A roundup of reactions to Chafee’s new municipal relief bills
Josh Barro of Forbes argues Chafee’s embrace of far-reaching changes to how cash-strapped municipal governments operate is part of a larger trend:
Chafee is coming out for mandate reform for the same reason that mayors like Chicago’s Rahm Emanuel and Los Angeles’s Antonio Villaraigosa are aggressively pushing pension reform. A majority of the typical local government budget consists of compensation costs. States and localities face significant political and economic barriers to collecting new revenue. When budgets get squeezed, the practical choice is often between reining in compensation costs per employee or cutting back on service delivery.
For politicians who care about providing high-quality government services, public employee compensation reforms have become the best available option.
Bob Plain of Rhode Island’s Future thinks I missed a crucial distinction between Chafee’s ideas and Carcieri’s:
[T]he big difference is Chafee’s bottom-up approach. Carcieri’s proposal was a blanket exemption to every municipality and Chafee’s is need-based. RI Future has held the former governor’s feet to the fire for cutting so much money from cities and towns that had so little. So did Chafee earlier this week.
Here’s hoping that Chafee’s proposal sparks a big debate in the General Assembly about the disparity between the haves and have-not communities in Rhode Island as this is arguably the biggest affliction affecting the entire state.
Monique Chartier of Anchor Rising thinks it’s foolish that some of the savings would go into pension funds:
Many cities and towns do not have the revenue to properly fund their pension plans. Some cities and towns do not have the revenue to maintain day to day operations, much less try to make up underfunded and very generous pensions. Accordingly, how could they have the money to reinvest, exclusively or otherwise, into their pension systems?
The Projo reports labor leaders are not happy:
Governor Chafee’s proposal to let financially distressed cities and towns make significant changes to union contracts represents a “fundamental assault” on the labor movement’s “core values,” according to George H. Nee, president of the state AFL-CIO. …
[James Parisi, lobbyist for the Rhode Island Federation of Teachers and Health Professionals] said giving certain cities and towns the ability to freeze annual salary increases for teachers and change medical benefits were particularly offensive, considering local chapters have, over the years, made concessions in their contract negotiations. …
Paul L. Valletta Jr., lobbyist for the State Association of Fire Fighters, said the proposal essentially allows executives of financially distressed cities and towns to “rip up” collectively-bargained union contracts.
“I actually thought this governor thought more of working men and women of this state,” he said. “This opens up everything. There are no protections anymore.”
And in case you missed it earlier this morning, my take is that Chafee sounds a lot like Carcieri:
Chafee’s pitch on Thursday sounded much like his predecessor’s in December 2009. ”I urge the General Assembly to pass the municipal tools articles immediately upon returning to session,” Carcieri said. “There is no need to debate them again this year. Pass them and free the cities and towns to manage their own budgets.”
Tags: bob plain, collective bargaining, general assembly, george nee, james parisi, josh barro, lincoln chafee, monique chartier, municipal, organized labor, paul valletta, providence, state government, unions, woonsocket
[...] also: WPRI: A roundup of reactions to Chafee’s new municipal relief bills [...]
It’s really very easy, court. Sorry Chafee it will be struck down.
Until we get rid of the “Maint. of Effort” requirement for schools, we are doomed! In my community, the number of students continues to fall, costs rise, and the “Maint. of Effort” remains a requirement! Crazy, but true. Census may fall, but we are still required to meet that! Now, if we all move, who the heck is going to pay? The STATE? I don’t think so. The US? I don’t think so! The middle class will contiue to get socked for “education”, which should carry a label of “Corruption, careless spending, and poor management”, NOT education. The teachers who care are stiffled in rules and regualtions set up by the “Schoo Leaders”, and there are more layers of “Mangement” that there are in private, for profits. When we begin to run schools like a business, we will all be better for it.
How can they have one set of state laws for some communities and different laws for the rest?
That in and of itself is unconstitutional.
Bob Plain, you will never get it. As long as RI continues to drive out the “haves” we will get even more “have-nots” Then there will be nothing left. Go take an economics course!
Labor leaders who are not happy…lol You are the reason we have Linc Chafee, as your troops voted him in. Your selfish attitude got you the devil and now he isn’t going along with everything you want because the walls are coming down in Rhode Island. It is time for you to look in the mirror as your selfish policies are what got us here. You bought and paid for the liberal dems who did whatever you wanted. What character did you expect from the ones you bought and paid for?