On Oct. 14, North Haven State Representative candidates Stephen Fontana, incumbent, and David Yaccarino, challenger, faced each other in a debate sponsored by the League of Women Voters.

Held in North Haven Community Television’s Washington Avenue studio, the debate was moderated by Quinnipiac University faculty member and veteran broadcaster Kenneth Venit. Campaigns received questions in advance.

Fontana won the right to begin first. In his opening remarks, he spoke of recessionary concerns, middle class objectives and bipartisan effort. “The past two years have been some of the most difficult years we’ve had to face,” he said. “I’m as frustrated as you are that we haven’t been able to get our economy back on track more quickly.”

Fontana reminded viewers of his “brand of accessible and responsive public service” and “proven ability to work across party lines to solve complex problems.”

“I will stay focused on the needs of the middle class in three areas,” he added, “getting the economy going again, reducing electricity and health insurance costs and rooting out government waste.”

In his initial comments, Yaccarino mentioned his community and national efforts, including serving in the U.S. Navy and owning and operating North Haven businesses. “Back in the navy, I was taught the importance of teamwork for one goal only, to look out for your fellow service men and women,” he said.

Yaccarino stated that being “a family man and business man,” he experienced “fiscal responsibility, putting three children through college, and staying within my budget.”

“I have 26 years of business experience,” he added, including running a family Getty Gas Station and his current store, DJ’s Sports Collectible and Comics at 1 Lincoln St.

Question 1 - What would each candidate propose to make Connecticut a more pro-business state?

Fontana disputed the question’s premise. “It’s simply not true,” he said. “According to the Council of State Business Taxation, Connecticut has the fifth lowest corporate tax burden in the nation. Furthermore, our corporate income tax rate in Connecticut is the lowest in New England. And, according to UConn’s Connecticut Economy, our manufacturing costs in Connecticut are actually the seventh lowest in the nation.”

Lowering health insurance and energy costs would benefit state businesses, Fontana said, as would a streamlining of permitting processes, expanding Connecticut grants to remediate older and contaminated properties and retraining older workers.

Arguing that Connecticut is, in fact, business-unfriendly, Yaccarino described state government as one which “does not take into account the laws they pass and the effects of those laws.”

“I would do the exact opposite as my opponent and his super-majority party has done,” he continued, including voting against the business-entity tax, repealing the 10 percent surcharge on corporate profits and repealing a soon to be official energy tax. Creating incentives for businesses to hire Connecticut workers was also suggested by Yaccarino.

“The fact of the matter is our state is hurting,” he said. “It’s too costly to do business in Connecticut, between energy and taxes. Business is not the enemy. We need jobs.”

In rebuttal, Fontana said “Cutting taxes doesn’t create jobs, or even pay for themselves.”

“Corporate taxes represent only four percent of the average corporation’s revenues,” he added. “In fact, it’s energy and health insurance costs that are far larger portions of their bills. And, unfortunately, we’ve had no cooperation from the Republicans in the house to pass legislation, because, unfortunately, they’ve taken an obstructionist tact.”

Question 2 – How would each candidate address their most important state environmental issue?

Yaccarino said he would target business properties contaminated to the point of being nonfunctional, by continuing to seek state funding to remediate such sites.

“These businesses can be restored, and jobs and businesses can move in to employ workers,” he said, “leaving a cleaner and safer environment. Not only is the property purified, but there is less contaminated water runoff.”

Alternative energy sources, including fuel cell and solar power technologies, were also brought up by Yaccarino as especially worthy environmental causes in Connecticut.

Fontana said he would focus on energy. “Certainly, my expertise as a chairman in the field helps,” he said. “From a cost perspective, a jobs perspective and an economic and environmental impact, energy should be our focus.”

A Democratic bill passed this year, but vetoed by Gov. M. Jodi Rell, Fontana added, would have established a discounted electricity rate for seniors, reduced overall energy rates by 10 to 15 percent, established Connecticut as a national leader in solar energy, and put “important” consumer standards and energy efficiency measures in place.

Getting private utilities back into competitive business to generate at-cost energy at regulated profit, Fontana said, would also lessen prices.

Yaccarino’s rebuttal questioned Fontana’s voting record on energy. “When you were the chairman of the Energy Commission, you knew, from the studies in Texas and California, not to deregulate energy,” he said. “California warned Connecticut, Texas warned Connecticut, ‘It’s a mistake, it’s going to be a disaster here,’ and you still voted to deregulate energy. That was a disaster.”

Question 3 – Could laws be utilized to limit suburban sprawl and maintain open space?

“We’ve been working for a number of years on so-called ‘smart growth,’” Fontana said, “Or, as Len Fasano would say, ‘responsible growth planning.’ We’ve tried to pass a number of initiatives to promote that. Certainly, we can do a better job of coordinating state, regional and local plans of conservation and development.”

Yaccarino replied, “I believe we can provide incentives for towns to pursue growth in a more environmentally-friendly way, an environmentally-responsive manner, although we do not want to pursue policies that punish economic growth.”

However, he continued, “state legislators” made environmental mandates too strict, hurting Connecticut businesses. Moreover, Yaccarino believes, state government should not have a role in municipal conservation decisions.

In rebutting, Fontana said, “We’ve been working for years to bring the [Department of Environmental Protection] and the business community together . . . This year, we had such great success in acting on the business community’s interest to streamline the permitting process to help improve the business climate in Connecticut.”

“We wouldn’t have purchased the property abutting Peters’ Rock if we hadn’t gotten a grant from the state,” he added. “So the state has a role in helping communities to buy open space and preserve it from development.”

Question 4 – Would candidates back a New Haven Harbor container terminal linked to state rail systems?

Both were in support.

“I think it’s a great idea,” Yaccarino said. “The entire rail infrastructure is in place, so we can have a smooth transition. It is well known that trucks are loaded in New Haven and have to drive on I-95 and I-91, on our highways, which greatly contributes to congestion, problems in North Haven and problems throughout the state.”

Fontana said, “I think North Haven would be a big beneficiary of a rail-port hookup in New Haven, and we have to do that if we’re going to try to use our roads more efficiently.

“I think we’re positioned very well to take advantage of that,” he added. “And I think we have to do that if we want to survive economically.”

In response, Yaccarino said he favored heavy rail over light rail, as the latter was not developed enough for feasible use.

“I would always be a proponent of rail in North Haven and throughout the state,” he added, “as long as it’s cost-effective, I’m a proponent.”

Question 5 – Is North Haven shortchanged by state education cost sharing (ECS) formulas? If so, how would candidates take action?

“Over the last seven years, North Haven’s ECS has doubled,” Fontana said. “Many other towns haven’t gotten that kind of increase, and, in fact, I don’t know of one that has.”

Every town gets less ECS funding than they want, he claimed, because of limited recourses and federal rulings seeking equal public education necessitating funding on basis of need.

“The solution, frankly, is to put more money into ECS overall,” Fontana said. “That’s what we did three years ago, and that’s why North Haven saw a significant bump in its ECS.”

Fixing ECS formulas, he argued, would cost $200 million to start.

Yaccarino replied, “I believe North Haven is being shortchanged. Just look at Wallingford. They receive over $3,000 per student, and they’re in our district. We receive $813 per student. I believe the system has to be completely overhauled.”

“Not only does this imbalance make North Haven taxpayers have to pay higher property taxes,” he added, “but our own children don’t receive the full benefits if the money is not distributed evenly throughout the state.”

In 2007, Governor M. Jodi Rell did an ECS study, Yaccarino said. “It showed that it was an inequitable formula and had to be addressed once and for all,” he continued. “The Democrats and Mr. Fontana opted to do nothing.”

In his rebuttal, Fontana stated, “My opponent doesn’t really understand how the process works. A person doesn’t go up and just change the formula.”

“The reason that Wallingford gets more is because Wallingford has double the number of students that North Haven has,” he added. “But its grand list is only about 78 percent larger than North Haven, which means it has a smaller net grand list.”

“That’s the primary driver of the formula,” Fontana continued. “The larger grand list you have, and the fewer students you have, you’re going to appear to be wealthy by state standards, and the lesser grant you’ll get.”

Question 6 – How will recent federal healthcare reforms impact the state?

“I’m concerned about the effects the national healthcare mandate will have on Connecticut,” Yaccarino said, especially on seniors, who he alleged would have less choice among supplement plans, and would have to change Medicare Care plans and pay higher premiums.

“Of course, we all want affordable healthcare,” he said. “The fact is there are significant elements in the plan that weren’t addressed. No tort reform . . . Insurance companies are still not subject to anti-trust. No crossing state lines for competition. You need competition. Competition brings down prices. And, of course, there’s no wellness plans.”

Fontana believed formation of “insurance exchanges,” a “private entity” where health insurance can be bought, would provide a measure of competition. “It’s a place for companies to compete on the basis of quality, cost coverage and so forth,” he said.

“Over the next several years,” he continued, “we’ll do things that make sense for us as a state to bring down health insurance costs, to make care more affordable, and to cover those people who don’t have health insurance. There are thousands of people in Connecticut, including thousands of kids, who still don’t have health insurance, whom the private insurance industry has failed. This includes thousands of people in North Haven.”

Yaccarino rebutted that affording federal healthcare and Connecticut’s SustiNet, on top of other state plans, would be difficult. “The fact of the matter is, you have to be able to pay for it,” he said. “And there’s no plan to pay for it right now, except for taxing people.”

SustiNet and federal plans are superfluous, he argued. “Most people are covered by healthcare, and it’s unfortunate when people don’t have it,” Yaccarino said. “That’s why we have Husky, Charter Oak, Nutmeg, Medicare and Medicaid.”

Question 7 – Do you support capital punishment?

“I support capital punishment,” Fontana said. “I believe that the death penalty should remain a valid form of punishment that prosecutors, judges and juries may seek to impose if they decide the circumstances in a particular case warrant its imposition.”

“Having said that, I recognize that it’s an extremely difficult moral issue,” he added. “I’m always open to making our statutes on the subject fairer, more equitable and just. For instance, several years ago I voted to prohibit mentally-disabled persons from receiving the death penalty.”

Yaccarino was also in support.

“My faith in common sense teaches me that life is both precious and sacred,” he said. “Unfortunately, people are capable of committing heinous crimes, as we have seen in the Cheshire murder case. When someone freely commits these acts, these hideous and violent acts, it shows that they have no respect for life or the wellbeing of others.”

“Therefore,” he continued, “under the proper circumstances, I support the right to capital punishment.”

In rebuttal, Fontana revisited health insurance reform. “We actually passed a bill last year to provide wellness incentives, and the Governor vetoed it,” he said. “Beyond that, I would just be interested to know that at some point [Yaccarino] would be willing to look into the eyes of those people in North Haven who don’t have health insurance, and tell them that they don’t deserve it.”

Question 8 – Is North Haven compliant with state regulations regarding affordable housing?

“North Haven is not compliant,” Yaccarino said. “We are at 7.4 percent of the state’s mandate for affordable housing. The requirement is 10 percent. I am in favor of affordable housing when done responsibly. But this should not be mandated by the state.”

“I believe these important decisions should be up to the town officials and the townspeople as a whole,” he added. “By having the statute in place, it leads to lawsuits where developers can extort better development deals under the threat of the towns being sued. Indian Ridge is a perfect example.”

Pointing out that he once went without health insurance himself, Yaccarino returned to the topic. “You can’t pass a bill, and that’s why the Governor vetoed bills, because you have no way to pay for it,” he said. “Our state is six billion dollars in debt. These plans sound good, but you’re not giving the whole story.”

During rebuttal, Fontana again defended universal healthcare. “My goal was to allow people like my opponent to save money at no cost to the state by buying the insurance through the state,” he said.

“As far as affordable housing,” he continued. “My understanding is that the town is not compliant.”

Fontana argued that state mandates allow towns power over affordable housing.

“Three years ago, we passed a bill called HOMEConnecticut,” he said. “That law was intended to provide towns with incentives to explore housing options that they choose to pursue. Basically, it would allow towns to proactively identify and design areas that are suitable for mixed-income and mixed-use development, giving towns that control.”

“If we can do it as a part of community discussion, to discuss where, whether, when and how we might pursue affordable housing,” Fontana said, “That’s a responsible and appropriate way to pursue affordable housing.”

“We also need to pursue housing for senior citizens,” he added. “I think that is a real need in North Haven.”

Yaccarino, too, favored senior housing. “My mom, and many of her friends, lives in Tuscan Villa,” he said.

On the general topic, Yaccarino said, “I’m for affordable housing if it’s done on the town’s accord.

“If I’m your State Representative, I will vote to repeal the statute, because it leads to lawsuits,” he added. “The town wants to build when there’s enough land. But when there’s not enough land, you cannot build.”

Fontana and Yaccarino’s debate can be seen on North Haven Community Television, Channel 20, at the following times: 4:02, 8:02 and 12:02 a.m., and 4:02, 8:02 and 12:02 p.m., from now until Election Day, Nov. 2.

The debate is also viewable online at nhtv.com

Polls will be open on Election Day at North Haven’s regular polling spots – the four elementary schools and Linsley Street’s Recreational Center — from 6 a.m. until 8 p.m.