenges.  reSET’s goal is to meet entrepreneurs wherever they are in their trajectory and to help them take their businesses to the next level.

Income Inequality in CT's 4th Congressional District is 4th Largest Gap in Nation; 2nd District Has Least Income Inequality in State

Connecticut’s 4th Congressional district, centered in Fairfield Country, has been ranked as the district with the 4th highest level income inequity in the nation.  A year ago, the 4^th C.D. was ranked fifth. A ranking of congressional districts of by their level of income inequality, conducted by Bloomberg, uses the Gini coefficient, a formula that measures the distribution of income across a population. The closer a Gini number is to 1, the greater the level of inequality; the closer to zero, the closer to perfect equality. The average score for the United States was 0.4804.

All of Connecticut’s Congressional Districts, with the exception of the Fourth District, did better than the national average in the degree of income inequality.

Bloomberg Businessweek has previously pointed out that the U.S. congressional districts with the most inequality share certain traits: “they contain a small, enormously wealthy elite surrounded by impoverished neighbors.” Most of the districts with the greatest disparity are located in or near major urban metropolitan areas.

The greatest income inequality in the most recent analysis indicated that the Congressional Districts with the most income inequality are Pennsylvania’s 2^nd District, New York’s 10^th District, and Florida’s 27^th District.  Following Connecticut’s 4^th District on the list are Illinois; 7^th District, and three additional Congressional Districts in New York – the 12^th, 7^th and 16^th.  Rounding out the 10 C.D.’s with the most income inequality are Ohio’s 11^th District and Georgia’s 5^th District.

In Connecticut’s 4^th Congressional District, which includes Bridgeport, the state’s largest city, as well as the communities often referred to as the “Gold Coast,” 59.3 percent of the population has household income in the highest quintile, while 6.7 percent of households have income below the poverty level.

Connecticut’s 5^th Congressional District (.4810) ranked number 88 on the list of Congressional Districts with the most income inequality among residents.  The state’s 3^rd Congressional District (.4792) ranked at number 95, and the 1^st C.D. (.4631) at number 175.  Much later in the rankings, Connecticut’s 2^nd District (.4261) came in at number 387, indicating it is the C.D. in Connecticut with the least income inequality.

The Gini coefficient, which is calculated by the U.S. Census from household income share by quintiles, was used to measure distribution of wealth. It ranges from zero, which reflects absolute equality, to one, complete inequality. The data was updated in November 2015, using 2014 data.  In 2014, a person living alone making less than $12,071 was classified as in poverty. The threshold increases for each additional household member and varies by the number of adults and children in each household.

Seven CT Financial Institutions Earn Federal Designation to Assist Low Income Communities

Across the country, there are 963 institutions designated by the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Community Development Financial Institutions Fund as having earned CDFI Certification.  Seven of them are based in Connecticut’s urban centers, the focus of their financial activities. CDFIs are specialized community-based financial institutions with a mission to promote economic development by providing financial products and services to people and communities underserved by traditional financial institutions, particularly in low income communities and to people who lack access to financing.  By offering tailored resources and innovative programs that invest federal dollars alongside private sector capital, the CDFI Fund serves mission-driven financial institutions that take a market-based approach to supporting economically disadvantaged communities. The institutions to receive CDFI Certification in Connecticut are in the state’s major cities:

• Housing Development Fund (Stamford)
• HEDCO Inc. (Hartford)
• Community Capitol Fund (Bridgeport)
• Greater New Haven Community Loan Fund (New Haven)
• Hartford Community Loan Fund (Hartford)
• Seasons Federal Credit Union (Hartford)
• Start Community Bank (New Haven)

CDFIs include regulated institutions such as community development banks and credit unions, and non-regulated institutions like loan and venture capital funds. By building the capacity of a nationwide network of CDFIs, the CDFI Fund works to empower low-income and underserved people and communities to enter the financial mainstream.

Certified CDFIs are eligible to apply for awards through a variety of programs offered by the CDFI Fund. These awards enable CDFIs to finance a wide range of activities—including mortgage lending for first-time homebuyers, flexible underwriting for community facilities, and commercial loans for businesses in low-income areas. Through varying strategies, each CDFI contributes to the cultivation of a healthy and stable local economy, the CDFI website points out.

Speaking last week in Detroit, where CDFI Certified institutions are involved with the city’s rebound, CDFI Director Annie Donovan said “CDFIs have always led the way, demonstrating to mainstream investors that there are opportunities in communities that have been overlooked, or judged to be too risky. If mainstream financial institutions move into markets behind us, we must continue to blaze new trails, to find the next community that is even harder to serve than the last one.”

The Housing Development Fund, Inc. was established in 1989 as a nonprofit organization to finance the development of affordable housing in Stamford, CT. Today, with offices in Stamford, Bridgeport, and Danbury, HDF provides lending and homeownership counseling services to the entire state of Connecticut as well as Nassau, Suffolk, Rockland, and Westchester counties in New York.

Community Capital Fund facilitates the flow of capital and expertise into housing and economic developments that “benefit low and moderate income people in the Greater Bridgeport Area.”  It was formed in 2005 from the merger of two loans funds.

The 27-year old Greater New Haven Community Loan Fund’s mission is to create and sustain vibrant neighborhoods and communities. Through its lending and investment, the Loan Fund is the flexible source of alternative financing for affordable housing and community development in the greater New Haven area.

Since 1975 HEDCO Inc. has helped clients and their communities improve, achieve and succeed by supporting their growth and progress. They “build productive partnerships, create new programs that meet the changing needs of entrepreneurs and increase the funds available to help people build and improve their business and non-profit organizations.”

Formerly the Middlesex Credit Union, Seasons Federal Credit Union was renamed in 2006 after expanding into New Haven County. Over the years, the credit union has “broadened its services beyond simple share savings and small loans to meet the increasingly diverse financial needs of its growing membership.”

The First City Fund Corporation (FCFC), Start Community Bank’s parent company, was formed in 2004 as a result of a challenge of the city of New Haven to New Haven Savings Bank’s conversion to a public company. In the fall of 2012 the bank received certification as a Community Development Financial Institution, (CDFI). There are only 100 CDFI certified banks in the country, and Start Community Bank is the only bank so designated in New Haven.

The work of the Hartford Community Loan Fund is to provide and promote just and affordable financial services that benefit low-wealth residents of Hartford.  HCLF helps borrowers overcome barriers—such as credit history, language, cultural differences, financial literacy, or lack of economic assets--that can isolate people from the financial mainstream.  As the Fund’s slogan indicates, “We Finance Hope.”

Providing access to affordable financial products and services in underserved communities is a vital part of the CDFI Fund’s mission. By building the capacity of a nation-wide network of specialized financial institutions serving economically distressed communities, low- income people are empowered to enter the financial mainstream, the CDFI website emphasizes.

Donovan, in her Detroit speech last week, underscored that “CDFIs do connect their strategies with many community stakeholders, but let’s make sure we aren’t leaving out the important voices of the people who live in the communities we serve. If we are to deepen our impact and increase economic opportunity, we must know and serve our target markets from the bottom up.”

White House Conference on Aging Has Connecticut Connections

It is a once-a-decade event that will feature the President of the United States and other senior administration officials. The White House Conference on Aging (WHCOA), first held a half-century ago and a key driver of federal policy towards the nation’s seniors, will be a conference reliant on digital technology befitting 2015. Rather than having delegates from throughout the nation stream into Washington, D.C., Americans are asked to watch events unfold via live stream – either at home, or by getting together with co-workers or people from their local communities.  Officials note that more than 600 public and private Watch Parties—in every state—have been organized and registered with WHCOA.

According to the WHCOA website, there are four “watch party” sites in Connecticut, where people can gather to watch the live video feed together. The sites are in Hamden at the Whitney Center, in Norwalk at Home Care 100, in Waterbury at the Western CT Area Agency on Aging, and in West Hartford at Hebrew Healthcare.  The WHCOA has produced a Watch Party Discussion Guide to encourage dialogue during the event, in addition to listening to speeches emanating from the White House.

Earlier this year, regional forums leading up to the WHCOA were held in Tampa, Phoenix, Seattle, Cleveland and Boston.  Lisa Ryerson, President, AARP Foundation President, moderated the panel in Boston, which explored the topics of healthy aging and long-term services and supports. Panelists included Jewel Mullen, Commissioner, Connecticut Department of Public Health and President, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials.  The Boston  Regional Forum, held on May 28, 2015, was the fifth and last in the series of regional forums, coordinated with the Leadership Council of Aging Organizations, a coalition of more than 70 of the nation’s leading organizations serving older Americans.

In addition, Connecticut’s Department on Aging, Legislative Committee on Aging and Commission on Aging held a public hearing in May at the Legislative Office Building highlighting issues impacting the state’s seniors, with the testimony from that day being shared with WHCOA officials. Connecticut officials noted that Connecticut is undergoing a “permanent and historic transformation” in its demographics, and currently has the nation’s 7^th oldest population.  Between 2010 and 2014, Connecticut’s population of people age 65 and older is projected to grow by 57 percent, while at the same time the population of individuals between age 20 and 64 will grow by less than 2 percent.

Monday's WHCOA  begins with a welcome from Valerie Jarrett, Senior Advisor and Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement, being introduced by Bernard Nash, Caregiving in America Panel.  An early morning panel is to be moderated by actor David Hyde Pierce and will include Secretary Robert A. McDonald, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs; Ai-jen Poo, Caring Across Generations; Harry Leider, The Walgreen Company; Frank Fernandez, BluePlus, BCBS Minnesota Foundation; and Britnee Fergins, Caregiver.

Remarks by President Barack Obama, will be followed by a panel on “Planning for Financial Security at Every Age” moderated by Secretary Tom Perez, U.S. Department of Labor.  The panel will include Jean Chatzky, AARP Financial Ambassador; Vickie Elisa, Mothers’ Voices Georgia; Robin Diamonte, United Technologies Corporation; and Andy Sieg, Merrill Lynch Bank of America.

Diamonte, UTC’s Chief Investment Officer, was voted CIO of the Year in April by her peers in the Investor Intelligence Network (IIN), an online forum of senior financial decision-makers. IIN is part of Institutional Investor PLC, a leading international business-to-business publisher best known for its Institutional Investor magazine.  Diamonte is responsible for overseeing UTC’s $52 billion in global retirement assets, including $24 billion in domestic pension plans, $7 billion in foreign pension plans and $21 billion in the defined contribution plan.

Following the panel that includes Diamonte, viewers will hear remarks from Nora Super, Executive Director of the 2015 White House Conference on Aging and Cecilia Muñoz, Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic Policy Council.

Also delivering remarks or participating in panels are Secretary Tom Perez, U.S. Department of Labor; DJ Patil, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy; Secretary Tom Vilsack, U.S. Department of Agriculture; professional athlete Diana Nyad; Vice Admiral Vivek Murthy, U.S. Surgeon General; Director Richard Cordray, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; and Stephanie Santoso, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

In addition, Kevin Washington, President and CEO of the YMCA, will be a member of a panel on The Power of Intergenerational Connections and Healthy Aging.  Washington, who formerly led the YMCA in Hartford, was honored last month by The Amistad Center for Art & Culture in Hartford for his leadership, noting that he is the first African American to lead the nation’s YMCA organization.

Throughout the day, individuals are asked to “Tweet us your questions using #WHCOA and we will pass them along to our experts participating on panels at the conference.” People are also asked how they would finish the sentence: “Getting older is getting better because …”? A PDF form can be downloaded and then sent along to WHCOA officials.  Interviews with older adults can be uploaded to be archived in the Library of Congress, and people are encouraged to share their interviews on social media using the #WHCOA hashtag.

https://youtu.be/gdAWa6wNYXs

Governor Travels to Iowa for Insurance Industry Keynote

When “attendees from around the world” convened in the “insurance hub of Des Moines, Iowa,” for the second annual Global Insurance Symposium, the keynote speaker was an individual from a state long considered as the hub of the industry, Governor Dannel Malloy of Connecticut. The symposium, being held this week, was designed to “provide a forum for insurance professionals and regulatory authorities to share insights into challenges facing the insurance industry,” and includes “some of the most knowledgeable experts in the insurance field and discuss important issues facing the industry, such as cybersecurity and big data,” according to conference organizers.

Why Des Moines, Iowa?  The conference website points out that “for decades, Iowa has been committed to policy that creates favorable conditions for the insurance industry to thrive. As home to more than 200 insurance companies, Iowa is uniquely suited to host the Global Insurance Symposium and assemble global leaders to discuss these important issues.”

The symposium will  also serve as a coming out for six start-ups completing Iowa's Global Insurance Accelerator, a fast-track business development program focused on insurance innovation. The accelerator brought together startups from Iowa, Nebraska, California, Germany and Brazil, for 100 days of fast-paced business development, and mentoring.  The initiative was launched in February.

Iowa Governor Terry Branstad provided opening remarks at Wednesday’s session, followed by Malloy’s keynote address.  Branstad, a Republican, and Malloy, a Democrat, were re-elected by voters in their respective states last fall.

The 2014 Connecticut Insurance Market Brief reports that Connecticut ranks #1 in the U.S. for insurance carrier employment as a percentage of total employment, #1 in the U.S. for insurance payroll as a percentage of total payroll (5.6 percent) and that one new job in the insurance industry results in 1.73 additional jobs to the Connecticut economy.  The insurance sector accounts for 5.7 percent of Connecticut’s Gross State Product, ranking #2 in the U.S. as a percentage per capita. 

A 2012 report by the Connecticut Insurance and Financial Services (IFS) Cluster and PwC US indicated that an increase of $1 in insurance labor income puts an additional $0.78 into state commerce; and every year the insurance industry purchases an average of $2 billion in goods and services from other industries in Connecticut.

The Iowa Economic Development Authority reports that “Iowa’s insurance industry grew by 11 percent during the past 15 years, while industry throughout the entire U.S. was flat.”  The agency indicates that while Iowa has 1.6 percent of the nation’s finance and insurance jobs, it generates 2.9 percent of the nation’s insurance GDP.

In a op-ed co-authored by the two Governors and published in 2012 by the Connecticut Post, Malloy and Branstad pointed out that “in Connecticut and Iowa, the multibillion-dollar insurance industry remains one of the essential anchors for sustained prosperity and quality of life. Both states are among the top four in the nation for the share of insurance and financial services jobs when compared to the entire workforce. In addition, the U.S. insurance industry is a titan in the world marketplace, accounting for nearly 34 percent of the worldwide market share.”

“Unique and fundamentally stable, insurance would top the list of industries for any governor to nurture and grow in his or her state,” the states’ chief elected officials noted. “The industry attracts a well-educated, well-paid work force of actuaries, financial analysts, attorneys, certified accountants and skilled support staff.”

The text of remarks by Branstad and Malloy at the Global Insurance Symposium were not immediately available, but The Hartford Courant reported that Malloy advocated continued state regulation of the industry, rather than an increased federal regulatory scheme.  "Our states, our commissioners and our governors need to be more actively involved if we are going to protect our industry as we know it, and not be dictated to, not simply by people in Washington but people abroad as well," the Courant quoted Malloy as stridently urging those gathered for the symposium.

https://youtu.be/R_aApLrqy5o

https://youtu.be/CmDCxvRIC3I

Connecticut Ranks #39 Among States for Retirement; Lowest In New England

Connecticut, ranking 39^th overall and lowest among the six New England states, came away with a mixed bag of results on a list of the “Best and Worst Places to Retire,” compiled by the financial data website bankrate.com and published this week. The good news:  Connecticut ranked #6 in crime rate, the state’s highest ranking among the six categories included in the survey, and just outside the top ten at #12 for health care quality.  Undeterred by the challenging February weather this year, Connecticut ranked #14 for weather among the nation’s 50 states.  Not so good – Connecticut ranked near the bottom, at #48, in cost of living, and at the middle-of-the-pack, at #24, for community well-being.

The survey of around 1,000 adults in the U.S. questioned what Americans' priorities are when it comes to retirement. Nearly a quarter of those surveyed said being close to family was the deciding factor. But when it came to climate, while around a quarter prefer being close to a beach, nearly 40 percent of people want access to the great outdoors, rivers and mountains, according to published reports highlighting the survey results.

The top 10 states were Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Idaho, Virginia, Iowa, Montana, South Dakota, Arizona and Nebraska.  The highest ranked New England states were Maine at #12, Vermont at #15 and New Hampshire at #16.  Massachusetts came in at #18 on the list, and Rhode Island was just ahead of Connecticut at #38.

By category, Minnesota topped the list in health care quality, Hawaii was #1 in community well-being, New Mexico was #1 in weather, and Mississippi (which ranked #36 overall) had the lowest cost of living.   Vermont had the lowest crime rate and Wyoming the lowest tax rate.

Bankrate provided the following breakdown of the origin of the data used in compiling the rankings:  The cost-of-living data was provided by the Council for Community and Economic Research, a Virginia-based group that tracks retail prices in more than 300 communities around the country. Crime statistics include property and violent crimes reported by police departments to the FBI.

Health care quality scores come from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, a federal office that measures each state's performance on about 160 different health-related issues. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration provided weather data, including readings on temperature, humidity and sunshine. The "well-being" scores for seniors were from Healthways, a research group that works with the Gallup polling service to survey the public about their happiness and general satisfaction with their surroundings.

There are worse places than Connecticut to retire, according to the survey.  Among them:  Oklahoma, Oregon, Missouri, Kentucky, Louisiana, West Virginia, Alaska, and Arkansas, as well as New York and New Jersey.  Hawaii also ranked in the bottom 10, largely due to its highest-in-the-nation cost of living.