CLT Update
Monday, March 11, 2002
Despite municipal profligacy, more is never enough
Mayor Ed Lambert has abandoned his oft-stated endeavor to keep a lid on taxes. He now
supports an increase in state levies. The association of mayors, which he heads, is in
agreement. That puts citizens who voted for Clean Elections and lower taxes at
odds not only with legislators, but with the mayors who now find themselves in league with the
tax-and-spend rogues on Beacon Hill....
Look for an arrogant Legislature to wipe out your tax cut and empower itself to
proportionately waste more of your money.
The New Bedford Standard-Times
Mar. 10, 2002
Mayors now in league with rogues on Beacon Hill who tax and spend
By Paul Gauvin
A "rainy day fund" contains about $1.5 billion put
aside during the halcyon days of the 1990s when tax revenues filled the state's cup to overflowing and
lawmakers couldn't spend it fast enough to avoid those nasty surpluses that taxpayers wanted back.
There is another $500 million the state gained from its raid on Big Tobacco. About another $500 million
sits in a health security trust fund.
Before thinking about burdening citizens with new taxes or reneging on a promise to roll the
income tax back to 5 percent, Finneran and lawmakers should look to these funds set aside
for a rainy day....
An Eagle Tribune editorial
Mar. 9, 2002
The rain is now falling
The question now is whether the state and federal
government can step aside and allow the economy to grow without killing the goose that lays the golden
egg. So far, those signs are not as encouraging as the economic data is.
Mayor Edward M. Lambert Jr., president of the Massachusetts Mayors Association, has
called for raising the income tax from 5.3 percent to 5.95 percent, but that would be far too
high and could help choke off future growth in the state, forcing Massachusetts to once again
claim the dreaded "Taxachusetts" tag.
A Fall River Herald News editorial
Mar. 10, 2002
Government should let economy recover
New taxes proposed by Democratic lawmakers would add
$920 a year to the average family's tax bill, and that's reason enough to reject them, said Kevin J.
Sullivan, the state's new administration and finance secretary and a former mayor of Lawrence....
He's also getting used to defending Swift's budget to critics, including the nonprofit
Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, which say her no-taxes stand is unrealistic, and her
plan to defer pension payments, restructure the lottery and use $300 million of the
tobacco settlement, is unsound.
The Lawrence Eagle Tribune
Mar. 8, 2002
Sullivan blasts proposal to raise taxes
Chip Ford's CLT Commentary
Tomorrow is the final hearing of the "House Revenue Group"
(State House, Gardner Auditorium, 10:00 am), at which CLT and CLT activists expect to confront a phalanx of municipal
lobbyists (ie., mayors and selectmen) pleading for higher taxes and more local aid.
The tax-and-spenders' constant bleating fortunately seems to
be falling on a lot of deaf ears, as demonstrated in today's news reports and editorials that follow. Few who are even
casually aware of fiscal events over the past decade are being fooled this time: only those who ceaselessly advocate for more
spending and higher taxes are marching in predictable lockstep.
I've compiled more information on just how well cities and
towns actually are and have been doing throughout the last decade -- despite their best efforts to ignore the elephant in
the middle of their living rooms. I think you'll find these overlooked, inconvenient little facts interesting, and
especially useful if you intend to be at tomorrow's hearing with us. Note that each of the most outspoken municipal
advocates for higher taxes have local budgets that have virtually doubled through the '90s to today, and they've got
millions in "free cash" stashed away for a "rainy day."
Going into FY 2002, the total amount of "free cash" held by
all cities and towns reporting to the Department of Local Services is $471,647,417. The cities of Boston, Brockton,
Haverhill, Lawrence, Quincy and Woburn, and 80 other municipalities, have NOT reported their amounts (they are
not required by law to report it) -- which would increase the actual total.
Framingham Town Manager George P. King, Jr., has called for a
"freeze" of the income tax rollback purportedly to increase local aid by $500 million. In January, the Framingham board of
selectmen sent letters to all other municipal officials across the state seeking their support for the tax increase.
How did Framingham fare during the 90s economic boom years?
FRAMINGHAM - TOTAL REVENUE
| FY |
Tax
Levy |
State
Aid |
Local
Receipts |
All Other
|
Total
Receipts |
| 1990 |
$56,193,456 |
$15,675,724 |
$17,161,226 |
$5,361,660 |
$94,392,066 |
| 1991 |
$58,771,563 |
$14,820,065 |
$17,966,800 |
$4,325,879 |
$95,884,307 |
| 1992 |
$65,087,110 |
$12,580,446 |
$19,200,641 |
$1,826,110 |
$98,694,307 |
| 1993 |
$67,109,295 |
$13,166,721 |
$21,095,705 |
$3,522,140 |
$104,893,861 |
| 1994 |
$70,118,953 |
$13,365,538 |
$22,410,501 |
$5,460,646 |
$111,355,638 |
| 1995 |
$72,930,143 |
$14,235,201 |
$22,503,115 |
$6,129,018 |
$115,797,477 |
| 1996 |
$75,865,944 |
$15,726,225 |
$24,774,381 |
$7,601,186 |
$123,967,736 |
| 1997 |
$79,596,724 |
$16,814,360 |
$29,209,607 |
$8,577,254 |
$134,197,945 |
| 1998 |
$84,581,265 |
$18,135,743 |
$29,259,337 |
$5,965,801 |
$137,942,146 |
| 1999 |
$88,687,937 |
$19,539,734 |
$31,651,590 |
$7,747,965 |
$147,627,226 |
|
2000
|
$93,269,525 |
$22,727,412 |
$32,570,973 |
$5,566,129 |
$154,134,039 |
| 2001 |
$97,906,597 |
$26,100,664 |
$33,854,683 |
$5,316,295 |
$163,178,239 |
| 2002 |
$102,602,969 |
$28,805,007 |
$32,970,158 |
$4,944,823 |
$169,322,957 |
FRAMINGHAM - FREE CASH
| 1990 |
$2,040,538 |
| 1991 |
$2,208,089 |
| 1992 |
-$608,470 |
| 1993 |
$487,463 |
| 1994 |
$1,725,858 |
| 1995 |
$288,019 |
| 1996 |
$4,104,167 |
| 1997 |
$2,117,777 |
| 1998 |
$547,525 |
| 1999 |
$2,491,174 |
| 2000 |
$1,642,918 |
| 2001 |
$1,976,110 |
| 2002 |
$3,233,152 |
Source: Mass. DOR; Division
of Local Services
Fall River Mayor Edward M. Lambert Jr., president of the
Mass. Mayors Association, has called for a return of the income tax rate to 5.95 percent in order to increase local aid.
How did Fall River fare during the 90s economic boom years?
FALL RIVER - TOTAL REVENUE
| FY |
Tax
Levy |
State
Aid |
Local
Receipts |
All Other
|
Total
Receipts |
| 1990 |
$29,022,445 |
$66,359,848 |
$14,744,740 |
$7,130,239 |
$117,257,272 |
| 1991 |
$29,499,350 |
$63,500,240 |
$14,839,200 |
$15,115,530 |
$122,954,320 |
| 1992 |
$31,712,023 |
$59,393,917 |
$15,787,000 |
$10,702,352 |
$117,595,292 |
| 1993 |
$32,815,660 |
$64,049,335 |
$15,145,200 |
$13,135,838 |
$125,146,032 |
| 1994 |
$32,540,612 |
$66,574,115 |
$18,477,212 |
$7,846,934 |
$125,438,873 |
| 1995 |
$32,533,956 |
$72,553,024 |
$22,360,961 |
$6,376,800 |
$133,824,741 |
| 1996 |
$35,722,154 |
$81,771,122 |
$18,513,200 |
$6,915,992 |
$142,922,468 |
| 1997 |
$37,029,219 |
$87,441,680 |
$19,668,934 |
$6,206,694 |
$150,346,527 |
| 1998 |
$37,035,626 |
$92,079,077 |
$21,467,674 |
$5,732,882 |
$156,315,259 |
| 1999 |
$38,583,222 |
$99,897,893 |
$22,825,208 |
$5,460,235 |
$166,766,557 |
| 2000 |
$38,580,419 |
$104,479,604 |
$22,052,118 |
$11,984,560 |
$177,096,702 |
| 2001 |
$38,586,283 |
$108,569,568 |
$29,390,578 |
$13,847,196 |
$190,393,625 |
| 2002 |
$38,583,216 |
$117,949,002 |
$32,389,387 |
$11,243,478 |
$200,165,083 |
FALL RIVER - FREE
CASH
| 1990 |
$8,857,391 |
| 1991 |
$10,882,407 |
| 1992 |
$3,269,560 |
| 1993 |
-$699,368 |
| 1994 |
-$949,744 |
| 1995 |
|
| 1996 |
-$1,495,187 |
| 1997 |
$1,984,534 |
| 1998 |
$3,511,229 |
| 1999 |
$9,390,238 |
| 2000 |
$11,962,511 |
| 2001 |
$9,749,894 |
| 2002 |
$10,569,087 |
Source: Mass. DOR; Division
of Local Services
Natick Selectmen Jeff Stern and Paul McKinley have called for
the repeal of Proposition 2½ so that cities and towns can increase revenue without limits.
How did Natick fare during the 90s economic boom years?
NATICK - TOTAL REVENUE
| FY |
Tax
Levy |
State
Aid |
Local
Receipts |
All Other
|
Total
Receipts |
| 1990 |
$28,506,589 |
$7,572,731 |
$9,384,296 |
$3,186,063 |
$48,649,679 |
| 1991 |
$29,580,338 |
$7,218,225 |
$9,375,000 |
$1,941,253 |
$48,114,816 |
| 1992 |
$30,594,013 |
$6,099,191 |
$9,936,369 |
$1,297,455 |
$47,927,028 |
| 1993 |
$31,566,074 |
$6,356,886 |
$10,155,766 |
$1,302,887 |
$49,381,613 |
| 1994 |
$33,050,076 |
$6,611,718 |
$10,838,603 |
$2,135,729 |
$52,636,126 |
| 1995 |
$34,526,590 |
$6,879,209 |
$10,973,461 |
$3,326,013 |
$55,705,273 |
| 1996 |
$38,640,056 |
$7,272,593 |
$11,086,857 |
$2,009,526 |
$59,009,032 |
| 1997 |
$39,211,030 |
$7,725,665 |
$12,234,625 |
$3,563,332 |
$62,734,652 |
| 1998 |
$43,251,848 |
$8,136,412 |
$13,140,783 |
$3,580,271 |
$68,109,313 |
| 1999 |
$44,996,424 |
$9,315,488 |
$13,834,596 |
$4,644,575 |
$72,791,084 |
| 2000 |
$46,885,381 |
$10,142,059 |
$14,575,363 |
$4,091,516 |
$75,694,320 |
| 2001 |
$49,413,782 |
$11,055,390 |
$15,878,470 |
$5,662,921 |
$82,010,563 |
| 2002 |
$51,549,010 |
$12,198,559 |
$17,727,470 |
$11,409,684 |
$92,884,723 |
NATICK - FREE CASH
| FY |
FREE CASH
|
| 1990 |
$563,348 |
| 1991 |
$394,668 |
| 1992 |
$143,153 |
| 1993 |
$256,598 |
| 1994 |
$804,603 |
| 1995 |
$1,442,721 |
| 1996 |
$1,675,191 |
| 1997 |
$2,131,823 |
| 1998 |
$2,728,405 |
| 1999 |
$3,450,176 |
| 2000 |
$3,431,756 |
| 2001 |
$3,913,775 |
| 2002 |
$3,584,494 |
Source: Mass. DOR; Division
of Local Services
The New Bedford Standard-Times
Sunday, March 10, 2002
Mayors now in league with rogues on Beacon Hill
who tax and spend
By Paul Gauvin
Mayor Ed Lambert has abandoned his oft-stated endeavor to
keep a lid on taxes. He now supports an increase in state levies. The association of mayors, which he heads, is in
agreement. That puts citizens who voted for Clean Elections and lower taxes at odds not
only with legislators, but with the mayors who now find themselves in league with the
tax-and-spend rogues on Beacon Hill.
Politicians tend to ignore the fact that citizens are
constantly bombarded by media stories of economic excesses by state government officials -- their golden parachutes, their
tolerance of well-placed scoundrels ripping off the government one way or another, of the arrogance of
Speaker Tom Finneran, the suspect politicking of would-be governor Tom Birmingham,
the chicanery of Tom Foolery and the economic gobbledygook of Tom Turkey.
Citizens want Clean Elections because they see too much
Dirty Politics. They want to cut taxes because they are constantly exposed to stories about government waste. The Big
Dig is but one humongous example of alleged rip-offs by con artists in league with government.
It's undoubtedly perceived as good strategy for Lambert and
other city leaders to disregard voters and acting Gov. Jane M. Swift by supporting legislators who insist on raising taxes in
response to revenue shortfalls. They pooh-pooh the fact that citizens just lowered taxes by
popular vote. Citizens expected the state and its communities to live within budget.
Taxing Tom Dumb is the easy way out of this mess. Just turn
taxpayers upside down and sweep the money that falls from their pockets. It reminds one of the HMOs covering
Massachusetts. They recently bragged about making substantial profits. That
was easy too. They whacked subscribers for double the premium. Any jackass knows you can bail out of
anything simply by charging the suckers more.
By backing a state tax increase, mayors presume the state
won't cut 10 percent from local aid. That means mayors won't have to endure the political heat of increasing local real
estate taxes or cutting local jobs and services. But the wizened taxpayer will know that mayors
supported a new tax to help themselves out of a political corner. Whether the tax is
local or state, Fall Riverites will have to pay their share.
Prior to the last election, Mayor Lambert knuckled under to
pre-election pressure by teachers for a substantial pay hike -- around 30 percent -- and is now having difficulty
making good on the payment, particularly if there is a reduction in state
aid. It's the kind of hole one digs while hoping that a foothold to climb out of it will be found down the road.
Politicians, and the public, are given to being seduced by
good economic times, only to repeatedly experience -- without ever learning -- that good times don't last; that the economy
is cyclical; that when bad times come, everybody has to pull his or her weight and suffer the
consequences in relative fashion. Take the recent upsurge in unemployment as an example.
As for the mayor's association, Massachusetts has 351 cities
and towns. Of that, only 39 are declared cities. However, there is one city pretending to be a town. That would be
Barnstable on Cape Cod.
In addition to the state's association of 39 or so mayors,
there also exists the Massachusetts Municipal Association, a lobby group that represents all cities and towns that care to
be members.
While towns far outnumber cities -- there are 312 towns --
this state's political muscle is in the cities. Because of large populations in the cities, they send more legislators to
the State House, hence the power of representation over towns.
It will be interesting to see if the MMA, representing
smaller towns, will also back a tax hike. That's because many smaller communities that are experiencing growth have been
greatly shortchanged in local aid, particularly for schools. They have less to lose than cities and may
not be as eager to tax themselves.
Look for an arrogant Legislature to wipe out your tax cut
and empower itself to proportionately waste more of your money.
Return to top
The Lawrence Eagle Tribune
Saturday, March 9, 2002
Editorial
The rain is now falling
OUR VIEW
Massachusetts should use money set aside in a rainy day fund to help blunt the effects of the economic downturn.
While the economists are seeing some bright spots on the
horizon, Massachusetts officials are seeing the worst of the recent economic downturn about to land in the Bay State.
The state's current fiscal year ending June 30 is expected
to be between $500 million and $800 million in the hole. Then things get a whole lot worse: The new fiscal year that begins
July 1 is predicted to come up short by $2 billion.
Just how bad the state's finances will get or exactly what
the fix will be is anyone's guess. One thing looks certain, though: There will be a tax increase, and it will come at a
time when many residents of Massachusetts can afford it least.
House Speaker Thomas M. Finneran, D-Mattapan, and his
lawmakers are also talking about cutting back hard on what the state spends. Finneran told The Eagle-Tribune this week that
he is aiming to cut state spending by $1 billion.
"Everything," he said, "is on the table."
Already, Massachusetts communities have been warned to
expect less state aid. Already, the flow of state money to help cities and towns build new schools has slowed to a crawl.
Lawrence, hoping to lift its high school back into the ranks of the accredited, will have to
wait until at least 2008 to build a badly needed new high school.
We applaud Finneran's vow to cut spending before raising
taxes, and urge him to make good on that. We also applaud Finneran's vow to put all the state's spending on the table.
There ought not to be any sacred cows out there.
In the process, we hope Finneran and the Legislature will
take note of several pools of money they set up for times such as these. A "rainy day fund" contains about $1.5 billion put
aside during the halcyon days of the 1990s when tax revenues filled the state's cup to
overflowing and lawmakers couldn't spend it fast enough to avoid those nasty surpluses that
taxpayers wanted back. There is another $500 million the state gained from its raid on Big
Tobacco. About another $500 million sits in a health security trust fund.
Before thinking about burdening citizens with new taxes or
reneging on a promise to roll the income tax back to 5 percent, Finneran and lawmakers should look to these funds set aside
for a rainy day.
We haven't seen any real rain for quite some time. But as
far as the state budget goes, it's coming down cats and dogs.
Return to top
The Fall River Herald News
Sunday, March 10, 2002
Editorial
Government should let economy recover
Last Friday's report that the nation's unemployment rate had
dropped to 5.5 percent in February took economists by surprise, because they had been anticipating a rise in
unemployment to 6.5 percent throughout the spring.
The news that businesses added 66,000 new workers, after
eliminating jobs for six straight months, was an indication the economic recovery could be a lot stronger than anyone initially
presumed.
The question now is whether the state and federal government
can step aside and allow the economy to grow without killing the goose that lays the golden egg. So far, those signs are
not as encouraging as the economic data is.
At least members of the Washington crowd, in their own
misguided way, are looking to stimulate the economy. The Massachusetts Legislature is heading in the opposite direction,
trying to gauge public opinion about how best to raise taxes. New revenue is needed, they
say, to plug a gap in the state's budget, now rising to the tune of $3 billion.
What lawmakers should resist is a heavy dose of taxation
that inhibits both consumers and businesses in the Bay State. Mayor Edward M. Lambert Jr., president of the Massachusetts
Mayors Association, has called for raising the income tax from 5.3 percent to 5.95 percent,
but that would be far too high and could help choke off future growth in the state, forcing
Massachusetts to once again claim the dreaded "Taxachusetts"
tag.
Recovery appears definitely on the way, and has been
achieved without stimulus from Washington. The direction over the next few months seems clear: trust consumers to keep
the economy afloat, and do nothing to weaken their hand.
Return to top
The Lawrence Eagle Tribune
Friday, March 8, 2002
Sullivan blasts proposal to raise taxes
By Jennifer D. Jordan
Eagle-Tribune Writer
BOSTON -- New taxes proposed by Democratic lawmakers would add
$920 a year to the average family's tax bill, and that's reason enough to reject them, said Kevin J. Sullivan, the
state's new administration and finance secretary and a former mayor of
Lawrence.
"The governor has a philosophical argument with legislators," said Sullivan, a Republican who
started his new job Feb. 15 after three years as the state's secretary of
transportation. "And that's why we need to do everything in our power -- through cuts, a prudent use of resources
and innovative ideas -- to avoid taxes."
Sullivan, 42, who was named to one of Gov. Jane M. Swift's
top-ranking cabinet posts on Feb. 15, said the Department of Revenue analyzed the list of 16 potential new taxes the
House of Representatives Ways & Means Committee proposed last week.
Warning lawmakers of a $2 billion to $3 billion budget
shortfall, Ways and Means Chairman John H. Rogers, D-Norwood, said lawmakers would need to "tax and cut" to cover the
"gargantuan and ghastly" losses in the budget. House Speaker Thomas N. Finneran said $1
billion will be cut from next year's budget.
But Sullivan, who led Lawrence through the last economic
recession in the early 1990s, disagrees.
Sullivan said the income-related taxes, such as postponing
the income tax rollback and halving the personal exemption would add $920 to the tax bill of a four-person family with
two children under age 12, earning $70,000 a year.
"I agree with the governor. The solution is not to tax your
way out of a fiscal crisis," Sullivan said. "We all have to tighten our belts."
The promotion to administration and finance pulls Sullivan
closer to Swift's inner circle as she prepares for a tough election this fall. In his new job, Sullivan oversees 22 state
agencies as well as Swift's $23.5 billion proposed budget.
And this is a hard year to be a budget director.
With a $2 billion gap, lawmakers estimate $1 billion more
has to be cut from the budget, but they disagree where the other $1 billion will come from.
"He's a good guy," said state Rep. Arthur J.
Broadhurst, D-Methuen, who has known Sullivan for 10 years. "But (Sullivan)
has been put into a position in a time when the state has hit its toughest point in a decade. He's in the hot seat in terms
of how he's going to make these difficult recommendations to the governor."
Sullivan was mayor from 1986 to 1993 and then served as
state highway commissioner before becoming transportation secretary.
But Broadhurst also said Sullivan's experience as Lawrence's
mayor during the last economic downturn will serve him well in his new job. His brother, Michael J. Sullivan, is the city's
current mayor.
"I think he's used to the stress of dealing with tough
decisions that have to be made," Broadhurst said. "My only advice is any cuts (he) has to make should be made immediately,
as we're already running a deficit."
Sullivan, talking in his spacious, wood-paneled office this
week, said the state is in better fiscal health than it was during the last recession, with more rainy day reserves, lower
unemployment and stable sales taxes.
"I think there's evidence that by this month, the worst
could be over in terms of capital gains," Sullivan said, referring to depressingly low revenues for the past two months
-- about $260 million below projections. "Better times are coming, but they won't be as brisk as what we
were used to," he warned.
Sullivan appeared calm in his new role, despite the fact the
past three weeks have had a steep learning curve and he and his boss could both be out of jobs next year if Swift loses the
fall election.
"I felt like I was a civilian walking into the Pentagon,"
Sullivan said with a smile.
Sullivan said he's been working long days.
"I really look forward to that hour and 15 minute ride home,
though," said Sullivan, who lives in Merrimac with his wife, Mary Ellen, and children Timmy, 12, and Annie, 9.
He's also getting used to defending Swift's budget to
critics, including the nonprofit Massachusetts Taxpayer Foundation, which say her no-taxes stand is unrealistic, and
her plan to defer pension payments, restructure the lottery and use $300 million of the tobacco
settlement, is unsound.
"Growth itself will come back; the question is when,"
Sullivan said. "This is not the time to panic; it's the time to show leadership, and sometimes that requires we say no to
conventional solutions, like raising taxes."
Several Merrimack Valley lawmakers said Sullivan has the
experience for his new job. But they also hope he won't avoid delivering the bad news about the budget, something
Democrats say the Swift administration has not yet done.
"I think he's a good choice for (Administration and
Finance)," said state Rep. Brian S. Dempsey, D-Haverhill. "But I think not only Kevin but the administration just has to be
honest about what we're facing. Certainly the governor's budget doesn't do that; it's overly
optimistic. With Kevin I expect to see more reality. If we pretend we're not in a crisis, it's
only going to make it worse."
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
|
