Meghan Rosenfeld and Melissa Ziobron - House District 34 Candidates' Views
Meghan Rosenfeld - Democratic challenger for House District 34
Describe yourself, your experience and the attributes you would bring to the office.
I'm a wife, mother and proud resident of East Hampton. I began my career as a Montessori teacher and moved into school leadership, then served as HR director at an engineering firm and as a senior litigation paralegal on wrongful conviction appeals and cases for victims of domestic violence. I returned to lead schools, and today I'm Director of Human Resources at school in CT. In every one of those settings, my work has been the same: creating spaces and systems where people are supported. I serve on the East Hampton Commission on Aging and helped develop a senior property tax relief initiative presented to our Town Council. If elected, I'm keeping my job. I will never be a career politician, and I won't be pressured by party leadership or special interests to vote against working people, retirees, or veterans. A representative should be the spotlight on the community's needs, bringing residents' voices into Hartford.
How would you provide necessary state services while trying to control expenses?
Controlling expenses starts with knowing where the money goes and what it actually delivers. In HR, I manage payroll, compliance, and systems, and I've learned that waste usually hides in duplicated processes and programs nobody measures. The state should evaluate programs on results and cut what doesn't work, not apply across-the-board cuts that hit what does. I'd also push back on unfunded mandates. When Hartford requires towns to do something, it should help pay for it, or local property taxpayers absorb the cost. On revenue, growing the tax base beats raising rates: lower energy costs, tax incentives for small businesses, and investment in talent pipelines bring employers here. Protecting core services for seniors, schools, and public safety while spending smarter isn't a contradiction. It's sound management.
What are the most important issues facing the state, and what would you do about them?
Affordability comes first. Families and seniors are being squeezed by energy bills, property taxes, and the cost of staying in the towns they love. On energy, I'd hold Eversource accountable on rates and diversify how Connecticut generates power so we're less exposed to price spikes. On property taxes, I'd expand the Circuit Breaker program, support local tax deferral options, and pursue a property tax freeze for qualifying seniors. I've already worked on these locally through the Commission on Aging. Second, education funding. Our small towns need a state partner that pays its fair share. Third, our business climate. Investing in talent pipelines and supporting small businesses keeps young people and employers in Connecticut, which strengthens the tax base for everyone.
What policy changes do you think are needed to improve the quality of state government?
At the doors, I hear the same thing over and over: people are disgusted with politics, money, and corruption. They feel unheard. I'd work to change that. Legislators should answer to constituents, not leadership or donors, which is why I'm running through the Citizens' Election Program and keeping my day job. I'd support making the legislative process easier for working people to follow and participate in, with plain-language bill summaries and hearing schedules that don't require taking a day off work. I'd also push for honest accounting of what state mandates cost towns before they pass. And I'd respect local autonomy. Decisions like sewer expansion belong with the communities that live with the results, not with a one-size-fits-all rule from Hartford.
Homeowners mostly bear the high cost of education. Does the state's cost-sharing formula need to be changed?
Yes. When the state underfunds education, the bill doesn't disappear. It lands on local property taxpayers, and towns like ours feel it most. I've testified on education funding at the Capitol, and the priority is clear: fully fund the Education Cost Sharing formula and keep that commitment through budget cycles. Special education is a particular pressure point. One or two high-cost placements can blow up a small town's budget, and the state should carry more of that unpredictable cost. The formula should also reflect what rural and small-town districts actually face, not just enrollment counts. Finally, PILOT funding needs to be reliable so towns aren't left covering what the state promised. Adequate, predictable state funding is property tax relief.
What are your thoughts on the use of Flock cameras?
I oppose them. Flock is a private company, and these cameras put records of where residents drive under that company's control. Every car that passes is captured, and the vast majority of those drivers have done nothing wrong. When a for-profit vendor holds that data, the public loses oversight: we can't fully control how long it's kept, who can search it, or where it ends up. Decisions about surveillance of our residents shouldn't be shaped by a company's business model or written into a sales contract. Police need effective tools, and I support investing in public safety. But the information government collects about its citizens should stay under public control, with public accountability. Residents shouldn't have to give up their privacy to a private corporation just to drive to work.
Melissa Ziobron, Republican candidate for 34th House District
Describe yourself, your experience and the attributes you would bring to the office.
I am a dedicated public servant with more than 25 years of local and state experience, attending local schools and later, raising my family and built our home in East Haddam. I currently serve as a board member for Connecticut’s Paid Leave program and last year was re-elected to the East Haddam Board of Education, where I also serve on the Open Space Committee. I have a long list of volunteer work that has ranged from local tax-relief committees and friends groups dedicated to preserving state parks and special places, to even serving as a proxy to a federal appointed commission overseeing fishing regulations up and down the eastern seaboard. I know how to work with a diverse group of passionate people from all walks of life. The strongest attributes I bring are the courage to stand up and the commitment to listening, especially under the intense pressure of the legislative process. I understand the role as a former three-term legislator and staff where I have watched the slide over the last ten years of decorum and standards of debate. Equally important is my fiscal acumen regarding the state budget and my firm adherence to the fiscal guardrails that have helped protect Connecticut’s long-term fiscal health.
How would you provide necessary state services while trying to control expenses?
We must prioritize state spending of taxpayer dollars. First, I would restore results-based accountability to the budget process. Democrats renamed and then eliminated that framework in 2023; no one is systematically asking whether the programs we fund produce results! Second, I would convert earmarks into competitive grants tied to measurable outcomes. Right now, the back of the budget contains roughly $150 million in “wants” rather than needs. I would also reduce funding to higher education and reframe the allocation process for the Board of Regents, where serious problems have arisen. Special education services should be fully funded by the state for towns as it is a reimbursable expense. At the same time, we must do more to control the costs that are charged to the town to begin with. Capping the charges that are allowed by organizations and aligning efficiency of scale is something we should do more of.
What are the most important issues facing the state, and what would you do about them?
If I rank the top three issues facing Connecticut over the next two years, they are federal funding uncertainty, internal pre-existing structural budget pressures that are producing projected deficits in the out-years, and lastly an aging population. These challenges interact with one another.
First, we must live within our means and stop using one-time funding for ongoing costs. For example, I could point to multiple times the state has expanded the state workforce with federal funding and then demanded the state taxpayer replenish the funds. In addition, the state has expanded services for those here illegally and relied on questionable reimbursement funding for healthcare costs. Second, the state structural imbalance is compounding fixed costs such as debt service, pensions, retiree health care, and Medicaid are growing at more than 4 percent while the revenues available to pay for them are growing at less than 3 percent. It is time to prioritize what taxpayers can realistically afford and stop fraud and abuse. Third, we need greater investment in smaller housing options so seniors can safely downsize and remain in their communities, freeing up family-sized homes for the next generation. Aging in place and creating a continuum for families to lay down roots is part of the joy of living in a small town.
What policy changes do you think are needed to improve the quality of state government?
Education funding: The Governor’s Blue-Ribbon Commission has spent months studying the issue. No matter their recommendations, I will fight to ensure small towns receive their fair share and that transportation funding is added to the equation.
Senior housing options: More coordination is needed statewide so seniors can retire in their own communities, and younger families can find affordable housing stock. We need to provide options that are affordable to those that have called our town home for their whole lives.
Farmer Bill of Rights: I have been inspired by the movement of small farms across the state and the district that is demanding an end to unnecessary red tape. From PA 4-90 updates that benefit functioning farms to reviewing how those farming families pay for personal property tax, it is time for them to be at the head of the line.
Homeowners mostly bear the high cost of education. Does the state’s cost-sharing formula need to be changed?
Yes, see above.
What are your thoughts on the use of Flock cameras?
I am not in favor of Flock cameras. I would not have supported the test period or the implementation law that allows towns to apply for review. We do have a legitimate speeding problem, and we should put more officers on the road in problem areas rather than relying on automated surveillance. At the same time, we should repeal or significantly reform the Police Accountability Act that is tying the hands of law enforcement across the state. Let’s allow our police to do their jobs without endless paperwork. We need more police, not less.
Comments