10 thoughts on “Election 2025: Town Council Candidate Scott Gress [Q&A]

  1. Wow Scott TC adding funding back
    That the Board of Finance cut
    Why don’t we just get rid of them
    Who needs them right
    What a power grab

    • Hi Richard,
      I am not suggesting a power grab (especially as I currently have no power), just that, through the charter review, we look how much “power” is in the hands of elected and how much is in the hands of the appointed. If, after review, it is deemed appropriate then we can keep it the way it is currently.
      Scott

  2. Hi Scott –

    As one of many people following the leaf blower issue closely, I wanted to say that “I am sure there is room for a compromise” expresses my view perfectly. Thanks for putting it that way.

  3. Scott, It’s always good to give voters choices so thanks for running. I wanted to address your comment “the number of candidates a party puts up for election should not exceed the number of spots available to that party. This creates chaos and confusion.” Ballot access laws across our nation outline a process for individuals to run for office. The history of our democracy is based on voters being able to elect their representatives. Remember King George? Primary challenges are built into our laws upheld by our Constitution. In my case, with a slate of 4 candidates pooling their funds, resources and with special help from seasoned Republican operatives working against me, I received 9 votes less than a 28 year incumbent, who was unable to attend the caucus. As an incumbent in excellent standing myself, and being urged by supporters, I decided to pursue a Primary Petition to gain ballot access to be on the Republican line as a Republican in November. My team succeeeded and we collected 306 signatures of Registered Republicans – all verified by our Registrar of Voters. So according to CT State Statute, and our Secretary of State, I am a nominated and endorsed Republican candidate who will appear on the ballot on the same Republican line as you. Our own Town Charter was changed by said 28 year incumbent to allow New Canaanites to vote for up to 6 candidates, which allows each party to endorse 6 candidates. As far as the chaos and confusion go, I offered to run with the slate of 4, including you, but your group refused. I offered my election participation, resources and assistance to the Republican Town Committee and was turned away by a 51 percent margin in a secret voting process. So let’s be clear on who bears any responsiblity for any confusion. Being a Town Council member starts with respecting the laws of the Town and the State of CT, so you might want to brush up on your understanding of the Town Charter, CT State Law and the U.S. Constitution. Here’s an article that goes into more detail on the actual vote tallies at the July caucus and may answer some more questions for voters – transparency is key here: https://patch.com/connecticut/newcanaan/town-council-mber-penny-young-barely-wins-caucus-only-wins-9-votes-nodx

    • Hi Kim,
      As I see it the responsibility for this Chaos is, exactly as you point out, the Town Charter’s allowance of New Canaanites to vote for up to 6 candidates. I do respect the laws and the Town, CT State and the US, which is why I am suggesting we look at this issue in the upcoming Charter review. If the GOP was only allowed by the Town’s charter to put up the four candidates that were chosen at the caucus, we wouldn’t have the chaos we now have. I am not trying to change the current situation just prevent it from happening again. And for the record while a “seasoned” resident I never knew King George.

      • The Caucus is not representative of the wishes of the electorate. Only 300 R’s showed up, many town hall insiders seeking control. The R caucus is held during the summer when many voters are away, only allows a 3 hour voting window and is held at one small venue. Many have business and commitments outside New Canaan. Additionally the 5500 independent registered voters cannot vote. 200 R votes should not determine who runs to represent us on the legislative branch.

        In vote the current R petitioning candidate Kim Norton received the support of 304 Registered R’s in a one week process. 50% more than the highest R Caucus getting. New Canaanites deserve more than a 3 hr mid summer caucus.

        That said the Town Democrats have no caucus and just ram candidates down our throat decided by a few on the Democratic Town Committee.

        Both methodologies in my analysis are in direct conflict and obstruct the Constitutional Right to vote.

        As far as allowing the TC to increase spending and have the final budget determination please inform me who on the Town Council has financial expertise.

        The Board of Finance should be elected so it is not subject to Executive Branch pressure as the BOS appoint the BOF.

        • I don’t know why Kim Norton’s supporters are pointing to the petition and comparing a legally required minimum figure to the Caucus tally. It’s like saying Pete Rose is the “real” all-time home run king because he had more career hits than Barry Bonds. You’re not making sense. If you want to say that she exceeded the required figure (252 signatures) that’s fine, but leave it there. Don’t tell us black is white. If getting signatures in August from registered Republicans was how elections were decided then we’d have candidates with pulled hamstrings, shin splints and dehydration sickness (which would be super fun to watch). Anyway, it makes sense to get far more signatures than required because some of them get thrown out in the vetting process.

          • I disagree. Point is shows support amongst R voters who could not make the caucus. Additionally the point is the caucus process is flawed. Caucus winners should not morally block a certified petitioning candidate. Are the caucus winners scared of a fair overall election in November. It is not about Kim Norton or support.

            In all respect Mike your analysis is apples and oranges.

            Thank you

  4. Over the past eight years, the New Canaan Board of Finance has consistently delivered strong fiscal results for taxpayers even amid challenging economic conditions. Their stewardship lead by Todd Lavieri has resulted in annual budget surpluses and helped keep tax increases to a modest average of just 2.3% per year. That kind of disciplined financial management deserves recognition and continued trust.
    For this reason, I am deeply concerned about any proposal that would shift final budget authority to the Town Council. While the Council plays an important role, introducing additional political dynamics into the budgeting process risks turning our town’s finances into a partisan battleground. The Board of Finance has proven itself to be a steady, nonpartisan guardian of taxpayer interests. Let’s not jeopardize that.