State grant aimed at making area around West Haven's Veterans Affair Hospital safer
WEST HAVEN, Conn. (WTNH) — The area around West Haven's Veterans Affair Hospital is about to get a lot safer. The city and Governor Ned Lamont Monday announced a new state grant that will soon make changes in the area.
Campbell Avenue would be one of the busiest roads in West Haven even without thousands of employees and patients going to the VA hospital every day.
Veterans, officials rally against federal funding cuts affecting veterans' benefits
'That is why today, we are announcing that we have been awarded $1.8 million by the State of Connecticut Community Investment,' Mayor Dorinda Borer (D-West Haven) announced.
City and state officials made that announcement at City Hall Monday morning. Some of the grant will go towards repaving streets and sidewalks around the hospital.
'The other day, I was driving in that area and there were kids on bikes, and they hopped off their bikes, and they lifted their bikes to walk over an unpatched area, and then they got on their bikes, and they kept riding,' State Rep. Trenee McGee (D-West Haven) said.
It is even tougher on the vision impaired patients who come to the hospital.
'With the sidewalks lifted and trees coming through them, we've had a number of fall victims,' West Haven's Emergency Management Director Rick Fontana said. 'So, this is going to make a huge, huge difference.'
Veterans depart from Bradley for Honor Flight Connecticut
Another improvement you will see in the coming months is blue light boxes. They will be installed right here on the sidewalk, with communication devices that put you directly in touch with emergency services, and they will have cameras in them, too.
There will also be measures to calm traffic through the area, making things even safer for pedestrians. The governor said it is part of an ongoing, statewide effort.
'Little investments like this that show we believe in your community, you believe in your community, have pride in your community, and you see these bits of improvement every day that make a difference,' Lamont said.
They are just starting the design phase. The hope is the whole project will take less than a year to complete.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
UPI
35 minutes ago
- UPI
'Unite for Vets' rally in Washington, D.C., protest overhaul of VA
1 of 8 | Veterans, military families and demonstrators gather on the National Mall in Washington, D.C.,, to participate in a Unite for Veterans Rally to protest the Trump Administration's cuts to staffing and programs at the Department of Veterans Affairs. Photo by Annabelle Gordon/UPI | License Photo June 6 (UPI) -- Several thousand veterans converged on the National Mall on Friday at a rally among 200 events nationwide against a proposed overhaul that includes staffing reduction and some services shifted. The Veterans Administration counters the new proposed budget is higher than last year, processing of claims have sped up and it's easier to get benefits. Veterans, military families and others participated in the Unite for Veterans, Unite for America Rally on the 81st anniversary of D-Day, which was the Allies' amphibious invasion of German-occupied France. The protests, which were organized by a union, took place at 16 state capitol buildings and more than 100 other places across 43 states. "We are coming together to defend the benefits, jobs and dignity that every generation of veterans has earned through sacrifice," Unite for Veterans said on its website. "Veteran jobs, healthcare, and essential VA services are under attack. We will not stand by." Speakers in Washington included Democrats with military backgrounds: Sen. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, former Rep. Conor Lamb of Pennsylvania and California Rep. Derek Tran. There were signs against President Donald Trump, VA Secretary Doug Collins and Elon Musk, the multi-billionaire who ran the Department of Government Efficiency. They said those leaders are betraying the country's promises to troops. "Are you tired of being thanked for our service in the public and stabbed in our back in private?" Army veteran Everett Kelly, the national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, asked the crowd. "For years, politicians on both sides of the aisle have campaigned on their support of veterans, but once they get into office, they cut our benefits, our services. They take every opportunity to privatize our health care." The Trump administration plans to cut 83,000 VA staffers and shift more money from the federal health care system to private-sector clinics. The administration's proposed budget for the VA, released on Friday, slashes spending for "medical services" by $12bn - or nearly 20% - an amount offset by a corresponding 50% boost in funding for veterans seeking healthcare in the private sector. The Department of Veterans Affairs employs approximately 482,000 people, including 500,000 workers at 170 hospitals and 1,200 local clinics in the nation's largest health care system. In all, there are 15.8 million veterans, which represents 6.1% of the civilian population 18 years and older. VA officials said the event was misguided. "Imagine how much better off veterans would be if VA's critics cared as much about fixing the department as they do about protecting its broken bureaucracy," VA press secretary Peter Kasperowicz said in a statement to UPI. "The Biden Administration's VA failed to address nearly all of the department's most serious problems, such as rising health care wait times, growing backlogs of veterans waiting for disability compensation and major issues with survivor benefits." Kasperowicz told UPI disability claims backlog is already down 25% since Trump took office on Jan. 20 after it increased 24% during the Biden administration. He said VA has opened 10 new healthcare clinics around the country, and Trump has proposed a 10% budget increase to $441.3 billion in fiscal year 2026. The administration's proposed budget for the VA reduces spending for "medical services" by $12 billion - or nearly 20% - which is offset by a 50% boost in funding for veterans seeking healthcare in the private sector. Kasperowicz said the "VA is accelerating the deployment of its integrated electronic health record system, after the program was nearly dormant for almost two years under the Biden Administration." The event was modeled after the Bonus Army protests of the 1930s, when veterans who served in World War I gathered in the nation's capital to demand extra pay denied after leaving the service. Irma Westmoreland, a registered nurse working at a VA hospital and the secretary-treasurer of National Nurses United, told the crowd in Washington: "It's important for every person to keep their job, from the engineering staff to the housekeeper to the dietary staff. When cuts are made, the nursing and medical staff will have to pick up all their work that needs to be done."
Newsweek
5 hours ago
- Newsweek
How Veteran's Benefits Are Impacted by Trump's Tax Bill: What to Know
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. President Donald Trump's legislative agenda continues to reshape federal spending, with House Republicans proposing a $453 billion bill for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in fiscal year 2026. While the bill preserves core benefit increases for veterans, it introduces a series of controversial provisions that could change how some services are accessed and funded. The new spending proposals, part of the One Big Beautiful Bill passed by the House in May, come amid a flurry of changes at the VA, including staffing cuts at the department, which have sparked protests across the nation. Why It Matters Veterans' programs have historically received bipartisan support and consistent funding increases. Trump's proposed budget continues that trend, with an $83 billion boost over the prior year, largely for mandatory medical care and benefits payouts. However, the bill's inclusion of policy items tied to reproductive health, firearm access, and vaccine mandates could limit or reshape access to VA services. What to Know The VA budget includes: A 22 percent—$83 billion—overall funding increase , with nearly all new funding earmarked for medical care and mandatory benefits like disability payments. , with nearly all new funding earmarked for medical care and mandatory benefits like disability payments. Discretionary program funding up by 4 percent , rising to approximately $134 billion. , rising to approximately $134 billion. $2.5 billion for the VA's Electronic Health Record Modernization program , doubling the prior year's allocation but still $1 billion short of the White House's ask. , doubling the prior year's allocation but still $1 billion short of the White House's ask. $18 billion in military construction funding, which includes $830 million for child development centers and barracks improvements. Policy changes include: A ban on abortion services and abortion-related counseling at VA facilities, unless the life of the mother is in danger. at VA facilities, unless the life of the mother is in danger. Ending the requirement for mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for VA health personnel. for VA health personnel. Restrictions on reporting veterans deemed financially incompetent to the national gun background check system, which Republicans have framed as a defense of Second Amendment rights. Democrats criticized the latter provisions. Florida Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Democrat, said in a statement the bill "needlessly fixates on keeping guns in the hands of those who are potentially a danger to themselves or others, and restricts reproductive rights." A stock image shows a U.S. flag patch on a soldier's uniform. A stock image shows a U.S. flag patch on a soldier's uniform. GETTY What People Are Saying House Appropriations Committee chairman Tom Cole said the bill "honors our commitment to those who've worn America's uniform and supports our military and their loved ones." "By providing critical funding for military bases and improving housing for our troops and their families, we are ensuring that our national defense needs are met both at home and abroad. We are also upholding our pledge to our veterans. This bill fully funds health care and benefits for those who have honorably served. They upheld their sacred oath to us—and now a grateful nation is keeping our promise to them. Today marks the start of our process and our work to fund the government. As this bill moves forward and considerations are made and debated, the pillars of the proposal won't change." Florida Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz said in a statement: "This bill needlessly fixates on keeping guns in the hands of those who are potentially a danger to themselves or others, and restricts reproductive rights, and [includes] other cruel and pointless policy restrictions. I cannot tell those currently serving and those who defended our nation that this is the best we can do." What's Next The bill faces a tougher showdown in the Senate than it did in the House, where Democratic opposition and the filibuster rule will require bipartisan cooperation in order for it to pass.
Yahoo
9 hours ago
- Yahoo
Democratic states double down on laws resisting Trump's immigration crackdown
As President Donald Trump's administration targets states and local governments for not cooperating with federal immigration authorities, lawmakers in some Democratic-led states are intensifying their resistance by strengthening state laws restricting such cooperation. In California alone, more than a dozen pro-immigrant bills passed either the Assembly or Senate this week, including one prohibiting schools from allowing federal immigration officials into nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant. Other state measures have sought to protect immigrants in housing, employment and police encounters, even as Trump's administration has ramped up arrests as part of his plan for mass deportations. In Connecticut, legislation pending before Democratic Gov. Ned Lamont would expand a law that already limits when law enforcement officers can cooperate with federal requests to detain immigrants. Among other things, it would let 'any aggrieved person' sue municipalities for alleged violations of the state's Trust Act. Two days after lawmakers gave final approval to the measure, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security included Connecticut on a list of hundreds of 'sanctuary jurisdictions' obstructing the enforcement of federal immigration laws. The list later was removed from the department's website after criticism that it errantly included some local governments that support Trump's immigration policies. States split on whether to aid or resist Trump Since taking office in January, Trump has enlisted hundreds of state and local law enforcement agencies to help identify immigrants in the U.S. illegally and detain them for potential deportation. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement now lists 640 such cooperative agreements, a nearly fivefold increase under Trump. Trump also has lifted longtime rules restricting immigration enforcement near schools, churches and hospitals, and ordered federal prosecutors to investigate state or local officials believed to be interfering with his crackdown on illegal immigration. The Department of Justice sued Colorado, Illinois and New York, as well as several cities in those states and New Jersey, alleging their policies violate the U.S. Constitution or federal immigration laws. Just three weeks after Colorado was sued, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis signed a wide-ranging law expanding the state's protections for immigrants. Among other things, it bars jails from delaying the release of inmates for immigration enforcement and allows penalties of up to $50,000 for public schools, colleges, libraries, child care centers and health care facilities that collect information about people's immigration status, with some exceptions. Polis rejected the administration's description of Colorado as a 'sanctuary state,' asserting that law officers remain 'deeply committed' to working with federal authorities on criminal investigations. 'But to be clear, state and local law enforcement cannot be commandeered to enforce federal civil immigration laws,' Polis said in a bill-signing statement. Illinois also has continued to press pro-immigrant legislation. A bill recently given final approval says no child can be denied a free public education because of immigration status — something already guaranteed nationwide under a 1982 U.S. Supreme Court decision. Supporters say the state legislation provides a backstop in case court precedent is overturned. The bill also requires schools to develop policies on handling requests from federal immigration officials and allows lawsuits for alleged violations of the measure. Legislation supporting immigrants takes a variety of forms Democratic-led states are pursuing a wide range of means to protect immigrants. A new Oregon law bars landlords from inquiring about the immigration status of tenants or applicants. New laws in Washington declare it unprofessional conduct for bail bond agents to enforce civil immigration warrants, prohibit employers from using immigration status to threaten workers and let employees use paid sick leave to attend immigration proceedings for themselves or family members. Vermont last month repealed a state law that let law enforcement agencies enter into immigration enforcement agreements with federal authorities during state or national emergencies. They now need special permission from the governor to do so. As passed by the House, Maryland legislation also would have barred local governments from reaching immigration enforcement agreements with the federal government. That provision was removed in the Senate following pushback from some of the seven Maryland counties that currently have agreements. The final version, which took effect as law at the start of June, forbids public schools and libraries from granting federal immigration authorities access to nonpublic areas without a judicial warrant or 'exigent circumstances.' Maryland Del. Nicole Williams said residents' concerns about Trump's immigration policies prompted her to sponsor the legislation. 'We believe that diversity is our strength, and our role as elected officials is to make sure that all of the residents within our community — regardless of their background — feel safe and comfortable,' Williams said. Many new measures reinforce existing policies Though legislation advancing in Democratic states may shield against Trump's policies, 'I would say it's more so to send a message to immigrant communities to let them know that they are welcome,' said Juan Avilez, a policy associate at the American Immigration Council, a nonprofit advocacy group. In California, a law that took effect in 2018 already requires public schools to adopt policies 'limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible.' Some schools have readily applied the law. When DHS officers attempted a welfare check on migrant children at two Los Angeles elementary schools in April, they were denied access by both principals. Legislation passed by the state Senate would reinforce such policies by specifically requiring a judicial warrant for public schools to let immigration authorities into nonpublic areas, allow students to be questioned or disclose information about students and their families. 'Having ICE in our schools means that you'll have parents who will not want to send their kids to school at all,' Democratic state Sen. Scott Wiener said in support of the bill. But some Republicans said the measure was 'injecting partisan immigration policies' into schools. 'We have yet to see a case in California where we have scary people in masks entering schools and ripping children away,' said state Sen. Marie Alvarado-Gil. 'Let's stop these fear tactics that do us an injustice.' ___ Associated Press writers Susan Haigh, Trân Nguyễn, Jesse Bedayn, John O'Connor and Brian Witte contributed to this report.
