The Boston Herald
Saturday, January 22, 2003
Backlash:
Mayors cry foul as state pols back Mitt's cuts
by David R. Guarino and Elizabeth W. Crowley
Legislative leaders swiftly coalesced around Gov. Mitt
Romney's unprecedented grab for budget-slicing power yesterday, even as mayors
labeled plans for vast local aid cuts as callous and "clueless."
House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran and Senate President Robert
E. Travaglini voiced support for Romney's legislation to - at least temporarily -
expand the sweep of his budget ax to include potentially $200 million in local
aid cuts.
The leaders called special sessions of both branches for
early next week, clearing the way for cuts likely to prompt teacher layoffs, cutbacks in police
patrols and other critical local services.
"Mitt Romney won the election, he is entitled to ... the
benefit of a fair opportunity to demonstrate what he can and will do to solve (the budget
crisis)," Finneran said. "It seems to me, we have to give him at least a fair
chance and ... give him the tools that he seeks."
But seething municipal leaders from around the state said
Beacon Hill should choose tax hikes or cut elsewhere before targeting localities.
"It's not 'Sleepless in Seattle' up there, it's 'Clueless
under the Golden Dome,'" said North Adams Mayor John Barrett III, a Democratic friend to the last
three GOP governors who bluntly said Romney should be "ashamed of himself."
Romney rolled out the aggressive first legislative steps of
his week-old administration before an unsupportive crowd of more than 600 mayors,
selectmen and town administrators.
Armed with a PowerPoint presentation and harsh rhetoric,
Romney said his predecessor's deep cuts to human service programs weren't enough to
overcome a bleak fiscal outlook.
"Despite all those actions, (this year) remains very much in
potential crisis," Romney told the Massachusetts Municipal Association's annual meeting.
"We're currently spending money we don't have and we're facing a cash crunch."
Under state law, Romney can cut only from certain areas of
state spending to balance the budget - most in the human service and health care sector. With a
projected shortfall of between $450 million and $600 million before the fiscal
year ends in July, Romney said he must curtail municipal aid and higher
education spending.
Romney said the worst-case scenario of a $600 million
deficit would mean a cut in local aid of $200 million, about 10 percent less than communities expected
for the last few months of the year.
Without the expanded powers, Romney said, lawmakers will
force him to cut further into human services that can't bear more cuts.
"Making cuts only in (allowable areas) would fall disproportionately on the poor
and on housing and on needed social programs," he said. "My solution is to
expand (emergency cutting powers) to include all state spending so the budget
can be balanced in the most fair and equitable way."
The budget hawks in both the House and Senate embraced the
concept but said full support won't be gauged until Monday.
"Reluctantly, I agree with the need for this type of bill,"
said House Ways and Means Chairman John H. Rogers (D-Norwood). "We're in a revenue freefall.
It's the steepest and largest revenue freefall in the Commonwealth's history."
Senate Ways and Means Chairman Therese Murray said pols must
start "facing reality now." The Plymouth Democrat called it "irresponsible" to allow
Romney to hack away only at health care programs while other sectors of the
budget remain untouched.
"Nobody wants to do this but where else do you go for the
cuts?" Murray asked.
The House and Senate plan to caucus behind closed doors
Monday and may debate the Romney emergency legislation early in the week.
But legislative sources said lawmakers have already won
concession from Romney that a sunset clause be added to the bill, granting Romney the powers
for only a limited time. "It wouldn't be for four years, there's got to be a sunset
provision," Murray said.
Travaglini, the new Senate president, told WBZ-TV Romney's
plan appears "likely to occur." Finneran said he empathized with the mayors but said the
budget holes must be filled quickly. "Whatever the medicine is or must be, it is
best to be administered and taken swiftly," he said.
But as fast as legislative leaders warmed to Romney's
proposal, municipal officials promised to take the fight to the streets. They said state
representatives and senators would be flooded with calls urging them not to
grant Romney the emergency powers.
Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino said taxes hikes are the
answer.
"You cannot just say we cannot raise revenues," Menino said.
"You're not going to wish your way through this thing. You're going to have to raise revenues to
make up some of the costs."
Menino said the state is sitting on $1 billion in reserves
it should burn through before looking to localities.
Disgusted mayors shrugged when Romney promised to make Lt.
Gov. Kerry Healey the "go to" person for municipal leaders. "The lieutenant governor
doesn't make decisions," said Medford Mayor Michael McGlynn.
"It's going to be war with the mayors and we're going to go
to our legislators and make sure that they understand what the impact is going to be back
home," Barrett said. Romney refused to raise taxes himself but wants locals to
raise property taxes to help out, Barrett said.
But as much as locals panicked, human service advocates
rejoiced that the Romney plan may spare them more cuts.
"We don't want to see other people hurt but, if you are
going to be considering reductions, it truly isn't equitable to be only looking at part of the budget," said
Leo Sarkissian of ARC Massachusetts, which lobbies for the disabled.
Joe Battenfeld contributed to this report.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Saturday, January 22, 2003
Lawmakers may let gov take blame
Analysis/by Elisabeth J. Beardsley
Gov. Mitt Romney's request for expanded slash-and-burn
budget powers may not be as politically radioactive as it seems at first glance - and in fact has been
embraced by legislative leaders.
The hue and cry from mayors was immediate and intense -
lending an air of "dead on arrival" to Romney's announcement that he wants to be able to pare
down local aid.
But the doomsayers' high-octane rhetoric doesn't take into
account a series of political variables that make for a pretty appealing equation in state
lawmakers' eyes.
With every new budget cut drawing fresh howls of protest
from the afflicted, allowing Romney to shoulder the responsibility for making tough decisions
offers a convenient escape route to lawmakers who have been on the public hot
seat for well over a year.
"(Romney) will take most of the heat and he's willing to
take it," one Romney adviser said. "I would think that's an attractive option for the Legislature."
Lawmakers were more than happy last fall to let former
acting Gov. Jane M. Swift slash popular programs and be called every name in the book - as long as
it brought the state's ledgers closer to balance.
Romney also could provide an easy whipping boy for lawmakers
- satisfying a nasty undercurrent among those who are still rankling over what they regard
as Romney's impossible campaign promise to balance the budget without new
taxes and without cuts to core services.
House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran, for instance, has
oscillated between unusual deference to Romney's budget moves - and occasional angry
castigations of the "idle, wealthy and bored."
Many State House observers wonder if Finneran is simply
giving Romney enough rope to hang himself.
Finneran is already personally on-board with Romney's plan -
but the speaker must still convince rank-and-file lawmakers, who are under pressure from
locals to preserve as many programs as possible.
If the Legislature doesn't give Romney the power to cut
local aid, they'll have to try to come up with a solution of their own - putting them back in the painful
spotlight.
Cobbling together enough votes for such a piecemeal solution
could be nigh on impossible - leaving Romney with no choice but to cut deeper into human
service programs that have already suffered the brunt of Swift's cuts, said
House Minority Leader Brad Jones.
"By not acting, the Legislature's effectively saying,
'Governor, cut DMH, cut DMR, I don't care about the homeless, throw them out on the street,' " said
Jones (R-North Reading). "That would probably go over slightly better than a
lead balloon."
Veteran observers of fiscal crises past are expecting
lawmakers - who tend to be jealous of their budget powers - to find a middle road.
"I don't think they can afford to either ignore the governor
or give him a carte blanche," said Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation President Michael
Widmer.
While it might be an easy first victory for Romney, winning
new budget-cutting powers from the Legislature would set Romney up for his first major problem -
a head-on collision with the state's mayors, most of whom backed his Democratic rival,
Shannon P. O'Brien.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Saturday, January 22, 2003
Hub may have to lay off hundreds
by Ellen J. Silberman
Boston will be forced to lay off hundreds of employees and
cut back on basic city services if the Legislature approves Gov. Mitt Romney's plan to slash local
aid, Mayor Thomas M. Menino said yesterday.
"We're going to get right to the core of government," he
said, predicting up to 450 pink slips in the coming months. "That's the last thing we want to do (but)
it's a good possibility."
Menino is also looking at trimming basic city services -
leaving residents who are used to getting their trash picked up three times a week with twice-a-week
collection.
He could also take the ax to the city's schools budget,
cutting accounts for books and other supplies.
"Everything's on the table," said Lisa Signori, Menino's
budget chief. "There are going to be very difficult choices and decisions that the mayor needs to make."
Romney yesterday proposed cutting up to $200 million from
local aid over the next six months.
Romney did not offer specifics about how the 5 to 10 percent
cut would be administered.
But if a 10 percent trim comes across the board, Boston
would lose $27 million city officials were counting on to balance their books.
Boston already saw its local aid drop by $29 million from
fiscal 2002 to fiscal 2003.
City officials already trimmed personnel costs - which make
up 65 percent of Boston's $1.8 billion budget - with an early retirement program that saw more
than 470 people exit the payroll.
Anticipating 20 percent local aid cuts in fiscal 2004,
Menino recently imposed a hiring freeze and cancelled a police academy that had been scheduled to begin
training 50 new patrolmen this month.
He has also asked the Legislature to help fill the city's
diminishing coffers by approving a host of tax increases totaling some $85 million.
Signori said the cuts would be particularly painful because
they come halfway through the fiscal year.
"They've given me absolutely no time to plan, to adjust,"
she said.
Signori said the mayor was unlikely to tap into the city's
reserve fund, recently pegged at $118 million.
"You can't solve this problem with reserves. It's bad
management," she said, refusing to discuss the size of the city's reserves. "You use them and they're
gone."
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Saturday, January 22, 2003
A Boston Herald editorial
No way around sharing the pain
Gov. Mitt Romney framed the question that now faces the
Legislature precisely right: "If we face a substantial shortfall this fiscal year, do we take all
of that money from health and human services accounts, knowing that those
cuts will fall disproportionately on the poor and the disadvantaged?"
Or is it time cities and towns were also asked to share some
of the inevitable economic pain?
Localities have, until now, been pretty much held harmless
under the state budgeting process. And right now under existing state law there is nothing the
governor can do about that. He has emergency powers to cut some of the state
budget, but not those items dealing with local aid - which this year account
for $5.5 billion of a $23 billion state budget.
So Romney walked into the lion's den of the Massachusetts
Municipal Association annual meeting yesterday and informed the assembled local
officials that he was filing legislation that would broaden his so-called 9C
authority to make emergency cuts to the existing state budget.
"Our problem is simple," Romney said. "Spending is high and
cash is low."
Further complicating his problem is the fact that for every
state dollar taken from some health and human services accounts (Medicaid, for example) the
state would also lose $1 in federal aid. Thus a $200 million cut becomes a $400
million loss.
The governor warned that cuts to local aid could total as
much as $200 million (assuming the state's budgetary shortfall is $600 million). Of course, if the
shortfall is less, the cuts would be less.
Yes, it's true that localities are usually held harmless
because they provide essential services - schools, police, fire protection. But it is also true that many
communities are sitting on cash reserves, while the state has just about run
through its rainy day fund.
There is, of course, much that can be done by the Legislature or the governor
or both to see that the burden of local aid cuts falls on those communities most
able to pay. Romney acknowledged that because local aid is delivered through
three separate formulas, it's possible to see that the needs of poorer cities are
recognized.
"I recognize the attractiveness and advantages of protecting
the most vulnerable of our cities," the governor said in an interview, adding that that too
is under review.
Longer term options - options that will be essential to
dealing with the anticipated $2.5 billion gap for the next fiscal year - could and should be on the
table. That part's Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey's assignment.
Local officials, such as Mayor Tom Menino, are looking for
relief from the burdens of over-regulation that add to their costs - purchasing rules, state
mandates and civil service requirements. The "restructuring" Romney has
promised in state government cannot and should not end at the foot of Beacon
Hill. Localities, some of them eager to make similar reforms, ought to be freed
to do so.
"One size does not fit all," Menino noted, adding that he
hoped Romney meant it when he talked about "flexibility."
Meanwhile unless the Legislature has some magic formula for
painless budget cutting, it ought to give the governor the authority he needs to do the job in the
most equitable way possible.
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Saturday, January 11, 2003
A Boston Globe editorial
Romney's local raid plan
Point by methodical point, Governor Romney explained to
members of the Massachusetts Municipal Association yesterday why he is seeking special
authority from the Legislature to reduce state aid to cities and towns. The
delivery was smooth and the slides crisp. The message was unconvincing.
Romney anticipates a budget shortfall of $450 million to
$600 million in the fiscal year ending June 30. He proposes to eliminate one-third of the gap by
reducing state aid that cities and towns are scheduled to receive in March and
June. Those funds, say local officials, are crucial to education, public safety, and
public works. In 1989, Governor Dukakis attempted a similar raid, but the
Supreme Judicial Court ruled that a governor's right to impound budget
appropriations does not extend to local aid accounts. Romney's bill would
broaden the impoundment power.
Romney needs to take a step back and survey the local
landscape. Mayors and town officials are eager to help devise a comprehensive strategy to achieve
fiscal balance. Such an approach might include reductions in state aid to cities
and towns, which now stands at $5.5 billion annually. But it should also include
discussions of short-term borrowing by the state to avoid midyear cuts in local
school and public safety budgets. The state's rainy day fund also belongs in the
mix.
Romney's midyear seizure would reduce Boston's local aid
payments by $27 million and could lead to hundreds of layoffs, according to Mayor Menino.
Romney can't just walk away from that damage. If he won't raise state taxes,
he needs to support the efforts of Menino and other elected officials who have
the courage to propose local option taxes on meals and other purchases.
Romney did not stay to answer questions from the local officials, but in an
interview later he said he would not rule out such local levies. "I won't close the
door," he said. "We will study every possibility."
Without local aid cuts, the governor says, he will be forced
to balance the budget on the "backs of our seniors and the poor." But more than 70 percent of
local aid goes to education. Michael Guzinski, town administrator in Blackstone,
was among the many officials looking shellshocked after Romney's speech.
The plan, said Guzinski, would drain roughly $500,000 in the next few months
alone from the school budget, a tremendous wallop in a town of 9,000 that
depends heavily on $10 million in state aid to educate its children.
Romney named Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey to act as
liaison with cities and towns during the fiscal emergency. Several mayors in attendance, including
Michael McGlynn of Medford, said they need to explain the ramifications of
Romney's proposal to him directly.
Romney shouldn't rush to expand his authority to reduce
spending. The real hurry should be to meet promptly with municipal officials to save as much local
aid as possible.
