I write in response to your January 31, 2007 public
records request to the Office of the Governor seeking copies of certain
budget savings memoranda that the cabinet secretaries submitted on or
about January 26, 2007 . . .
Notwithstanding Lambert, it is the practice of the Office
voluntarily to consider and to respond to public records requests on a
case-by-case basis. In that regard, we have reviewed your request and
determined that it seeks memoranda relating to policy deliberations that are
exempt from production . . .
Response by the Governor's Deputy Chief Counsel
February 5, 2007
To CLT's request for public documents
"It is now a month since Patrick took office as governor. And
what great reforms has this new administration brought to the citizens of the
commonwealth? A good old-fashion
bribing of
the Legislature. Deval has learned that he can get some scraps from the
legislative table, if he offers them a payraise. It is too bad Barbara
Anderson of Citizens for Limited Taxation couldn’t give legislators a
raise, so we could get our promised income tax rollback. I wonder how much Deval
will end up paying them for a little cooperation." --
Holly Robichaud
The Boston Herald
Monday, February 5, 2007
The Monday morning briefing
By Casey Ross
Earmarks in the state budget have long been considered
lawmakers' best friends. They allow local politicians to bring back state money
for specific projects that might otherwise be overlooked. But some argue that
there are items that state tax dollars should not pay for.
"In some communities, the state is paying for something taxpayers didn't plan on
funding. If one town wants a bandstand, why should a taxpayer on the other side
of the state have to pay for it?" said Barbara Anderson, executive
director of Citizens for Limited Taxation....
Earmarks aren't inherently bad, Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts
Taxpayers Foundation, said. The process allows legislators to funnel state money
to specific projects rather than allow the state departments to decide how the
money is spent.
"Every legislator has a right to make decisions about where money should be
spent in his district. On the other hand, it certainly can be and has been
abused. It's really a matter of balance and a matter of priorities," Widmer
said. "It's about the value of a particular project, and that may be in the eye
of the beholder."
Which projects are funded is often based on who is closest to legislative
leadership, and not which is most deserving, Anderson said.
"It benefits legislators who happens to have clout to get it for their community
as opposed to an even distribution of money," Anderson said.
The Berkshire Eagle
Monday, February 5, 2007
A boost for local programs
Earmarks keep state lawmakers connected
If it was a fiscal trial balloon Bourne Selectwoman Linda
Zuern was trying to float last week to augment the town’s annual budgeting, the
air started slipping out of it right away.
Zuern, the board chairwoman, told the cable television audience that “a creative
fund augmentation” might provide a way for taxpayers to regularly contribute
more to the town’s general fund and help chip away at structural deficits
plaguing annual budgets.
Zuern said the money, perhaps a local tax bill check-off, would help fiscal
matters that hamper the town each year when it comes to keeping services with
revenue that doesn’t stretch that far....
Selectman Stephen Mealy said he had recently received his most recent tax bill,
however, and he was not about to send any more money to the town than
necessary....
Zuern, however, said finance director Linda Marzelli is
reviewing the voluntary tax idea. “We could look at it, perhaps in lieu of an
override [of Proposition 2½],” Zuern said. “It might prolong the time that we’d
need for an override.
The Upper Cape Codder
Monday, February 5, 2007
Bourne considers seeking voluntary contributions
Governor Deval Patrick signaled yesterday that he has little
appetite to take on a state policy, one fiercely protected by the state's police
unions, that allows officers to collect tens of thousands of dollars extra each
year for working construction details.
It's "not at the top of my list, to be perfectly candid," Patrick said, in
response to a Globe report that nearly 10 percent of the State Police force
earned more last year than his salary as governor because of detail work....
David Tuerck, executive director of the conservative Beacon Hill Institute . . .
said he found Patrick's reluctance to take on the issue of details to be
disappointing.
"It would be a signal that the state is getting tough on public employee unions,
which is what the state really needs to do to save money," he said....
Eric Kriss, who served as budget chief under Governor Mitt Romney, said it is
"nearly impossible" to change the laws governing the detail policy because
public unions have an iron grip on the State House....
Massachusetts is the only state that requires police officers, rather than
less-expensive flaggers, on nearly all road work sites.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, February 8, 2007
Policy on police details appears safe
Patrick avoiding explosive issue
Dear Gov. Patrick:
You won’t be able to cut much further -- which means you’re likely to be asking
for a tax increase two or three years from now. Then you’ll have the worst of
all possible worlds -- raising taxes just before you run for re-election, with
no time left to make progress on other issues.
But if you asked for an increase now, you’d have three years to use these funds,
so voters could measure the pain of the increase against the benefits of the
extra spending....
Others insist a tax hike will hurt the economy.
Actually, a shortage of skilled workers, soaring home prices and health care
costs, and over-regulation -- not taxes -- are the biggest problems facing
business here....
It’s time for a governor who levels with people about what they want, how much
it will cost, what choices he recommends and why.
The Boston Herald
Friday, February 9, 2007
Gov, tell us we can pay more now or later
By Ed Moscovitch
Patrick said his budget will include “some new
revenue” – he declined to identify its source – but said, “The problem
is that the new revenue is not going to be enough for all the new things
that we want to do this year.”
State tax collections are projected to grow by 3 percent next fiscal
year, while state spending this fiscal year is growing at more than
twice that rate, leaving Patrick and the Legislature to adjust to the
dawning fiscal realities.
State House News Service
Thursday, February 8, 2007
On airwaves, Patrick takes questions from citizens,
talks about his plan
Chip Ford's CLT Commentary
"Together We Can" was the moonbats' mantra that
helped elect Deval Patrick to the governorship. Like his apparent
mentor and former boss, Bill Clinton, Governor Patrick can parse words
with the best of them; smile, talk smoothly, and say nothing of
substance -- as he accomplished throughout the campaign.
Parsing "Together We Can," we now know that the
operative word is "can" -- not will. "Together We
Can" -- but now we learn, Together We Won't. The governor has
decreed that he and his office will not comply with the state's
Public Records Law -- that his exalted position is above needing to
disclose anything to the hoi polloi.
CLT intends to pursue his refusal by filing an appeal
with the supervisor of public records of the Secretary of State's
office. What does the governor fear that must be hidden from taxpayers,
and why?
There goes Michael Widmer, president of the so-called
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, popping off again in defense of
more wasteful government spending -- this time legislative "earmarks"
like gazebos and Victorian streetlights. "It's about the value of
a particular project, and that may be in the eye of the beholder," he
proclaimed this week. "Every legislator has a right to make decisions
about where money should be spent in his district."
Mike, it's not the legislator's money, it's ours!
What a joke MTF has become, an embarrassment to its corporate
membership. Why do the Fat Cats keep him onboard?
I truly hate to pop her "fiscal trial balloon" if
she's serious, but I expect Bourne Selectwoman Linda Zuern's proposed
voluntary property tax check-off would prove just as fruitless as CLT's
has over the years on the state level. There's but a handful of
tax-and-spenders across the state who've put their money where their
mouths are. I doubt very much that the Town of Bourne would fare
any better. But it's smart of her to call their bluff, as we did,
and highlight their hypocrisy.
Michael Widmer's joined-at-the-hip comrade, Ed
Moscovitch, president of Cape Ann Economics, is another longtime
tax-and-spender. [Read more about
Moscovitch over the years from the CLT website.] He and Widmer's
MTF
both opposed Proposition 2½ and just about every
tax cut since, so it's perfectly in character that he should be leading
the charge for higher taxes already.
It appears Widmer and
Moscovitch are back to double-teaming taxpayers. More spending,
higher taxes -- now rather than later. Then they'll be back for
more later after they've spent whatever they can raise now.
And the governor is listening -- already planning
"some new revenue" (notice he doesn't use the "T" word) in the budget
he's soon to reveal -- if he feels like revealing it, I suppose.
Maybe he'll just keep that secret too!
 |
|
Chip Ford |
The Boston Herald
Monday, February 5, 2007
The Monday morning briefing
By Casey Ross
Lawmakers are awaiting Gov. Deval Patrick’s plans for reorganizing state
government, including initiatives to give him greater control over
education policy and independent agencies such as Massport and the
Turnpike Authority. The governor tomorrow will attend his third funeral
in six days for a fallen Bay State soldier, this time paying respects to
21-year-old Army Sgt. Alexander Fuller, killed in action in Iraq.
Deval’s Forecast:
Patrick is facing crunch time on his first budget, but regional meetings
with business leaders will help him control the topic of conversation.
The week ahead looks...Mostly clear, outrage possible
The governor has three weeks to show his cards on next year’s budget,
with critics lining up to pounce if he leans on taxpayers too much or
uses a looming deficit as an excuse to punt on key campaign promises.
The governor will fulfill at least one campaign pledge this week by
reaching out to business leaders in Westport and Springfield, using the
events to highlight plans for transportation upgrades and economic
growth.
The Lone Republican with Holly Robichaud:
It is now a month since Patrick took office as governor. And what great
reforms has this new administration brought to the citizens of the
commonwealth? A good old-fashion bribing of the Legislature. Deval has
learned that he can get some scraps from the legislative table, if he
offers them a payraise. It is too bad Barbara Anderson of
Citizens for Limited Taxation couldn’t give legislators a raise, so
we could get our promised income tax rollback. I wonder how much Deval
will end up paying them for a little cooperation.
The Berkshire Eagle
Monday, February 5, 2007
A boost for local programs
Earmarks keep state lawmakers connected
By Hillary Chabot, Eagle Boston Bureau
The Vietnam Veterans' skating rink in North Adams received $1.2 million
in state money to spruce up the aging building. The proposed cinema
center complex in Pittsfield scored $1 million to jump-start the
process. And Pittsfield nabbed another $50,000 in taxpayer dollars for
an Onota Lake education program.
Earmarks in the state budget have long been considered lawmakers' best
friends. They allow local politicians to bring back state money for
specific projects that might otherwise be overlooked. But some argue
that there are items that state tax dollars should not pay for.
"In some communities, the state is paying for something taxpayers didn't
plan on funding. If one town wants a bandstand, why should a taxpayer on
the other side of the state have to pay for it?" said Barbara
Anderson, executive director of Citizens for Limited Taxation.
Targeting local needs
State Rep. Christopher N. Speranzo, D-Pittsfield, said legislators often
know exactly what projects money is needed for, and the earmarks allow
them to target those needs better than state departments could.
"Earmarks are my way to say, 'Here are a few projects that are very
important to my district and to its economic well-being,' " Speranzo
said.
Gov. Deval L. Patrick promised to cut $735 million in wasteful spending
during his campaign, much of it in earmarks. Earmarks have swelled to
make up $408 million of the fiscal 2006 budget. Patrick's first budget
is due Feb. 28, and he has been mindful of cutting earmarks.
He faces a tough fight from local legislators, however, who view the
items as their bread and butter.
"We may spend a lot of time working on something like universal health
care reform, but the things that get us re-elected are the things that
are earmarked. It's the traffic light on Route 7 in Great Barrington
that gave me a lot of support and convinced voters that I was a credible
legislator in Boston," said state Rep. William "Smitty" Pignatelli.
"People can relate to those earmarks much better than a major health
care initiative."
Patrick's tough stance on reducing pork has already caused friction with
Senate President Robert Travaglini, who threatened to oppose Patrick on
any cuts to legislative projects at a breakfast late last year.
Travaglini quickly made up with Patrick, and the two have since been
careful to focus on cooperation.
"He wants to be helpful, and he wants to work with the governor," said
Ann Dufresne, spokeswoman for Travaglini. Travaglini will have to see
the kind of earmark cuts Patrick makes before he decides how he will
react, Dufresne said.
But the new governor also has sent mixed messages. One of his first acts
as governor was to restore $386 million in emergency cuts former Gov.
Mitt Romney had made. Most of those cuts were earmarks.
"When he restored the cuts Gov. Romney made, he did so because the cuts
reflected a commitment to the legislation which had already been made.
His restoration of those cuts should not be interpreted to mean he is
any less serious to limiting those earmarks in this fiscal year," said
Patrick spokeswoman Cyndi Roy.
Earmarks aren't inherently bad, Michael Widmer, president of the
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said. The process allows legislators
to funnel state money to specific projects rather than allow the state
departments to decide how the money is spent.
"Every legislator has a right to make decisions about where money should
be spent in his district. On the other hand, it certainly can be and has
been abused. It's really a matter of balance and a matter of
priorities," Widmer said. "It's about the value of a particular project,
and that may be in the eye of the beholder."
Which projects are funded is often based on who is closest to
legislative leadership, and not which is most deserving, Anderson said.
"It benefits legislators who happens to have clout to get it for their
community as opposed to an even distribution of money," Anderson said.
The state is facing a slow revenue growth this year, and the funding
shortfall may do Patrick's job for him, Widmer said.
House Speaker Salvatore DiMasi, D-Boston, has already warned legislators
that they shouldn't be expecting money for many projects.
But the tight funding also could have the opposite effect, Widmer said.
"In a tight budget, legislators can't get any funding increases for
local aid, then they're more anxious to direct where money will go,"
Widmer said. "If (Gov. Patrick) vetoes too many, there would be a lot of
conflict. It's going to be a very delicate balance, and the Legislature
has a lot of cards. They control the flow of legislation and they
control the budget."
State Sen. Benjamin B. Downing, D-Pittsfield, believes that, although
earmarks are important, legislators should keep them in check during the
tight budget season.
"We have to look at every single taxpayer dollar we spend and realize
it's not our dollar, it's the taxpayers' dollar. We have a duty to
ensure we spend them in the most effective way possible," Downing said.
The Upper Cape Codder
Monday, February 5, 2007
Bourne considers seeking voluntary contributions
If it was a fiscal trial balloon Bourne Selectwoman Linda Zuern was
trying to float last week to augment the town’s annual budgeting, the
air started slipping out of it right away.
Zuern, the board chairwoman, told the cable television audience that “a
creative fund augmentation” might provide a way for taxpayers to
regularly contribute more to the town’s general fund and help chip away
at structural deficits plaguing annual budgets.
Zuern said the money, perhaps a local tax bill check-off, would help
fiscal matters that hamper the town each year when it comes to keeping
services with revenue that doesn’t stretch that far.
Selectman Stephen Mealy said he had recently received his most recent
tax bill, however, and he was not about to send any more money to the
town than necessary.
He said that for Zuern to suggest that residents send more money to town
coffers – in the wake of “tax bills with hefty increases” — could
jeopardize the status of springtime scholarships.
Zuern, however, said finance director Linda Marzelli is reviewing the
voluntary tax idea. “We could look at it, perhaps in lieu of an override
[of Proposition 2½],” Zuern said. “It might prolong the time that we’d
need for an override.
“A few dollars here and there,” Zuern said. “Perhaps an additional $20
with every tax quarter; it might help.”
Zuern said the idea might also especially resonate with people who can
afford their taxes and more. Mealy agreed it might be worthwhile to ask
people what they think about the idea. “It’s good to ask the question,”
he said.
Selectman John Harrington, who is not seeking reelection in April, said
the board might get to the point where the budget could support “a
community growth person” who would solicit large donations. He said a
fund might be established with the interest each year being used for
“dedicated purposes.”
Selectmen have been wrestling with an estimated $800,000 deficit in
planning for fiscal 2008. Town Administrator Thomas Guerino has
recommended using reserve funds next year and 2009 and then forwarding
an override request in 2010 to keep pace with services and their
escalating costs.
The Boston Globe
Thursday, February 8, 2007
Policy on police details appears safe
Patrick avoiding explosive issue
By Lisa Wangsness, Globe Staff
Governor Deval Patrick signaled yesterday that he has little appetite to
take on a state policy, one fiercely protected by the state's police
unions, that allows officers to collect tens of thousands of dollars
extra each year for working construction details.
It's "not at the top of my list, to be perfectly candid," Patrick said,
in response to a Globe report that nearly 10 percent of the State Police
force earned more last year than his salary as governor because of
detail work.
Patrick said he understands concerns about the high paychecks, but
downplayed the idea that the state could save much money by changing the
detail policy, which automatically assigns police to most public and
private road and utility work sites. He said the cost of the details is
more of a concern for private construction businesses, who must pay the
officers a higher wage than civilian flaggers earn.
A Patrick spokesman said later that the governor was speaking mostly
about local police details, which have less of an impact on state
coffers than the State Police details.
The Globe report found that State Police officers make millions of
dollars a year from state projects, $6.1 million on Big Dig details and
$7.2 million on Massachusetts Port Authority details in 2006.
Utility companies pass the cost of the details along to ratepayers, said
David Tuerck, executive director of the conservative Beacon Hill
Institute, and the state is a large consumer of electricity and
telecommunications services.
Tuerck said he found Patrick's reluctance to take on the issue of
details to be disappointing.
"It would be a signal that the state is getting tough on public employee
unions, which is what the state really needs to do to save money," he
said.
Kyle Sullivan, Patrick's press secretary, said later that the governor
has not ruled out reviewing the detail policy later in his term.
"The governor is focused on his top priorities of writing the state
budget, reorganizing government, and putting together a comprehensive
education plan for Massachusetts," Sullivan said. "This focus on these
priorities does not foreclose the possibility of looking at the police
detail issue in the future."
In 1992, Governor William F. Weld proposed legislation to replace police
details with flaggers, prompting some 800 police officers to picket the
State House. Weld gave up.
"It's just clear we're not going to get anywhere on that issue," he told
the Globe several years later.
Eric Kriss, who served as budget chief under Governor Mitt Romney, said
it is "nearly impossible" to change the laws governing the detail policy
because public unions have an iron grip on the State House.
But Robert Haynes, president of the Massachusetts AFL-CIO, countered
that unions across the state "will do whatever it takes to make our
workforce more productive." The detail policy, he said, exists to ensure
the safety of workers on dangerous job sites.
Patrick was swept into office with strong support from unions, including
the International Brotherhood of Police Officers. The State Police
Association of Massachusetts, however, endorsed his Republican opponent,
Kerry Healey.
Yesterday, the president of the State Police union, John Coflesky,
praised Patrick for declining to take on the detail issue. He said that
replacing police with flaggers would not save much money and that there
would be a public safety cost.
"I know how construction people feel," he said. "They would much rather
have a state trooper or local police officer standing at their detail
with cruisers and lights and first-responder capabilities and radios."
Massachusetts is the only state that requires police officers, rather
than less-expensive flaggers, on nearly all road work sites.
Addressing a luncheon of more than 400 Southeastern Massachusetts
business people yesterday, Patrick outlined a few of his more immediate
priorities.
He said his economic development cabinet is on the verge of persuading a
renewable energy company to put aside its plans to expand out of state
and to add 1,000 jobs in Massachusetts.
The governor also said he plans to create a commission to study what
outcomes the state wants from its public education system and how to
make it more "seamless." The group would explore how much its proposals
would cost and how to pay for them.
In the next week or two, he said, he will introduce legislation that
would give him authority over areas of state government that he
otherwise could not control for another three years.
He was not specific, but a previous Globe report said that Patrick was
interested in gaining control of high-profile boards such as the
Massachusetts Turnpike Authority and those that oversee education and
economic development.
"Give me the tools, and I will do the job," he said.
The Boston Herald
Friday, February 9, 2007
Gov, tell us we can pay more now or later
By Ed Moscovitch
Dear Gov. Patrick:
The consensus revenue forecast for the state is 3 percent growth; barely
half the 5 percent to 6 percent the Taxpayers Foundation tells us it
takes just to keep doing what we’re already doing. Your stated intent is
to balance the budget without taxes, presumably by scrounging together
cuts you’d rather not make. Before you do this, you should give thought
to asking for more taxes now. Here’s why:
It looks like revenue growth will stay below 6 percent for the next two
budget years. We still haven’t restored previous cuts. In higher
education, public health and environmental programs, spending in the
current budget year has fallen in actual dollars, never mind adjusted
for inflation. And state aid is still less than in 2001 for many cities
and towns.
You won’t be able to cut much further -- which means you’re likely to be
asking for a tax increase two or three years from now. Then you’ll have
the worst of all possible worlds -- raising taxes just before you run
for re-election, with no time left to make progress on other issues.
But if you asked for an increase now, you’d have three years to use
these funds, so voters could measure the pain of the increase against
the benefits of the extra spending.
What are the objections?
Well, people don’t want higher taxes. Of course they don’t! But they
also don’t want their local firehouse closed, teachers laid off or
library hours limited. And they expect to be admitted to a hospital if
they need care, regardless of whether they have insurance.
In short, you can’t give the people all they want. You can, however,
decide which part of what they want you are going to give them.
Others insist a tax hike will hurt the economy.
Actually, a shortage of skilled workers, soaring home prices and health
care costs, and over-regulation -- not taxes -- are the biggest problems
facing business here.
Our state colleges and universities are underfunded by $400 million; do
you want to put off addressing this?
Housing costs and business regulation are local as well as state issues.
You can approach cities and towns with a grand bargain: You’ll take the
politically difficult step of raising state revenues if they’ll adopt
zoning, licensing and other regulatory practices that will lead to more
vigorous home construction and allow businesses to open or expand
facilities as easily here as they do in competing states.
You’ll also be in a position to ensure cities and towns receive extra
aid for the cost of educating the extra children coming to their schools
from new developments.
Of course, you should work on efficiency. Start by letting cities and
towns tap into the state’s health plan for their own workers; that will
save local governments tens of millions of dollars.
Every administration has looked for waste and inefficiency. You’re not
going to find the $1 billion a year you’ll need to keep current programs
going, or the $2 billion or $3 billion you’ll need to carry out all of
the promises you ran on.
And don’t count on revenue growth. If revenue started growing at 10
percent two years from now, you’d have eliminated the current gap by the
last year of your term -- assuming no additional costs from our new
health care plan. But if we’ve had only two years of 10 percent growth
since Mike Dukakis left office, how likely are three years in a row of
such growth?
It’s time for a governor who levels with people about what they want,
how much it will cost, what choices he recommends and why.
Ed Moscovitch is president of Cape Ann Economics.
State House News Service
Thursday, February 8, 2007
On airwaves, Patrick takes questions from citizens,
talks about his plan
By Michael Norton
Gov. Deval Patrick is preparing legislation targeting duplication and
waste in state government, eyeing budget cuts in his spending plan due
out later this month, and planning to comprehensively examine the costs
of public education.
With more than a month under his belt as governor, Patrick elaborated on
his work so far, and hinted at upcoming policy plans, while responding
directly for an hour to radio talk show callers, covering topics ranging
from police details to activities for teens and the treatment of the
parties behind the last week’s guerrilla marketing fiasco.
During his first monthly “Ask the Governor” segment on WTKK-FM, Patrick
bantered with hosts Jim Braude and Margery Eagan about cooking lobsters
and the secret recipe for Coke, and fielded calls from the people who
identified themselves simply as Anita from the western suburbs, Sean in
the car, and Sonya from North Andover.
Commenting on deliberations leading up to the filing of his first budget
later this month, Patrick hinted at budget cuts on the horizon. “We had
to trim in order to try to close that one billion dollar gap,” he said.
Patrick said his budget will include “some new revenue” – he declined to
identify its source – but said, “The problem is that the new revenue is
not going to be enough for all the new things that we want to do this
year.”
State tax collections are projected to grow by 3 percent next fiscal
year, while state spending this fiscal year is growing at more than
twice that rate, leaving Patrick and the Legislature to adjust to the
dawning fiscal realities.
The governor said his budget will include plans for up to 250 new police
officers, an expansion of both the size and scope of property tax breaks
now available only to seniors, some increases in local aid, and a plan
to allow cities and towns to roll their health plans into plans managed
by the state Group Insurance Commission.
He endorsed “zero-based budgeting,” questioning the perennial exercise
of building on spending and revenue levels and making them match up, but
said budget reforms will take time. Until budgets are built from scratch
and based on whether agencies are meeting missions, state leaders will
not know “where the big savings are,” Patrick said.
Saying “there’s a lot of duplication” in state government, Patrick said
much of the state’s workload has been delegated to boards, commissions,
and quasi-independent agencies. “There are 900 of them right now,”
Patrick said. “It’s just not organized in the most efficient way,”
Patrick said. “I want to get at those and do it surgically.”
Patrick said his Administration and Finance Secretary, Leslie Kirwan,
sits on 26 boards and Housing and Economic Development Secretary Dan
O’Connell is required by state law to sit on 22 boards. “There is
overlap. There is duplication. And there is waste on account of that,
not because people mean ill.”
A bill addressing duplication will be filed “over the next few weeks,”
Patrick said.
The next “Ask the Governor” show is scheduled for March 6.
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
