CLT
UPDATE
Friday, December 17, 2004
Promises, promises:
"Live by the sword, die by the sword"
The Romney administration Tuesday launched a process to re-evaluate the necessity of the last three major Big Dig transit, but dozens of state lawmakers, city officials, and residents called for an end to the process before it goes any further....
"An ounce of performance is worth pounds and pounds of promises," said Sen. Jarrett Barrios (D-Cambridge) quoting Mae West. "We've been waiting 14 years for you to keep your promise."
State House News Service
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
Resistance strong as bid to revisit
Big Dig transit commitments begins
It's appalling that more than a decade after education reform - and its requisite spending of billions of dollars - that Sen. Jarrett Barrios (D-Cambridge) and many of his colleagues would respond to districts failing to meet higher standards by saying, in effect, "Give them more."
A Boston Herald editorial
Thursday, December 16, 2004
Barrios' stupid idea
This is starting to look like a done deal.
Or a bag job, as the case may be.
And on the question of the University of Massachusetts buying a law school for short money up front, it's worth asking what bag the big money will come from when it's needed down the road....
The Boston Herald
Thursday, December 16, 2004
Trust UMass? Funding could raise objections
By Cosmo Macero Jr.
The University of Massachusetts trustees will meet Tuesday in a special session to push through a plan for the acquisition of an unaccredited law school, rejecting the protests of some board members who say that they are being stampeded into approving the plan without a full vetting....
Boyle and other critics say Karam and other proponents have never clearly explained how the university can get the law school up to ABA standards for accreditation without huge expenditures of public funds. Critics say it could cost tens of millions of dollars.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, December 16, 2004
UMass to vote on acquiring law school
Trustees to meet in special session
Some key players involved in the controversial University of Massachusetts plan to buy a troubled law school have had a hand in another big South Coast project: the failed New Bedford aquarium....
The Oceanarium was billed as a way to get New Bedford on the map, and it did, but for the millions of dollars spent on a dream aquarium museum that was never built.
The Boston Herald
Friday, December 17, 2004
Prospective law school bigs couldn't build a fish tank
The piper has yet to be paid. Modest good news on the state's revenue front is like getting a small surprise bonus at the end of the year. It's a plus to be sure, but somehow that suddenly fattened wallet never comes close to paying for the holiday spending spree, never mind dealing with those unexpected expenses in the year ahead....
These factors alone should cloud anyone's vision of the dawning of a fiscally carefree era. And there are plenty of promises being made on Beacon Hill which ought to be offered, as well as taken, with a grain of salt. The price tag for universal pre-school? Some $1 billion. Universal health care? About $300 million to $600 million. And these are just the big ticket items that don't take into account the myriad of smaller programs which some lawmaker or state agency head thinks we taxpayers simply can't do without.
A Boston Herald editorial
Wednesday, December 8, 2004
Good revenue news no cause for spree
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary
"Those who live by the sword, die by the
sword" is sometimes attributed to Shakespeare's "Hamlet."
Actually it originated even further back, from the Bible, Matthew 26:52 -- "Jesus said to him, 'Put your sword back in its place, for all those who take up the sword perish by the
sword.'"
State Sen. Jarrett Barrios (D-Cambridge) has yet to
appreciate its implication, the warning it carries.
Jarrett Barrios, while a state representative in
2002, voted to freeze the voters' income tax rollback -- steamrolling
over democracy and again breaking a promise the Legislature made in
1989, the promise that its income tax hike would be only
"temporary." [See: "Was
it a promise or wasn't it?"] He voted for the biggest tax
increase in state history, he joined in giving voters the traditional
Beacon Hill middle-finger salute. A promise made fifteen years ago
meant nothing to him, but one made more recently -- one he now
champions -- is somehow, different.
He thinks more recent promises should mean
something -- because he wants something.
Apparently he is ignoring the echoes emanating from
his willful treachery: "One legislature can't hold another to its
promise" -- "Things have changed" -- "We'll resume
it once the economy becomes stronger" -- "A new
formula" -- "Unmet needs ..."
By 1990, the Big Dig expense had only slightly
grown, relatively, from the $2.6 billion taxpayers were promised
it would cost them. Besides leaking tunnels and shoddy work, we're now
looking at the bottom line easily climbing to over $15 billion, its
next benchmark in a long history of "cost overruns." The
feds today have even threatened to withhold $81 million in federal
funds to the state over to this fiasco.
But Barrios thinks the promised "outstanding projects" approved in 1990
"as a condition of the planning and construction of the Central Artery
Project" must be kept -- unlike other promises made and broken to us mere taxpayers and
voters, in
part due to the ethically-challenged senator.
Sen. Barrios' ally Phil Warbur, president of the Conservation Law
Foundation, asserted: "You found $15 billion to fund the Big Dig. You're going to have to find funding for these projects
too."
What happened to "One legislature can't hold another to its
promise" -- "Things have changed" -- "We'll resume
it once the economy becomes stronger" -- "A new
formula" -- "Unmet needs ..."?
First things first.
How about instead: "You found $15
billion to fund the Big Dig. It's time to first keep your older
promise and roll back the income tax to 5 percent. That won't cost
$12.6 billion, but only then can we honestly address the next
broken promise and any that followed."
No, not Sen. Barrios, D-Peoples Republic of
Cambridge, never. He wants as much of our money as he can get his grubby
hands on -- then more whatever it takes. He believes in cavalierly breaking promises
when they don't suit his agenda. Now he even wants to transfer more of
our money to the teachers union while he has it to spend.
Jarrett Barrios: state senator, shameless
hypocrite, "Hamlet on the Charles." Live by the
broken promise, die by the broken promise.
*
*
*
Meanwhile, we've also got to keep our eye on another ring in Bacon Hill's three-ring circus.
"Ladies, gentlemen, and rubes -- in the center
ring watch the next taxpayer boondoggle unfold!"
Another apparently critical "unmet need"
has just been discovered. We don't have enough lawyers you know, so
taxpayers must immediately subsidize this obvious shortcoming! Some
think it's a bargain at mere millions more of our dollars; that's if
even with our money they can convince the American Bar Association to
recognize a failed law school it has so far refused to accredit. Hey,
if all else fails we can take Sen. Barrios' sage advice and just keep
throwing more taxpayer money at failure.
Because The Connected said it will be so, we got
their "$2.6 billion" Big Dig -- so why can't we have a state-run failed
law school too? Without a doubt it will also be just as "on time
and on budget." All The Connected have to do is buy it
with other people's money,
take it over, and it's ours in sickness and in health until death do us
part. Once we taxpayers own it there will be no turning back, we're committed.
There never is any turning back, not once the hole is dug for us and needs to be
constantly filled.
Which demonstrates why we certainly can't afford
the voters' tax rollback mandate yet, or ever.
More Is Never Enough ("It's MINE now!")
and never will be.
|
|
|
Chip Ford |
State House News Service
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
Resistance strong as bid to revisit
Big Dig transit commitments begins
By Cyndi Roy
The Romney administration Tuesday launched a process to re-evaluate the necessity of the last three major Big Dig transit, but dozens of state lawmakers, city officials, and residents called for an end to the process before it goes any further.
The outstanding commitments are the Green Line Extension to Medford Hillside, the Red-Blue Line Connector and the restoration of streetcar service to the Arborway in Jamaica Plain. The projects were approved in 1990 as a condition of the planning and construction of the Central Artery Project.
State transportation and environmental officials held the first of several public hearings in a packed State House auditorium to determine whether to proceed with the projects or substitute transit plans that may cost less and produce better air quality.
"After 15 years, a lot has happened at the MBTA, in transportation planning and in the Commonwealth," said Transportation Secretary Daniel
Grabauskas. "We need to examine these three commitments as well as other projects through the lens of the last 15 years so the Commonwealth can use its resources to build the best transit projects while meeting its transit requirements."
The three projects carry a combined estimated cost of $650 million, but Executive Office of Transportation spokesman John Carlisle said the estimates are conservative "placeholders" and said the actual costs could "well exceed $1 billion."
Those who want to see the projects move forward accused the administration of starting the multi-layered process in order to further delay construction.
"An ounce of performance is worth pounds and pounds of promises," said Sen. Jarrett Barrios (D-Cambridge) quoting Mae West. "We've been waiting 14 years for you to keep your promise."
Officials from the Department of Environmental Protection, Executive Office of Transportation, the federal Environmental Protection Agency and area planning organizations will all be involved in a series of hearings and recommendations in the next four to five months.
Barrios, the first of more than 70 people scheduled to speak, called the meeting "illegitimate and ill-advised," and said the terms of the contract signed between the MBTA and the state require the state to determine that scheduled projects are unfeasible before discussing any potential substitutions.
Officials did not respond to comments or questions from speakers, but EOT spokesman John Carlisle said it was too early for the department to determine the projects' feasibility or potential solutions.
"This is just the beginning," he said. "We haven't gotten that far."
The projects in question affect hundreds of thousands of residents from some the area's largest cities.
The Green Line Extension would extend the Green Line from Lechmere to Medford Hillside, adding six new stations, including stops in Somerville and Medford. Most of those who spoke in the first few hours of the hearing Tuesday urged continuation of the Green Line extension, saying Somerville residents would benefit from expanded public transportation after years of negative effects from the Big Dig. Somerville residents suffer from high levels of air pollution, they said.
"It's too late to begin this process now that you've finished all but three projects," said Rep. Patricia Jehlen (D-Somerville). "The residents of Somerville have already paid for this. We've paid in taxes, double fares, with worse health, shortened lives, limited access to our streets, and in forgone economic development."
The Red-Blue Line Connector would connect the Blue Line at Bowdoin Street in Boston to the
Charles/MGH stop on the Red Line.
The Arborway Restoration is restoration of streetcar service in the Jamaica Plain Arborway corridor from Heath Street to Forest Hills Station. The plan has been sidetracked several times over the past 10 years, but advocates continue to push for full restoration.
"Really, I'm not sure why we're here," said Sen. Diane Wilkerson (D-Boston). "My understanding was that we were ready to go on this project."
Several speakers told Grabauskas, DEP Commissioner Robert Golledge, and other administration officials that they should prepare to be sued if they do not move forward with the projects as they are included in the state contract.
"We will be filing suit in early January to demand that these commitments be honored," said Phil
Warbur, president of the Conservation Law Foundation. "You found $15 billion to fund the Big Dig. You're going to have to find funding for these projects too."
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Thursday, December 16, 2004
A Boston Herald editorial
Barrios' stupid idea
Creating a new legislative commission to determine how much additional money to throw at failing public schools is the dumbest idea to come across our desk lately. And that's saying something.
It's appalling that more than a decade after education reform - and its requisite spending of billions of dollars - that Sen. Jarrett Barrios (D-Cambridge) and many of his colleagues would respond to districts failing to meet higher standards by saying, in effect, "Give them more."
Education Committee Chairman Sen. Bob Antonioni (D-Leominster) doesn't so reflexively carry the teachers unions' water. There isn't "oodles" of extra cash to spend, he said, and "accountability and redirecting of existing resources" should be the priority if the Supreme Judicial Court rules the state isn't meeting its public education obligation.
Barrios may think he's getting ahead of the curve by setting up a school funding panel before the SJC decision, but by doing so, he's proving how hopelessly behind it he remains.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Thursday, December 16, 2004
Trust UMass? Funding could raise objections
By Cosmo Macero Jr.
This is starting to look like a done deal.
Or a bag job, as the case may be.
And on the question of the University of Massachusetts buying a law school for short money up front, it's worth asking what bag the big money will come from when it's needed down the road.
Just don't count on your Minutemen trustees posing the tough questions next Tuesday.
For the higher education equivalent of picking up the payments on a slightly used mid-sized sedan,
UMass-Dartmouth is fixing to absorb the Southern New England School of Law and all its unaccredited trappings.
And everyone from House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi (D-Boston) to former state Sen. William Q. "Biff" MacLean seems to be pulling levers to make it happen.
"He's like a lot of people in this region," UMass-Dartmouth spokesman John Hoey was saying yesterday of MacLean, who lives in Fairhaven, and who was recently spotted huddling with DiMasi and several supporters of a UMass law school. "I'm sure he's among the hundreds of advocates for this proposal in this region."
MacLean, who could not be reached last night, has also been calling UMass trustees.
But really, is this the kind of crowd to deny William Bulger one last victory?
After all, it was Bulger - during his tenure as UMass president - who helped create the off-budget funding mechanism for UMass Online "distance learning" that is the model for the law school scheme.
An independent trust, outside the parameters of legislative tinkering, funds the university's online education programs.
Ditto for UMass' long-established continuing education offerings.
Now a similar trust is envisioned as the backbone for the UMass law school.
The big question: Where is all the money going to come from?
Hoey suggests "growth in enrollment" will provide ample bounty to support operations once UMass acquires
SNESL.
"Right now with 250 students, the law school has a $350,000 operating surplus on a $4.5 million budget," he said. "The facility has the capacity to easily handle 450 students."
Meanwhile, UMass-Dartmouth Chancellor Jean MacCormack, in an October interview with the New Bedford Standard Times, said the school was putting "$1 million a year into its reserve fund."
To which an inquiring trustee might ask: Oh, really?
Some skeptics are wondering if "slush" might be the more appropriate modifier.
One thing is clear: Big money is needed to win accreditation from the American Bar Association - a good deal more than the $600,000 UMass officials say they need.
"All the big costs of accreditation have (already) been expended," Hoey says.
That must be why MacCormack is socking away $1 million a year - and from God knows where, to boot.
A good auditor needs to ask whether money from UMass' other off-the-books trusts are being diverted to Mr. Bulger's final project. A project, no doubt, entrusted to Bulger lackey Jim Julian and the heir to the president's throne, Jack Wilson.
A fact worth remembering: Wilson was brought into the UMass fold specifically to oversee UMass Online. So he knows his way around the trust and its books.
Hoey insists there is no way UMass Online funds are being used for the law school effort. But the continuing education trust?
"I'm sure if we decide to make a one-time investment, you can use those dollars," he said yesterday.
Is this deal starting to stink?
Or is it just UMass business as usual?
Return to top
The Boston Globe
Thursday, December 16, 2004
UMass to vote on acquiring law school
Trustees to meet in special session
By Frank Phillips, Globe Staff
The University of Massachusetts trustees will meet Tuesday in a special session to push through a plan for the acquisition of an unaccredited law school, rejecting the protests of some board members who say that they are being stampeded into approving the plan without a full vetting.
Chairman James Karam, a Fall River businessman and a leader of the drive for UMass-Dartmouth to take over nearby Southern New England School of Law, said he is confident that a majority of the board will back the acquisition plan, which has sparked a huge battle on Beacon Hill, often behind the scenes, and among politically connected private law schools.
"A large majority of the board feels that action should be taken on this," Karam said. "We couldn't wait."
Karam said the unusual process of calling a special meeting is necessary because of the tight schedule to get the deal done. He said that the university wanted to move quickly to get the plan before the state Board of Higher Education at its February meeting. The board plans to take a lengthy review of the proposal.
But some UMass board members opposed to the plan and other critics say the proponents, led by Karam and UMass president Jack Wilson, have for weeks conducted a high-pressure sales pitch, using dubious facts to back up their proposal, failing to seek an independent review of the plan, and denying board members access to supporting documents.
"I object to such a hasty meeting with so little notice," trustee Larry F. Boyle said in an e-mail to his colleagues yesterday. He cited what he called "misrepresentations" in the proposal and the refusal of the law school to provide trustees with an American Bar Association accreditation review. "There is no reason we can't meet after the first of the year," he said.
Boyle and other critics say Karam and other proponents have never clearly explained how the university can get the law school up to ABA standards for accreditation without huge expenditures of public funds. Critics say it could cost tens of millions of dollars.
"We have never had an objective review of the strengths and weaknesses of this school and what it will take to achieve ABA accreditation," Boyle said in an e-mail to the Globe.
Karam said that the majority of board members support the plan, and that many of them -- leaders of major corporations or financial managers -- have concluded that the financial plan is sound. He said that it would cost taxpayers $650,000, and that the university would obtain a facility worth nearly $10 million, plus $2 million in reserves. He said the plan will not cost taxpayers more than the initial acquisition.
Another trustee, Robert B. McCarthy, the president of the Massachusetts Firefighters Association, said he supports the concept of the law school but was not happy with the decision to vote on it next week. "I wish it was not happening so quickly," McCarthy said.
In calling for the session, Karam is bringing to a head an effort that has sparked an intense struggle pitting the university and the southeastern legislative delegation against officials at some of the state's private law schools. Many of the private schools serve minority and blue-collar populations.
The private law schools, including Suffolk University and the New England School of Law, have hired some of Boston's top public relations consultants and strategists to spin the media and influence public officials. The lineup includes George Regan, a major Boston public relations impresario who is under contract with Suffolk, and Rob Gray, a former top gubernatorial aide who is working for New England School of Law. Also handling some lobbying chores for Suffolk is former Senate assistant majority leader John Brennan.
UMass-Dartmouth has hired Ray Howell, a former state Republican operative. Former Suffolk district attorney Ralph Martin stepped in recently to try to broker a compromise, but the private law schools rejected the effort.
The political machinations are intense. Many members of the Legislature, including House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, received their law degrees at Suffolk University, and the school has maintained close ties to the state's political leaders. But the move by the university to bypass the Legislature has rankled some influential members. House Ways and Means chairman John Rogers, a Norwood Democrat and Suffolk Law School graduate, several weeks ago warned the university that it should bring the proposal to Beacon Hill for a public vetting and approval.
Karam said he would not have called for the meeting Tuesday if he felt the university would damage its relationship with the Legislature. "I would not be bringing this
initiative forward if I thought I was burning bridges to the leadership in both the House and Senate," he said.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Friday, December 17, 2004
Prospective law school bigs couldn't build a fish tank
By Kevin Rothstein
Some key players involved in the controversial University of Massachusetts plan to buy a troubled law school have had a hand in another big South Coast project: the failed New Bedford aquarium.
UMass at Dartmouth Chancellor Jean F. MacCormack, who has been pushing to take over the Southern New England School of Law, is also vice chairwoman of the New Bedford Oceanarium Board of Trustees.
And two Oceanarium board members also serve on the board of the unaccredited Southern New England School of Law: Margaret D. Xifaras and John K. Bullard, who was mayor of New Bedford when the law school moved out of the city and into its suburban Dartmouth digs.
The Oceanarium was billed as a way to get New Bedford on the map, and it did, but for the millions of dollars spent on a dream aquarium museum that was never built. Inspector general and state auditor reports on questionable contracts and lax oversight harpooned the plans for the aquarium. The Oceanarium board now provides education programs with federal grant money, said UMass-Dartmouth spokesman John Hoey.
"What would be unusual about the civic leaders of the region serving on the major boards of the region?" Hoey asked.
The ties between UMass-Dartmouth and the Oceanarium run deeper. The school gave the aquarium $3 million in exchange for promises to develop education and research programs with the school.
Hoey said UMass-Dartmouth's operation, not the Oceanarium, should be used to evaluate the merger, which UMass trustees will likely approve next week.
The merger will then undergo another review by the Board of Higher Education.
Return to top
The Boston Herald
Wednesday, December 8, 2004
A Boston Herald editorial
Good revenue news no cause for spree
The piper has yet to be paid. Modest good news on the state's revenue front is like getting a small surprise bonus at the end of the year. It's a plus to be sure, but somehow that suddenly fattened wallet never comes close to paying for the holiday spending spree, never mind dealing with those unexpected expenses in the year ahead.
So caution ought to be the prevailing sentiment on Beacon Hill as the Romney administration and lawmakers begin their annual budget dance.
"We are starting to get back on our feet," said Senate Ways and Means Committee Chairwoman Therese Murray (D-Plymouth). "But the crisis has not passed."
Indeed, there are plenty of reasons to believe the state is simply in the eye of the storm.
Before the new revenue forecasts were presented at a State House hearing Monday (projecting 3.5 percent to 5 percent growth over 18 months), the budget deficit was thought to be in the neighborhood of $900 million. With the added $300 million or so now predicted? Well, you can do the math.
There are also plenty of variables which could put a huge crimp in lawmakers' plans to add money for their pet programs. The Supreme Judicial Court has yet to rule on the landmark education equity funding case which could cost as much as $2 billion in the long run. The SJC also will decide whether the state's response to an earlier ruling invalidating the date set for collection of a higher capital gains tax rate is adequate. Its ruling could require an additional $250 million in tax refunds.
A squabble with the federal government over Medicaid reimbursements has put some $600 million the state collects at risk. And a school construction reform measure passed last year means 20 percent of the sales tax will be earmarked for building schools (on top of 20 percent already directed to the
MBTA).
These factors alone should cloud anyone's vision of the dawning of a fiscally carefree era. And there are plenty of promises being made on Beacon Hill which ought to be offered, as well as taken, with a grain of salt. The price tag for universal pre-school? Some $1 billion. Universal health care? About $300 million to $600 million. And these are just the big ticket items that don't take into account the myriad of smaller programs which some lawmaker or state agency head thinks we taxpayers simply can't do without.
It's enough to make our head hurt - and our wallet feel pretty thin.
Return to top
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or
payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For
more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
|