Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram

By Amy Stefanowski

When I recently heard Fred Wilms speak about the Connecticut Treasurer’s office, one part of his message really caught my attention.

It wasn’t simply that Fred has spent decades working in banking and public finance.

It was his question about how Connecticut should be managing billions of dollars belonging to its taxpayers, retirees and public employees.

Why should so much investment responsibility ultimately rest with one elected official?

That question deserves more attention.

Fred Wilms isn’t coming to this discussion without experience. He spent decades in banking and public finance and served for years in Norwalk municipal government, including as chairman of the city’s Board of Estimate & Taxation.

During his tenure, Norwalk maintained its prestigious Triple-A bond ratings. In fact, all three major rating agencies reaffirmed Norwalk’s Triple-A ratings during the COVID-19 pandemic, when communities across the country were dealing with extraordinary economic uncertainty. Norwalk’s own records credited strong financial management, budgeting practices and reserves with helping the city weather those circumstances.

That experience matters.

But Fred’s argument isn’t simply, “I have better qualifications.”

His larger point is about the structure of the Treasurer’s office itself.

Connecticut’s Treasurer serves as the principal fiduciary for the state’s pension and trust funds. The Treasurer’s office manages and safeguards these assets, while an Investment Advisory Council provides advice and oversight on investment policy.

Fred believes Connecticut should take the next step.

Rather than concentrating ultimate investment authority in one elected official, he wants Connecticut to move toward a professional board structure, where investment decisions are made collectively by people with appropriate financial expertise and where responsibility and accountability are shared.

That strikes me as an important conversation.

Think about how we handle finances in our own businesses and households. When the stakes become enormous, we generally don’t put everything on one person’s shoulders. We establish checks and balances. We seek advice. We create systems of accountability.

Why shouldn’t government operate the same way when managing billions of dollars?

This isn’t about whether one particular Treasurer is a good person or whether one particular candidate has a good résumé.

It is about whether the structure itself is the best way to protect taxpayers and the people whose retirement depends on these investments.

And Fred isn’t proposing this from an ivory tower.

He has actually sat at the table where difficult financial decisions had to be made.

His record in Norwalk gives voters something more meaningful than campaign promises: a history of making financial decisions in public office and helping maintain the city’s highest possible bond rating through difficult economic periods. Norwalk continues to hold Triple-A ratings today.

There is another thing about Fred that I find refreshing.

He isn’t looking to make politics a career.

After decades in banking and finance, he is stepping into public service because he believes Connecticut’s financial management needs to change.

That distinction matters.

We don’t need every elected office to become another stop on someone’s political ladder. Sometimes the best people to serve in government are those who have spent their careers doing something else and decide that their experience can be put to work for the public.

Fred’s message is not simply, “Elect me because I’m qualified.”

It is: “Let’s change the way Connecticut manages this responsibility.”

That is a much bigger idea.

Connecticut has enormous financial obligations. Our pension systems, debt and investment decisions affect taxpayers today and will affect generations of taxpayers tomorrow.

So perhaps we should stop looking at the Treasurer’s race simply as a contest between two names on a ballot.

Perhaps we should ask a more fundamental question:

Is the way Connecticut manages billions of dollars of public money structured in the best possible way for taxpayers?

Fred Wilms believes it can be better.

He wants a system that relies on professional oversight, shared responsibility and accountability rather than concentrating so much authority in one elected official.

After hearing him explain his proposal, I think that idea deserves serious consideration.

Sometimes the most important reason to support a candidate isn’t simply who the candidate is.

It’s what they are willing to change.

And Fred Wilms is proposing to change the system itself.

‘NO AD’ subscription for CDM!  Sign up here and support real investigative journalism and help save the republic!'