PERSPECTIVE - Early Childhood Care and Education: A Prudent Investment

by Joanna Meyer, Michael Strambler, Clare Irwin and George Coleman Young children are often compared to sponges because they constantly soak up new knowledge. In serving children under five, high-quality early childhood care and education programs aim to capitalize on this stage of rapid brain development in efforts to promote positive outcomes among children.

Much has been learned about the impact of early childhood education from research over the past several decades. While some researchers have shown that the positive effects of early childhood programs on children’s achievement may fade over the first years of elementary school, research with longer time horizons tells a different story about long-term effects.

For example, the Perry Preschool Project and the Carolina Abecedarian Project are two rigorously studied programs in which at-risk children were tracked from birth into their 30s. Half of the children participated in an intensive early childhood education program from infancy to kindergarten entry while the other half did not. When children who had participated in these programs grew into adults, they had improved educational attainment, employment, earnings, and health outcomes. They also engaged in less criminal activity and fewer unhealthy behaviors.

These research findings have important implications for society. If early childhood programs produce healthier adults, investing in these programs could reduce the burden on the health care system. If children who participated in early childhood programs grow up to experience higher employment rates and earnings, requests for public assistance should decrease. If these children are less likely to engage criminal activity, their communities and society as a whole should benefit.

Research also points to clear economic implications of investing in early childhood education. For example, through studies of two specific programs that served students from birth to age five and following children into their thirties, economists have estimated a social benefit to society of $7.30 for every $1.00 spent on early childhood programs, with an annual return on investment of 13.7%.

While this estimate is based on two small demonstration programs, another study analyzed evaluations of a wider range of early childhood programs and noted that the federal Head Start program produces persistent beneficial effects on long-term outcomes. It also made the case that a comprehensive cost/benefit analyses of Head Start would reveal a high rate of return.

How would investing in early childhood education pay off in Connecticut?  In a recent policy brief by Connecticut Voices for Children, the authors use the 7.3 benefit/cost ratio to estimate the benefits and costs of early childhood education in Connecticut. According to these estimates, it would cost $1.8 billion dollars to provide high-quality early childhood care and education to all Connecticut children under age 5, and this care would have a long-term economic benefit of $13.3 billion.

It is also important to note that in states like Connecticut with vast economic disparities, the provision of high-quality early childhood education alone is not enough to level the playing field for disadvantaged children. Many low-income children are concentrated in poor neighborhoods, and research has shown that the neighborhood in which a child is raised impacts the child’s inter-generational mobility.

Children living in poverty are more likely to face toxic stress that results from food insecurity, housing instability, and limited access to health care, all of which can impact children’s short- and long-term outcomes. Maximizing the impact of high-quality early childhood education may include addressing the causes of toxic stress, which in turn requires investment in supportive services for families.

In the midst of the current fiscal crisis in Connecticut, lawmakers are urgently seeking ways to reduce the short-term budget deficit. When evaluating potential reductions to spending on education and social services for young children and their families, it is critical to consider the long-term impacts of such an approach.

According to the cost-benefit analyses described above, cutting $1M of early childhood education funding from the state budget now could result in a $7.3M reduction in long-term benefits to society. The evidence suggests that across-the-board cuts to the programs that serve Connecticut’s most vulnerable citizens is economically imprudent in the long run.

_____________________________________

Joanna Meyer, M.A.T., Michael Strambler, Ph.D., Clare Irwin, Ph.D, and George Coleman, M.Ed., M.A.are the Management Team for the Partnership for Early Education Research (PEER), an alliance among early childhood stakeholders in Connecticut that engages in collaborative research focused on children from birth through age 8. By pursuing questions developed in collaboration with its members, PEER aims to produce rigorous, actionable research that can inform early childhood education policy and practice at the local and state levels, increase access to high-quality early childhood education, and reduce disparities in educational outcomes. Funding support for PEER is provided by the U.S. Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences (IES) and the Spencer Foundation.

Hartford, New Haven, Bridgeport Among Highest in US for Households That Don’t Own Cars

Whether it is good news or bad news may be in the eye of the beholder.  The percentage of households without a motor vehicle in Hartford is 10^th highest in the nation.  New Haven (24^th) and Bridgeport (49^th) also make the top 50. Some would suggest that lack of car ownership is a reflection of poverty.  Others may point to millennials and others who choose an urban lifestyle specifically because car ownership is less necessary.

In Hartford, 35.7 percent of households do not own cars.  In New Haven it is 29.2 percent; in Bridgeport, 21.2 percent, according to data compiled by Governing magazine, using data from the Census Bureau's 2010-2013 American Community Survey.

Taking cars off streets yields a number of benefits for cities, including helping to attract young people, limiting pollution and facilitating safer roadways for both drivers and pedestrians, explains Norman Garrick, who studies urban planning at the University of Connecticut. That’s part of the reason “cities are really doubling down and trying to reduce use of cars,” he pointed out to Governing magazine in 2015.

Nationwide, about 9 percent of U.S. households didn’t have access to a car in 2013, according to Census data analyzed by Governing -- a figure that has been relatively stable.  Garrick’s past research in Hartford, for example, found 71 percent of employees drove alone to work for an insurance company that charged for parking. Rates for other downtown Hartford employers offering free parking were between 83 and 95 percent.

Among the other Connecticut communities reviewed in the analysis (% of households without cars, ranking):

• Waterbury          18.2 of HH           69^th
• New Britain        17.7% of HH        74^th
• East Hartford     15.9% of HH        87^th
• West Haven       11.9% of HH        151^st
• Stamford             11.8% of HH        156^th
• Meriden              11.4% of HH        169^th
• Norwalk               9.4% of HH          262^nd
• Danbury               9.3% of HH          271^st

Census estimates suggest there were about 1.8 vehicles per U.S. household in 2013. This ratio varies greatly across cities and larger regions. As one would expect, suburban jurisdictions tend to have greater car ownership than more densely-populated cities. Data was included for all cities (794) with at least 50,000 residents.

National Leader, Connecticut Green Bank Reaches Milestone in Project Financing

The Connecticut Green Bank’s C-PACE program recently surpassed $100 million in closed project financing. Out of the 19 states with C-PACE (Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy) programs, this project financing level is second only to California, according to officials. The Connecticut Green Bank’s C-PACE program reached the milestone of $100 million in total closed project financing. The solar photovoltaic (PV) and energy efficiency projects, which vary in size and scope, are saving more than $9.29 million annually in energy costs for nearly 170 building owners across multiple sectors. 

The Green Bank, which administers the C-PACE program, seeks to make green energy more accessible and affordable to commercial and industrial property owners by providing no money down long-term financing for meaningful energy upgrades to their buildings.

C-PACE enables building owners to finance qualifying energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements through a voluntary assessment on their property tax bill. As the program grows, more Connecticut businesses can achieve lower energy costs. Reaching $100 million in closed project financing reaffirms Connecticut’s program as a national leader, officials indicated.

Since its inception in 2011, 166 C-PACE projects have been closed in 69 of the 128 municipalities that have opted into the program. C-PACE funds have been used in manufacturing facilities, non-profits, houses of worship, retail establishments, office buildings, and other business entities.  The projects consist of solar installations, new boilers, energy efficiency lighting measures, HVAC systems, and other energy improvements that help building owners to take control of their energy costs.

“Connecticut’s Green Bank has really been the national leader for C-PACE,” said David Gabrielson, the Executive Director of PACENation, the national non-profit that supports development of PACE programs nationwide. “The way they administer their program has really served as a great example for other program administrators throughout the U.S., and we congratulate the entire Green Bank team on this impressive milestone.”

The project that propelled the Green Bank over this milestone will be installed at Farmington Sports Arena (FSA). FSA is a 130,000-square foot modern indoor sports facility that is home to four indoor and three outdoor artificial turf fields as well as four natural grass outdoor fields. The project, which will be installed by 64 Solar, consists of two solar PV systems (170 kW total).

Connecticut’s C-PACE program maintains an open market approach, allowing private capital providers to finance projects for building owners, and, in 2015, the Green Bank reached an agreement that provided it access to up to $100 million in private funding for C-PACE projects. Today, nearly 70% of the funding in the program consists of private capital.

“The Connecticut Green Bank is a leader in the green energy movement, but the rapid growth of C-PACE wouldn’t be possible without the support of our contractors, capital providers, municipal officials, and other stakeholders who have contributed to the C-PACE movement,” said Mackey Dykes, Vice President of Commercial, Industrial and Institutional programs at the Connecticut Green Bank. “There is still significant potential for energy improvements for Connecticut businesses and non-profits, and we look forward to bringing cleaner and cheaper energy to more building owners across the state.”

The website Energy Collective noted recently that “states have and will continue to play a key role in leading the clean energy transition,” highlighting the work in Connecticut as among the national models.

“Connecticut has found a way to make the financing of clean energy deployment more accessible and affordable for consumers and businesses. In 2011 the state legislature created the Connecticut Green Bank, the nation’s first green bank. It uses public funds to attract private capital investment in green energy projects. By leveraging private investment, the Green Bank significantly increases the total amount of financing available for clean energy projects.

The site highlighted that “Among the Green Bank’s most successful initiatives is the Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (C-PACE) program, which allows commercial property owners to pay for clean energy or efficiency upgrades over time through their property taxes.

The Connecticut Green Bank is the nation’s first green bank. Established by the Connecticut General Assembly on July 1, 2011 as a part of Public Act 11-80, the Connecticut Green Bank evolved from the Connecticut Clean Energy Fund (CCEF) and the Clean Energy Finance and Investment Authority (CEFIA), which was given a broader mandate in 2011 to become the Connecticut Green Bank.

https://youtu.be/kPqO4QlTkDU

New School Year Approaches Without Seat Belt Requirement on School Buses

June 7 was the final day of the regular legislative session in Connecticut.  It was also the day following the signing of a new law to require seat belts on school buses – in Nevada. Gov. Brian Sandoval signed legislation, approved overwhelmingly by his state’s legislature, which requires that any new school bus purchased by a school district on or after July 1, 2019, be equipped with a shoulder-harness-type safety belt assembly for passengers.

There was no similar bill signing in Connecticut.  Legislation that would have imposed a similar requirement in Connecticut, effective in 2022, failed to get out of the Transportation Committee after a public hearing months earlier.  The new school year approaches with no requirement in Connecticut, and no change in policy on the horizon, despite years of efforts.

Nevada joins only six other states — California, Florida, Louisiana, New Jersey, New York and Texas —in enacting laws requiring seat belts. In Louisiana and Texas, however, the requirements are contingent upon funds being appropriated by the state, which has yet to occur.

The Connecticut legislator leading the unsuccessful effort says cost, rather than safety, drove the result.

"While the bill did not get voted out of the Transportation Committee, it was given a public hearing and received some favorable comments from committee members,” Rep. Fred Camillo told CT by the Numbers this week.  “The main hold up continues to be funding, something that will take out of the box concepts as the state fiscal situation has not been resolved. I look forward to continuing the effort until our goal is achieved."

It has been elusive here, and elsewhere, despite a change in position by the National Highway Traffic Administration, more than a year ago.  The federal agency previously viewed school buses as safe without seat belts, because of their construction.  That changed in 2015.  Since then, as Connecticut’s Office of Legislative Research noted last year in a report to the legislature, “NHTSA has been exploring ways to make seat belts on schools buses a reality.”

The Connecticut Association of Public School Superintendents testified against the measure, calling for approval to be “postponed” until a series of questions – ranging from the use of bus monitors to the cost of seat belt maintenance to district liability from unused seat belts – could be answered.

The Connecticut Association of Boards of Education (CABE) – representing local elected school boards across the state – also voiced their opposition at the January 30 public hearing.  CABE officials expressed concern about “years of busses” that would “need to be replaced or retrofitted.”  They also noted that lap belts “would not work best for 5-year-olds and 18-year-olds alike.”  In addition, questions were raised about students who might “unclick the belt” and the liability of bus drivers if they did.

Camillo initially proposed the bill in 2011 after a Rocky Hill student was killed in a school bus crash.   earlier this year, in March, after a school bus accident in Canterbury sent five students to the hospital, public discussion on the pending proposal was renewed, but the legislature did not take action.  “This accident today is just another reminder that we really need to do something regarding this issue. We don’t want to wait for another tragedy to occur,” Camillo told the Norwich Bulletin.  Later that month, five people were injured after a crash involving a school bus in North Haven.

Federal law doesn’t require seat belts on the “big yellow school buses” that most students ride, Stateline reported earlier this year. The buses are designed to protect riders through “compartmentalization,” structural safety features such as high, energy-absorbing seat backs and closely spaced seats so children are kept snug like eggs in a carton, Stateline reporting explained.

However, published reports indicate that those features don’t necessarily protect children during side-impact crashes or high-speed rollovers because passengers don’t always remain within their seating compartment, according to the National Transportation Safety Board, which has recommended for nearly two years that three-point seat belts be included in new buses.

Over the past 10 years, NHTSA reports, 6.2% of fatal injuries in school bus related crashes were school bus occupants.

The American School Bus Council, urging people to “support the school bus,” points out that “students are about 70 times more likely to get to school safely if they ride in the school bus instead of a car.”

Report Outlines Responses to Opioid Emergency as Numbers Climb

It’s official.  The opioid crisis has grown from a national crisis to a national emergency.  That fact is plainly evident than in Connecticut. The national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates there are enough opioid prescriptions for every American adult to have their own bottle. Connecticut saw 729 deaths from drug overdoses two years ago, and 917 last year. Published reports suggest that the number is trending towards a thousand deaths in the state this year.

In 2012, Connecticut was ranked 50th in the nation in opioid deaths, with just 2 per 100,000 people.  By 2015, that number spiked 5-and-a-half times, and Connecticut's ranking climbed to 12th.The latest numbers from the Office of the Chief State's Medical Examiner show the trend continued in 2016, with a 21 percent increase in deaths involving opioids in a year.

According to the National Center for Health Statistics, the first three quarters of 2016 brought an average overdose death rate of 19.3 per 100,000 population — a rate that’s 17 percent higher than during the same period in 2015.  If 2016’s rate holds steady through the final quarter — data for it isn’t yet available — it is anticipated that more than 62,300 people will have died of overdoses in the United States in 2016. For Connecticut, however, last year’s numbers were more than 25 deaths per 100,000 - significantly higher than the national average.

A 28-page policy report produced this year by the Governing Institute found that Baltimore, Washington, Ohio, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania “serve as models for other states to jump start their efforts,” to respond to the opioid crises.

The addictive nature of opioids and overprescribing are fueling the epidemic, the Governing report explains, pointing out that “in the last 15 years, the number of opioids prescribed and sold in the U.S. has quadrupled, even though the amount of pain Americans report is the same.”

“The most important thing for policymakers to remember is this epidemic is a multi-faceted that requires multifaceted policy solutions,” the report, “A Crisis: A Practical Guide for Policymakers to Mitigate the Opioid Epidemic,” concluded.

A report released last week from a national commission led by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie noted that number of deaths is approaching 142 each day from drug overdoses across the country – a death toll that is "equal to September 11th every three weeks," AP reported.

State medical examiner James Gill said in May that his office sees at least two or three overdose deaths a day, and as many as five or six.  The state budget crisis has kept the state’s Chief Medical Examiner’s Office from releasing quarterly data for this year, WTNH reported this month.

“There is no single spot on the continuum of interventions that is the magic bullet,” explained Ohio’s director of the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services in the Governing Institute report. “Really you just have to take it piece by piece.”

The  report noted that “Medicaid beneficiaries are prescribed opioids at twice the rate of the rest of the population, and research indicates they are at 3 to 6 times greater risk of a fatal overdose.”  The report also observed the impact of the epidemic on the nation’s prison population: Eighty percent of prisoners have a history of drug abuse; 50 percent are addicted to drugs; 60 to 80 percent of prisoners abusing drugs commit a new crime after release; and approximately 95 percent of addicted prisoners relapse when they’re released, according to National Association of Drug Court Professionals (NADCP) data.

In 2016, the Connecticut General Assembly passed a law that prohibits a prescribing practitioner authorized to prescribe an opioid drug from issuing a prescription for more than a seven-day supply to (1) a minor or (2) an adult for first-time outpatient use (PA 16-43).  That timeframe was tightened further under legislation signed into law last month.  The 2016 law included an exception if the prescriber, in his or her professional judgment, determines a longer prescription is necessary, OLR noted.

In June, Gov. Malloy signed a bill that has as a key component reducing the maximum opioid drug prescription for minors from seven to five days.  It was introduced by Malloy at the beginning of session and passed unanimously through the Senate and House. The bill also increases security on controlled substance prescriptions by requiring scheduled drugs to be prescribed only electronically, which officials believe will cut back on the potential for prescription forgeries.  And it requires increased data-sharing between state agencies regarding opioid abuse and overdose deaths.

Attorney General George Jepsen’s office recently announced it would be joining a multistate probe into the marketing practices of opioid drugmakers.  Jepsen did not specify any companies by name, citing “the ongoing and sensitive nature of the investigation.”

Connecticut law allows various health care providers to prescribe opioids and opioid antagonists within their professional scope of practice, including physicians, APRNs, dentists, nurse-midwives, optometrists, PAs, podiatrists, and veterinarians, according to the Office of Legislative Research. Pharmacists can prescribe opioid antagonists if they receive a special certification and training to do so.

Promise Scholar Day Kicks Off School Year for Many in Hartford

When Hartford Promise holds its second annual Promise Scholar Day, a full day of programming and college prep for local Promise Scholars, it will be plainly evident that participating Hartford students are doing precisely what the program aimed to accomplish – they’re going to (and excelling in) college. The day-long program will be held on August 15 at Central Connecticut State University. In just two years, Hartford Promise has 257 Promise Scholars attending more than 50 colleges around the country.

Harford Promise President Richard Sugarman recently told FOX61 that the program can be life changing for these students.  “This is a way to really change the trajectory not only for the kids and families, but for the city of Hartford,” said Sugarman.

The Hartford Promise Scholarship is a "last dollar" scholarship that helps pay expenses not funded by other grants and financial aid packages, allowing students to consider colleges/universities they otherwise would not be able to afford, expanding their options and their worlds, according to officials, who note that financial aid from a college/university does not always cover a student’s costs.

The first class of Promise Scholars just completed their freshman year of college. The second class of Promise Scholars graduated high school in June, having attended Hartford Public Schools throughout the city. The 113 scholarship recipients come from all 18 Hartford high schools, and represent 14 percent of the HPS graduating seniors who live in Hartford. Each will receive up to $20,000 in college scholarships.

Among the colleges that Hartford Promise Scholars are currently attending:

• Bowdoin College
• Central Connecticut State University
• Clark University
• Eastern Connecticut State University
• Franklin & Marshall College
• Georgia State University
• Howard University
• Marist College
• Morgan State University
• Mount Holyoke College
• Olin College of Engineering
• Smith College
• Trinity College
• Tufts University
• University of Connecticut
• University of Pennsylvania
• University of St. Joseph
• Yale University

To qualify for a Promise Scholarship, students must

• Attend a Hartford Public High School continuously since 9th grade
• Be a Hartford resident throughout high school
• Have a 93 % or better cumulative attendance record during high school
• Have a 3.0 cumulative GPA or better on a 4.0 scale in high school

Students attending any accredited, not-for-profit 4-year college or university will receive up to $5,000 per year if attending full time.  Students attending any accredited, not-for-profit 2-year college will receive up to $2,500 per year if attending full time. Between the class of 2016 and class of 2017, Hartford Promise has helped 257 scholars attend more than 50 colleges around the country totaling approximately $3.2 million in scholarship funds, according to published reports.

PERSPECTIVE: Protect Connecticut DREAMers, A Vital Part of Our Communities

by Khadija Gurnah Nearly 800,000 DREAMers -- young adults who were brought to America as children -- received critical protections and work authorization under the 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. It provided undocumented immigrant youth with opportunities to study and participate in the workforce.

DACA has been operational for five years and it is a success. It is popular with the public and enjoys the support of employers, educators, community leaders and elected officials from both political parties.

But despite this widespread support, DACA is under attack. President Trump has not decided whether to continue or end the program, and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton -- joined by attorneys general from nine other states -- is threatening to sue the Trump Administration if DACA is not rescinded by September 5th.

Ending DACA would be short-sighted and inhumane. It would directly harm roughly 5,000 people in Connecticut who have work permits under the program, and it would indirectly harm thousands more -- young people who are a dynamic part of their communities and who contribute tremendously to the strength and vitality of our state.

Nationally, rescinding DACA would be disastrous to our economy. Removing 800,000 people from the workforce nationwide would be short-sighted and harmful. It would cost the country $433.4 billion in GDP loss over a decade. It would cost employers $3.4 billion in unnecessary turnover costs. Contributions to Medicare and Social Security would be cut by $24.6 billion over a decade.

DACA recipients are employers and consumers. Some 6 percent have launched businesses that employ American citizens. Almost 55 percent have purchased a vehicle, and more than one in ten has purchased a home.

Recognizing their contributions, last month U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) took a step in the right direction when they introduced the bipartisan DREAM Act of 2017. This urgently needed legislation would provide a path to citizenship for the nearly 1.8 million DREAMers who have grown up in this country and know no other home.

They include DREAMers like Carolina Bortolleto, a Connecticut resident, a DACA recipient and an advocate who has lived in the United States since she was ten. In October 2010, Bortolleto founded Connecticut Students for a DREAM, a statewide organization of young adults who works for the rights of undocumented youth and their families.

I met Carolina at a community roundtable with U.S. Senators Chris Murphy and Richard Blumenthal and Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro. She is working hard to create a platform to ensure other young DREAMers have an opportunity to come out of the shadows and actively participate in the economy and the communities in the only home they've ever known. Our state is stronger, and more just, for her tireless work.

Protecting family unity, ensuring that our public policies address the concerns of immigrant women and children, and ending human rights abuses that are occurring in the name of immigration law enforcement are in our national interest. We urgently need a constructive national dialog on reforming our country’s immigration policies, so they will finally reflect our values as a nation and allow all families to contribute to our culture and economy.

That begins with passing the DREAM Act -- a smart, humane immigration policy that will strengthen our communities and our country. The incredible young people known as DREAMers are contributing to our communities and our economy. Our state and our nation will benefit tremendously if the DREAM Act becomes law and we move to permanently protect DREAMers, to give them the opportunity to build lives in the country we all call home.

________________________________

Khadija Gurnah is a Campaign Director with MomsRising, an on-the-ground and online grassroots organization of more than a million people. She lives in Wallingford, Connecticut.

Immigration May Be Key to Connecticut's Economic Future (Again)

Immigrants may be a pivotal component in Connecticut’s economic strength – or weakness – in the coming decade, according to recent statistics.  Population projections from the University of Virginia’s Demographics Research Group, reported by the American Immigration Council, show that in many states in the Northeast and Midwest, including Connecticut, growth of the working-age population is slowing due to aging, lower fertility rates, and people moving out of the state. The aging of the workforce in the working-age population can mean shrinking workforces and potential economic problems, the Council reported recently. As a result, “states need to think about how immigration can ameliorate impending trouble.”

By 2020, the number of working age adults (age 25-54) is expected to decline in 16 states. For example, in Maine, while the overall population is expected to decrease by about two percent, the working age population will decline by 16 percent. Vermont and West Virginia can also expect declines of more than 10 percent, while Connecticut, Illinois, Michigan, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Wisconsin can expect more than five percent decline, according to the data.

Those states “will become less attractive to the people who are already there, and less attractive to newcomers,” according to UC-Berkeley demographer Ronald Lee, who explained that a shrinking working-age population can hurt a state’s economy: businesses close due to a lack of workers and customers, housing prices drop, schools close, and tax revenue declines.

The decline in the working-age population will not be offset by births, the Council reported, citing data the projects the current total fertility rate is about 1.86 children per woman and would need to be at least 2.08 for the population to replenish itself. At the same time, the U.S. population is getting older and living longer. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) projects that by 2024, Americans age 55 and older will increase by 18.2 million—reaching 102.9 million, or 38.2 percent of all people in the country.

Reliance on immigrants is nothing new for Connecticut.  The Connecticut Business and Industry Association recently cited statistics from the New American Economy, which indicated that 494,059 Connecticut residents were born abroad.  That is 14 percent of the state’s population, compared to 13 percent across the United States.

For example, almost a quarter (23%) of Connecticut workers in science, technology, engineering, and math fields such as healthcare and bioscience were immigrants.  Over 36,000 foreign-born Connecticut residents are self-employed, with immigrant-owned businesses generating $1.1 billion income in 2014 while employing 73,047 people. “Immigrants are already playing a huge part ensuring that Connecticut remains a leading innovator in industries like healthcare and bioscience,” according to the analysis.

The report also notes that foreign-born workers currently make up 21.3 percent of all entrepreneurs in the state, despite accounting for 13.7 percent of Connecticut’s population.

Immigration mitigates the downward population trends that are anticipated, in Connecticut and beyond. In many areas of the country, the foreign born have accounted for more than 20 percent of the growth of the adult population since 1990. In some areas – mainly in the Midwest – overall adult population would have declined if not for an increase in the foreign born population. Almost half of immigrants admitted between 2003 and 2012 were between the ages of 20 and 40, while only 5 percent were ages 65 or older, the Council reported.

Jepsen Stresses CyberSecurity at Home and Business, with Settlements and Warnings

National Cyber Security Awareness Month isn’t until October, but Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen and just over a dozen of his colleagues across the country are getting a head start in warning the public about the dangers of so-called pirate websites. In televised public service announcements now airing in Connecticut, along with social media and radio psa’s, Jepsen shares hackers can infect visitors’ computers with malware and viruses that can leave consumers’ personal and financial information vulnerable.

Cyber security is a topic Jepsen has been involved with for some time.  This past March, the Attorney General announced the creation of a new department within the Connecticut Office of the Attorney General – the Privacy and Data Security Department – that works exclusively on investigations and litigation related to privacy and data security.

The new department has been responsible for all investigations involving consumer privacy and data security. It also helps to educate the public and business community about their responsibilities, which include protecting personally identifiable and sensitive data and promptly notifying affected individuals and the Office of the Attorney General when breaches do occur.

Jepsen is immediate past president of the National Association of Attorneys General (his one-year term ended in June) and has been a member of the organization’s Internet Safety/Cyber Privacy and Security Committee.

National Cyber Security Awareness Month, a month-long collaborative effort between the United States Department of Homeland Security and the National Cyber Security Alliance, began in 2004 and is held every October. During the campaign, individuals are encouraged to take advantage of resources that can help them be safer and more secure while online.

This week, Jepsen’s office announced that Connecticut has joined with 31 other states and the District of Columbia in a $5.5 million settlement with Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company and its subsidiary, Allied Property & Casualty Insurance Company, which resolves the states' investigation into a 2012 data breach that exposed sensitive personal information of 1.2 million consumers across the country. Approximately 774 Connecticut residents were impacted by the breach, the Office said. Connecticut's share of the settlement funds totals $256,559.28, which will be deposited in the state's general fund. The Connecticut Attorney General's office was a co-leader of the investigation and negotiations, along with the Offices of the Attorney General of the District of Columbia, Florida and Maryland.

In May, Jepsen announced that Connecticut joined with 46 other states and the District of Columbia in an $18.5 million settlement with the Target Corporation to resolve the states' investigation into the retail company's 2013 data breach. The settlement represented the largest multistate data breach settlement achieved to date.  That breach affected more than 41 million customer payment card accounts and contact information for more than 60 million customers. Connecticut will receive $1,012,936 from the settlement, which will be deposited in the state's General Fund.

In the new public service announcement, Jepsen stresses that “Nowadays, all of you have to worry about cybersecurity,” Jepsen tells viewers in his ad. “Hackers are always looking for new ways to break into our computers. Something as simple as visiting pirate websites can put your computer at risk.”

"State AGs often serve as the consumer protection agency for their citizens, so we appreciate the leadership they are taking in alerting consumers to the new danger that consumers face from malware and content theft websites," said Tom Galvin, Executive Director of the Digital Citizens Alliance, a consumer-focused group that looks at how to make the Internet safer. "Criminals are exploiting stolen content by baiting consumers to view videos and songs and then stealing their IDs and financial information. It should be a wake-up call for consumers."

Among the states whose Attorneys General are participating in the initiative are Arizona, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota and Wisconsin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-r1wMnXP9Bk&feature=youtu.be

The Connecticut Attorney General's office has previously issued a series of tips for consumers:

TIP #1: When it doubt, throw it out:

Be very cautious about clicking on a link or opening an email, social media post or tweet (or its attachment) from someone you do not know and trust, and always keep virus protection software up to date. Consumers that use Facebook or Twitter should regulate their privacy settings to ensure personal information is protected and not accessible. Also, only allow those that you know into your social network rather than those that you may not recognize.

TIP #2: Watch out for phishing emails or scams:

You may do business online with financial institutions that you know and trust, however, always keep in mind that legitimate businesses will never ask you to reply in an email with any personal information such as your Social Security number, PIN number. If you question the validity of an email you received, call the number on your credit card, bank statement, or on the financial institution's actual website (which you should find online without clicking on any links in a suspicious email).  If available, always use a safe payment option when making online purchases, such as a credit card.

TIP #3: Keep your machine clean and up to date:

Online users can reduce the risk of their computers being infected with malware by keeping antivirus software up to date and having the latest versions of apps, Web browsers and operating systems. Many but not all software programs will automatically update in order to avoid risks.  Consumers should consider turning on automatic updates when available to be sure that critical updates are not missed while waiting for manual download.

TIP #4: Help to educate your children about online safety and security:

Remind your family to limit how and with whom they share any information on line.  When made available, set privacy and security settings on accounts and web browsers used by children to your comfort level for surfing the Web and information sharing.  If your browser does not support such settings, consider using one that does.  From social media to simple internet searches, it is important to talk to children about online security before they potentially confront risks on line.   

TIP #5: Regularly change and update passwords and web keys:

If you use the Internet for banking, bill-paying or other monetary transactions, be sure to select secure, difficult-to-guess passwords and PINs, and get in the habit of changing them on a regular basis whenever possible. Consumers can also protect their personal and communications data by encrypting their own wireless Internet networks and regularly changing their wifi passwords. Try not to login into any social media accounts on a public computer and if you must, be sure to never save passwords or login information.

Rebuffed Again in CT, Tesla Explores Growth in Westchester

Tesla’s goal of selling vehicles direct to consumers in Connecticut remains elusive, dismissed out of hand by Connecticut’s legislature this year, as last year and the year before.  Even the sole “gallery” the electric car manufacturer and retailer has been operating in the state, in Greenwich, has been ordered by the Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles to “cease all functions.” Within a stone’s throw of the state line, in Westchester County, NY, the company is actively exploring potential locations for a new car dealership and customer education center, according to published reports. Under Connecticut’s dealer franchise law, automobiles may only be purchased through independent car dealerships.  Tesla’s business model relies on direct-to-consumer sales.

Both a retail center and warehouse in the town of Greenburgh are currently under consideration, Westfair Publications reported this week.  “We’ve been working with Tesla for quite some time now in searching for a proper facility in the area where they can house both sales and service,” said James MacDonald of Simone Development Cos., a Bronx-based company that owns both potential Tesla properties, Westfair reported.

In June, as the Connecticut legislature’s regular session concluded, a proposal that would have permitted Tesla to sell cars directly to consumers was never raised for debate. It made it through the Transportation and Finance, Revenue, and Bonding Committees, but was never called for a vote in either chamber.

House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz said at the time that he was reluctant to say that it was the objections of the state’s car dealers, who are subject to the regulations under the state’s motor vehicle franchise system, that killed the Tesla bill, CTNewsJunkie reported.  The Connecticut Automobile Retailers Association strongly advocated for defeat of the proposed legislation this year, as in previous years.

In New York, Tesla is currently limited to five sales locations, in accordance with a law passed in that state in 2014.  Efforts are underway in New York to increase that number.

A spokesman for Tesla said in June that the company wasn’t quite ready to give up on Connecticut.  Diarmuid O'Connell, Tesla's vice president of business development, said in an interview with the Hartford Business Journal in May that the company hoped to open 10 stores if the legislation was approved, which would "conservatively" employ 25 full-time workers.

"We're talking 250 jobs in the near term," O'Connell said, adding that some locations could employ as many as 50 people, the newspaper reported. The company also released a Greenberg Quinlan Rosner poll showing that 74 percent of Connecticut residents "strongly" or "somewhat" support allowing direct sales in Connecticut.

Tesla is prohibited from selling directly in Connecticut, Michigan, Texas, and West Virginia, according to the company. There are about 1,300 Teslas registered in Connecticut, nearly two-thirds of the electric vehicles in the state, according to the state Department of Motor Vehicles.

In a recent op-ed published in New York, Nick Sibilla of the Institute for Justice, a libertarian public interest law firm, indicated that in a review of employment figures for car dealerships in Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York, the Acadia Center, a nonprofit focused on creating a clean energy economy, concluded that “there has been no negative impact on auto dealer job levels or trends” in nearby states that allow direct sales of electric vehicles.  The Union of Concerned Scientists recently pointed out that “between January and June of 2016, dealers in the Bridgeport to New York City metro area had 90 percent fewer electric vehicles listed for sale than Oakland, when adjusted for relative car ownership.”

Tesla is currently in the midst of raising $1.5 billion as it ramps up production of the Model 3 sedan, its first mass market electric car, with an anticipated pricetag hovering around $35,000, about half the cost of Tesla's previous models, and thought to be more attractive to consumers.  The loss in sales tax revenue to Connecticut could be substantial if sales of the Tesla are not permitted in the state, according to some estimates.

Will the company’s plans impact legislatures in Connecticut or New York?  Back in June, CTNewsJunkie reported Connecticut House Majority Leader Matt Ritter said he thought the issue might be resolved “when you see more Teslas” on the road.  That day may be coming, emanating from Greenburgh if not Greenwich.