Governor Level Funds Local Aid

The Governor has proposed to level-fund Ch. 70 (education) and local aid. I say level-fund because that is what is really happening. The "increase" to education funding that will be touted by the administration is not completely accurate. The "increase" is really just a result of shifting the funds from the Federal budget (via Stimulus money) to the State budget.

While I am encouraged by the governor's attempt, I am extremely skeptical about this being possible. Given the shortfall projected in the state's overall budget I will be interested to see what services have been cut to accomodate the increase.

Those who are harmed in the Governor's budget will spend a lot of time lobbying the legislature to restore those cuts...at the expense of local aid.

Let the roller coaster ride that is the state budget process begin.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2010/01/patrick_propose_1.html

When Government cries wolf...

It has become a common belief that government at all levels is filled with patronage and wasteful spending. I can tell you that is not universally true. It is probably the least true at the local level.

However, in Massachussetts, the local level is the only one that voters can actually have a direct input. Many communities have either a representative or open town meeting form of government. This allows residents to vote on nearly every decision (especially fiscal decisions) made for their town. While this is the most democratic format for decisions to be made at the local level, it is also the one place that voters can take out thier anger at the waste and patronage they see in the news.

Massachusetts also has a law called Proposition 2 1/2. This law requires that no city/town property tax revenue can be increased by an aggregate value of 2 1/2% in any given year without a ballot question being approved at the voting booth. In theory, this is a great law. It requires local governments to contain expense growth within 2 1/2% or justify a higher amount to the voters (referred to as an "override vote").

Our state government doesn't have that restriction. In fact, just last August the sales tax was increased from 5% to 6.25% without a ballot question. The sales tax was also expanded to cover items that had previously been excluded...no ballot question there either. No, the Governor and Democratic majority in the legislature told us that they had turned every stone and pinched every penny...there was no reform left to do. There was no choice but to raise taxes.

And now, we see just another example of a rock they missed.

One of the secondary consequences of news reports of wasteful governement is that people tend to dismiss any request for increased funds out of hand. This immediate dismissal is felt most at the local level when instances arise that do require an override question to be placed on the ballot. Its unfortunate because many of the people who always vote "no" on overrides are the same people who, like I, favor smaller/local governement over bigger government.

I would much rather pay more taxes to town hall knowing I can influence how its spent instead of sending more money to the state and federal government so they can create 35 departments that serve the same function. Funny how the Senate President is just realizing that...

Senate president: Consolidate economic agencies to save money

State will pass most of the buck to Cities/Towns

State budget gap could grow from bad to worse - Milford, MA - The Milford Daily News

Posted using ShareThis

The more open about it they are the more of a guarantee it is...

Elected officials always down-play bad news.

• If they say "its not an option right now"...that means its possible.
• If they say "its possible"...its probable.
• If they say "its likely"...its definite!

State Rep. John Fernandes, D-Milford, said current-year budget cuts are inevitable, and warns communities to take care on discretionary spending.

"Local officials need to be cautious in budgeting, and how they handle their financing, because there is so little funding," said Fernandes.

State officials are admitting there is no more rainy day funs or federal stimulus money. They are saying that local aid cuts are likely, so they're definite. Oh, the state says they'll make cuts too.

I'm sure it will be the same across the board, non-targeted, degree of cuts that will only ensure higher inefficiencies (see RMV wait times). What needs to be done are specific reductions that improve the efficiency in state government. There also needs to be a review of the purpose and necessity for all state agencies. Those that are no longer needed or are unsuccessful should be eliminated.

We don't need all state employees to share equally, we need the state beuracracy to be steam-lined.

Until this happens, local governments should not be left holding the bag.

Local schools districts should be left alone

This article inadvertantly speaks to one of the major issues in the Massachusetts education system. Local officials (and residents) have seen their ability to make decisions decrease. The state government should not be mandating how a school should be run. That is the responsibility of the local elected officials and the residents of the community who elect them.

The other major hurdle that forces our local officials into "no-win" situations is the influence of the Massachussets Teachers Association (MTA) on the collective bargaining process. Any school committee member will tell you that it is not the local union representatives that are driving the process, it is the MTA. The involvement of the MTA in the negotiation process of all teacher contracts amounts to a monopoly.

A template contract is used that ensures virtually the same high percentage (6-7% annual) increases for teachers in every district. While the pieces (cost of living, step, lane, longevity) may vary, the aggregate amounts don't vary by much. This forces all school committees to comply, regardless of the economic sustainability, in fear of being uncompetitive to their neighboring districts.

This also takes the decision out of the local teachers' hands. It is the teachers "on the ground" that best understand the realities in a community. It is their co-workers that face being put out of work, and it is their workload that is to be altered. Why are they not the ones with primary influence at the negotiating table?

30 failing schools may face takeover - The Boston Globe

Posted using ShareThis