Debate Recap by CT Examiner
SALEM — In a civil, policy-focused debate at Gardner Lake Firehouse Wednesday night, nearly 100 local residents and politicos from across the region watched and sometimes cheered loudly as State Rep. Nick Menapace and his challenger Anne Santoro took questions on electric rates, state budgets, Flock cameras and immigration.
The debate was moderated by CT Examiner Editor-in-Chief Gregory Stroud.
The biggest surprise of the debate may have been what wasn’t said or mentioned by either candidate – President Donald Trump.
Nick Menapace, a progressive Democrat and schoolteacher who defeated Republican Holly Cheeseman by just 99 votes in 2024, is facing a challenge from Anne Santoro, an attorney who previously served on East Lyme’s Deputy First Selectman. Santoro is running as the Republican and Independent Party candidate.
Menapace offered a variety of policy solutions, including publicly owned utilities, and loosening the state’s fiscal guardrails to allow increased spending on towns and schools.
Santoro argued for reining in spending and rolling back some of the “1,400 unfunded mandates” on the state’s cities and towns.
Asked why residents pay some of the highest electricity rates in the country – and what if anything they would do about it – Menapace pitched what he called a “true public option” to partially undo what he blamed on the failures of deregulation.“It has resulted in all of us paying much, much higher premiums for energy rates,” Menapace said. “The only other option we have is to create more competition, but you know, frankly, that’s something we can’t do … Eversource doesn’t want to see their monopoly broken up.”
Santoro agreed on deregulation, but took aim at the public benefits charge added to customer electricity bills.
“This is definitely an issue, and definitely one way that we can reduce our energy costs. So this is something I would like to see done by the legislature, examine these programs, figure out if they should stay or go,” Santoro said.
Asked whether the state had struck a fair balance between state income taxes and local property taxes, Santoro emphasized the need for fiscal discipline.
“We need to work towards reduction in our state income tax, and changing categories … this is something that should be a goal, and I think there’s many ways of getting at that if we start budgeting more appropriately,” Santoro said.Menapace argued that the biggest problem driving higher local property taxes was the lack of aid to towns and cities through the state’s outdated Education Cost Sharing formula.
“It is the biggest problem that we are going to be addressing next year, because everyone seems to agree that this is a huge problem … just 14 years is a long time to try to fix this issue,” Menapace said. “We have every single town doing its own thing and paying for every single thing and when it comes to education, that drives up our costs exponentially.”In her rebuttal, Santoro argued that Menapace was ignoring the many times that Republican lawmakers had already proposed permanent methods of funding ECS.“This is all happening, but it should have happened a lot of years ago, and it should have happened on Mr. Menapace’s watch as far as I’m concerned,” Santoro said.The candidates also disagreed on the state’s fiscal guardrails, adopted in 2017 as part of a bipartisan deal to limit the use of higher state revenues for public spending.
Menapace argued that loosening those curbs was actually prudent.
“We’ve paid down so much of the debt that it is now being told by all the analysts that it is better for us to start spending that money on our people or reducing taxes. And we can’t do that unless we adjust the fiscal barriers,” Menapace said.Santoro stood by the current budget constraint and a conservative approach to the state’s sometimes boom-and-bust revenues.“That was so important for stabilizing our economy and providing fiscal discipline. This is what’s lacking. There’s too much dependence on volatile income in our state,” Santoro said.
On housing, both candidates agreed on the need for more, but had differing solutions to meet the need.Menapace embraced last year’s far-reaching housing bill, passed in a November special session of the state legislature, which eases the conversion of commercial properties into housing and takes a regional approach to apportioning development.
Santoro argued that the state’s efforts dating back to the passage of 8-30g, the state’s affordable housing statute, in 1989 and last year’s housing bill had actually slowed the construction of housing by imposing burdensome and time-consuming demands on developers and towns. She argued instead for more local control.
Asked how they would ensure that the 37th House District – East Lyme, Salem and Montville – would benefit from the estimated $23 billion of spending and investment over 12 years at Electric Boat in nearby Groton, Menapace emphasized the need for more housing, and investments in Shore Line East.
“If we are not building housing in the area, people are going to be coming from far and farther away to be able to come and work here,” he said.
Santoro also focused on investments in transit.“We need to deal with both buses and trains. Buses can be very advantageous to take the congestion off of our roads,” she said.
Both candidates shared concerns about Flock cameras, but the next question on immigration enforcement drew by far the sharpest contrast between the candidates – and the strongest response from the audience.
Asked whether they supported the state’s current approach to federal immigration enforcement, both candidates offered strong and by turns emotional responses.
There were equal parts cheers and boos echoing in the hall after each answer.
“I don’t think that there is anything that is appropriate … with no identification going in and grabbing people. It is entirely inappropriate. It is not the way to conduct immigration at all,” said Menapace. Santoro argued that the state’s lack of cooperation with federal immigration had actually exacerbated the problem.
“We have an issue in Connecticut and in other states where there is lack of cooperation. My solution is, please let’s cooperate. And where ICE has cooperated in other jurisdictions in other states, you don’t see this conflict,” Santoro said.“When we have criminals who are illegally here — it’s a double whammy. I think that we need to let ICE do its job,” she said.
Asked to highlight one disagreement with their party’s nominee for governor, Menapace said he wished Gov. Ned Lamont would be “more forward thinking” on public transit.Santoro offered a nuts-and-bolts critique of State Sen. Ryan Fazio’s idea of capping property taxes at the rate of inflation.
“I understand the desire to do that, but again, it looks, feels, and sounds like another state mandate to me,” she said.
Both candidates spoke with CT Examiner after the debate, while a crowd stayed and talked among themselves into the evening.
“We disagree with each other, and that’s how we move things forward. We have to keep pushing that, and I always want everyone to be able to push me on these things. And I’m really glad that we’re able to do that,” said Menapace.
“I’ve run two other elections for first selectmen, and my opponent never wanted to debate,” Santoro said. “So for me, this was important, sort of a rite of passage, if you will.”
A 2024 graduate of the University of Connecticut, Luke Feeney covered the Gilgo Beach murders, the 2025 Ryder Cup, as well as local and statewide politics on Long Island prior to joining CT Examiner in 2026. Feeney covers Middletown, Meriden and New Britain for CT Examiner.
Comments