Progressive News, Opinion, and Analysis
I just thought how funny this looked while walking downtown yesterday for lunch. A “Shred-It” truck parked next to Providence City Hall. However, it doesn’t frighten me as much now that Mayor Taveras is in office as it would have if Buddy Cianci still occupied the mayor’s office.
The story in Woonsocket just keeps getting weirder. First the House delegation overrode the will of the mayor and city council by not supporting a supplemental tax bill at the State House last week. Then, today, a member of that city council – one who supported the tax increase, no less – has called for the resignation of the state official who tried to negotiate a deal with the delegation for the tax.
And, oh yeah, they are also father and son.
Woonsocket City Councilor Albert Brien, who voted for the supplemental tax increase at the city-level, is the father of Rep. Jon Brien, the legislator who killed it at the state level. Today, Albert called for the resignation of Rosemary Booth-Gallogly, the governor’s fiscal adviser who negotiated with the delegation late into the last night of the session, for saying in a press release after talks stalled that his son – and the rest of the delegation – let down local residents.
“It’s very simple,” Albert Brien told me. “If anyone has failed the city it has not been the delegation, it has been the state.”
He said Booth-Gallogly and state Auditor Dennis Hoyle specifically failed Woonsocket by not overseeing bond criteria was met after its issuance. In general, he added, that the state has failed Woonsocket by not properly funding education.
Albert Brien did so, first reported by the Valley Breeze, as a member of the Woonsocket Taxpayers Coalition, a group that advocates for lower property taxes locally. While Albert is a member, son Jon is not.
“It’s more of a citizen thing,” Rep. Jon Brien said. His father stepped down from the group’s executive board when he was elected to the city council but remained a member.
Both father and son say they are the rare breed of staunchly fiscally conservative Democrats that seems only to exist in norther Rhode Island communities like Woonsocket.
“Socially, I’m liberal, and fiscally I’m conservative,” Albert said. He said such a platform is not such a strange phenomenon in Woonsocket. Jon is one of the most conservative members of the General Assembly.
Albert Brien actually beat out his son’s wife Stella Brien for a seat on the city council, and she used to hold his seat in the legislature.
Although they often agree politically, they don’t always such as was the case on the supplemental tax bill.
“We disagree all the time,” Albert Brien said. “He does his thing and I do mine. Last year I had a Cicilline sign on my lawn and he had a Loughlin sign on his.”
Recently, the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats interviewed both of the candidates running in the Congressional District 1 Democratic primary race, incumbent Rep. David Cicilline and challenger Anthony Gemma. Each candidate was asked the same questions and below are their video responses. When the endorsement vote was taken, David Cicilline received the unanimous endorsement of the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats. As you watch the videos, and read the summaries, you’ll understand why.
Cicilline is a well-polished candidate, being in public service for roughly 15 years, first as a State Representative, then Mayor of Providence, and now as U.S. Congressman. Gemma is not as well-polished and at times seems uncomfortable with the questions being asked. While in some of the questions Gemma and Cicilline give similar and even identical responses. In virtually every set of questions Cicilline is the more progressive and forward-thinking candidate.
I commend the Rhode Island Progressive Democrats for the level of sophistication and detail embodied in these questions and for really pushing the candidates to give detailed answers. And with that….
Economy:
Cicilline:
Rep. Cicilline supports President Obama’s Jobs Act. He states that America needs to rebuild its infrastructure and asserts that such an effort will generate huge payoffs in the number of jobs due to the employment of construction workers and in the supply of goods and services that are required to rebuild America. He envisions a modern day version of the WPA. He has co-sponsored the National Infrastructure Bank legislation and feels there has never been a better time than now to borrow money and get this done due to historically low rates.
Secondly, the country needs to reinvigorate American manufacturing and expand on the great base that exists in the US by putting in place policies that actually support the manufacture of American-made goods rather than incentivizing the offshoring of American manufacturing overseas. In Congress he has introduced a set of bills to “Make it in America.” These include a national manufacturing strategy, legislation to address the manipulation of Chinese currency, and ending tax break to companies that ship jobs overseas. Cicilline voted against trade agreements because they lacked the protections for American jobs, and while some labor- intensive manufacturing will never come back to America, many other types will return if the incentives to ship jobs overseas are removed.
Finally, the country’s small businesses need access to capital and a skilled workforce which require investments in training programs and education from Head Start through to Pell grants for post-secondary education.
To pay for much of this, the country needs to end the war in Afghanistan and redirect those funds to do “nation building” in America. Business owners need customers with money to buy the goods and services that businesses produce, and the only way this will happen is with a strong and thriving middle class.
When asked about Stimulus Spending versus Deficit Reduction, Cicilline spoke to how austerity has severe consequences that are now playing themselves out everywhere. In the short term, we need to make investments now to create jobs, combined with a long-term strategy to reduce the deficit in a balanced way by cutting spending and increasing revenue. He also supports Quantitative Easing.
Gemma:
Gemma states that he is the only candidate who has created jobs in the private sector. His jobs plan rests on several “pillars” including:
Gemma states that his plan will create at least 10,000 jobs in RI over five years at the low end, but he thinks it could be as high as 30-40,000 jobs. He also assumes that much of the funding will come from foundations and private money since Congress is resolute in not investing in job creation. Many of his proposals assume things that may not actually be possible however, such as increasing enrollment at Brown University by 10,000 students, and not contacting Brown University about this.
When asked about Stimulus Spending versus Deficit Reduction, Gemma’s #1 priority would be to reduce the deficit, using a balanced approach of tax increases and earned benefit cuts. When asked about Quantitative Easing, he said it is ok, although he is concerned about the inflationary effects of printing more money (although inflation is at super low rates).
Healthcare:
Cicilline:
Cicilline believes that everyone should have access to quality, affordable healthcare and references a public option and a single payer system as models that would ensure affordability and access. The healthcare reform legislation includes components of a good system: enabling children to stay on parents’ plan until 27, no denial of pre-existing condition or monetary caps, etc. The cost of healthcare, while important, is a systems question not a provision question. In order to lower costs, however, the system should be able to negotiate prices with drug companies like the VA system can, and there should be investments in wellness and technology. America cannot reduce the level of care and must ensure that everyone has access. We pay for universal care now due to emergency room visits, but there is a much less expensive way to handle this through universal coverage.
Gemma:
Everyone should have HC, but affordability is the biggest issue. As President of Gem Plumbing, insurance premium rates were growing rapidly, so he created a program call Benefits by Design that incentivized employees to be healthier and engage in preventative measures. The current HC system is lacking in preventative measures. We should incentivize people to be healthier and take responsibility for their own health. Gemma did not endorse a single payer system, although he states that he would have voted for healthcare reform and the public option had he been in Congress at the time.
Education:
Cicilline:
We need to be serious about investments in early childhood education as they are the best investments in children we can make in terms of educational outcomes. We expend a lot more later on for remediation because of our failure to spend enough on the early years. Invest early for every child in the country to maximize the return on investment for children’s learning.
Build a system that cares for children from when they wake up to when they go to sleep. They need a learning environment created to provide learning experiences outside of school. Look at AfterZone and the PASA. Kids need the support, especially those in households in which both parents are working, or parents are working multiple jobs, etc.
Charter schools have some great examples, but the innovative ideas are not being transplanted to the public school system, nor are charters held to the same standards. Different learning environments are great for children, but the majority of children will be taught in public schools. We cannot abdicate our public responsibility for teaching children.
Public money should never be spent on the private school system. Public school choice presumes that parents have the same capacity and information about their child’s education, so the system will likely not work as theorized. Rather, every public school should offer every child a high quality education.
The funding of school based on property taxes has created segregated school districts where the wealthiest areas have the greatest capacity to invest in their public schools compared to poor neighborhoods. Ed quality should not be based on zip code. A state funding system should help remove that inequality.
Gemma:
Every available dollar needs to be invested in public education. Certain cities have failed their students and multiple generations due to underperforming school system. Re-educate adults who cannot read and write and make them more productive members of society. He believes in school choice for both public and private schools, funded by public money, and is supportive of Head Start and charter schools, claiming there are models that work. He cites the Mayor of Cumberland as a person who has a vision of education with which he agrees, although he doesn’t explain exactly what that means. He is also supportive of equal funding.
Taxation Policy:
Cicilline:
Raise enough revenue to do the things we need to do and those who have benefitted the most from this country should pay a proportionally larger share than those who earn the least. He supports progressive taxation. Growing inequality is exacerbated by taxation policy that taxes the wealthy less than other workers. All income, however it is earned, should be treated equally rather than providing favoring tax rates for hedge fund managers and those who earn income by already having wealth, and taxing other workers at a higher rate.
Cicilline supports a financial transactions tax to limit the destabilizing speculation that occurs in financial markets and has cosponsored two bills to limit oil speculation. Supports new tax brackets for higher earners. Supports letting the “Bush Tax Cuts” now the Obama Tax Cuts expire for people earning over $250,000, although he feels there is some legitimate concern about those earning between $250,000 and $1 million that should be acknowledged.
Gemma:
Gemma believes that the tax cuts for those making above $100,000 should expire (this is roughly 20% of the CD1 population), while those making less than $100,000 should see their current tax rates maintained. Additionally, Gemma feels that those making less than $50,000 should see their taxes decrease. Capital gains should be divided into two “buckets.” Bucket 1 = zero cap gains taxes for new business creation that exist for more than 3 years and which create jobs. Bucket 2 = phased in capital gains taxes to higher pre-Bush tax cut level in order to limit disruption to stock market. Gemma feels that oil speculation is a major problem, but his response to having a financial transactions tax is unclear.
Foreign Policy:
Cicilline:
Cicilline only supports military actions in foreign nations when it is necessary to protect the national interests and security of the people of America. He is a strong advocate for ending the war in Afghanistan and did not support military action in Lybia. Syria is a challenging question due to the slaughter of innocent people and human rights abuses. America has some moral responsibility to take actions to protect human life, even though we cannot do it everywhere. Ideally, the US as part of a global coalition, can play a role in preventing these types of abuses. In the Sudan, the US should play a role, but we have not currently done so.
Drones change the way the military thinks about warfare. When people went onto the battlefield, limits were placed on interventions. The depersonalization of drone warfare impacts the frequency of it. The decision made about when, and against whom, to use drones are difficult to reconcile with basic constitutional tenets. There needs to be some oversight of President’s kill list so that the people who are targeted are actually intending to do harm to the US, although any system like this would be an imperfect system. Cicilline opposes indefinite detention and believes the defense budget should be cut.
Gemma:
Gemma does not support interventions in Iraq and Lybia but does support military action in Afghanistan. Syria is a deep concern, although he feels that we don’t know everything so much of this is speculation. Gemma feels that military action should be a last resort. He is opposed to indefinite detention.
Campaign Finance Reform:
Cicilline:
Rep. Cicilline is cosponsor of several bills aimed at reforming the way campaigns are financed. The Disclose Act requires the identity of donors to Super PACs to be made almost immediately so people know who is behind campaign ads. Cicilline cosponsored two constitutional amendments to overturn the Citizens United decision and does not believe that corporations are people. He proposed legislation, the Fair Elections Act, which would create public financing model for campaigns.
Cicilline believes the biggest challenge facing America right now is the funding of elections, and if we want to fix any of the other problems, we’re talking about we need to address how campaigns are funded and by whom. The influence of big money and secret money devastates our democracy.
Gemma:
Gemma supports an amendment to repeal Citizens United. Gemma does not accept PAC money and has self-funded much of his campaign. He believes there should be public funded campaigns so that more people can run.
Environment
Cicilline:
Rep. Cicilline believes that it is critical to protect the EPA so that it can enforce clean water and air regulations, make serious investments in clean renewable energy, and support local farmers. He is opposed to the Keystone Pipeline, stating the very serious environmental concerns attached to the project, maintains that the jobs numbers are inflated, and that it is unlikely to reduce energy costs. He points out that Republicans even defeated an amendment to ensure that the oil running through the pipeline would stay in the US.
Cicilline supports reinstating tax credits for renewable energy projects and extending them for longer periods of time so that there is more stability in the funding of long-term renewable energy projects. He suggests that we could eliminate the $40 billion in subsidies to oil companies and invest that money in renewable energy technology. Cicilline believes that over time it may be possible to phase out nuclear energy if sufficient investments are made in the development of renewable energy technology.
He is skeptical of ethanol subsidies and supports labeling of genetically-modified foods and milk derived from cows injected with Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone.
Gemma:
Gem Plumbing has invested in sustainable energy and personally, Gemma is passionate about the environment and sustainability. Gemma believes the Keystone Pipeline project should move forward, as long as it has the correct environmental protections. To lessen burden on foreign oil overseas, he said, the US should import more oil from Canada. He believes the dirty tar oil may be able to be burned cleaner.
Gemma supports reinstating tax credits for renewable energy projects, ethanol subsidies, and the labeling of genetically modified foods and milk derived from cows injected with Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone.
Progressive Caucus:
Cicilline:
Rep. Cicilline will remain a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
Gemma:
Gemma would join the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
Recently, the DLT has been informed of an unprecedented reduction in workforce. Up to sixty-nine employees are scheduled to lose their jobs on July 28th, 70 percent of these are to come from the Unemployment Insurance sector. The irony of going from working to serve unemployed citizens in their time of need, to being one of those in need of such assistance is not lost on us. This layoff is guaranteed to significantly decrease the department’s ability to provide the necessary level of customer service.
The bottom line is this: Rhode Island’s employment situation is not improving quickly and this mass layoff of frontline workers is going make more acute the pain unemployed Rhode Islanders are already feeling.
At 11% unemployment Rhode Island already has the second highest jobless rate in the country. The Rhode Island Department of Labor & Training provides that assistance with its divisions of Income Support and Workforce Development for the approximately 62,000 Rhode Islanders out of work.
At its current staffing levels, DLT is already it struggling to keep up with the demand for services. I know this because I work as a Senior Employment & Training Interviewer with Unemployment Insurance. I am one of the many representatives that work hard to ensure fair and timely processing of payments within the increasingly complex system of jobless benefits.
The cutback in staff will exponentially delay benefits payments to those facing extreme hardship. It will hold back dollars from flowing into economically starved local economies. Entire specialized sectors of benefits specialists could be eliminated, including but not limited to the already challenged office dedicated to processing military claims. This will lead to extremely long delays in benefits to those men and women in uniform, returning from service. Our veterans have honorably served our country and are owed the highest quality of service the state can provide.
Finally, the State of Rhode Island is a direct reimbursable employer. This means that they are responsible to pay the employees that they lay off dollar for dollar when these employees file for Unemployment Insurance. This burden falls ultimately to the taxpayer. Therefore, Rhode Island’s taxpayers will be on the hook for upwards of one million dollars in benefits paid out to laid off DLT staff to perform no services to Rhode Island citizens. This estimation does not include subsidizing health insurance for the out of work employees and their families. I know, personally, my wife and infant daughter will be forced to seek public assistance to help pay the high costs of staying insured.
Is there a solution? I think so. The state of Rhode Island needs to create a plan to find and allocate funds to maintain appropriate staff levels at the DLT. When a house is on fire one does not take the firefighter’s hose and replace it with a watering can. Rhode Island is our house and it is burning. Rather than reducing the economic stream that can help contain this fire and eventually extinguish the blaze, the state needs to locate the funds and allow them to flow to where the fire burns brightest: the people who need it most.
For progressives, the best thing to come out of the 2012 legislative session will be the 2012 elections. Having lost – or merely having held the line – on all the major policy proposals they weighed in on, the best that can be hoped for is that the local electorate knows that the left was with them even if the powers that be were not.
Almost half of the House of Representatives signed onto a bill that would have raised more than $130 million in revenue by taxing the richest Rhode Islanders more and incentivized job creation. But legislative leadership prevented a plethora of proposals on the matter from even reaching a floor vote. Candidates for State House seats will surely mention during the campaign where legislators stood on this one – with the top 2 percent, or the other 98.
They’ll also bemoan the culture that protected predatory lending this session. A bill was killed that would have put interest rates on payday loans from approximately 270 percent back into line with what Massachusetts and Connecticut allow. One would think this would be a no-brainer – local poor people versus out-of-state loan sharks; especially given that Treasurer Gina Raimondo and Providence Mayor Angel Taveras both lobbied for it, the two most popular pols in the state. But of course former House Speaker Bill Murphy lobbied against the legislation. It was a tough sell even for a reasonable fix.
Marriage equality, racial profiling and other such human rights stuff was fun to follow for a while, but everyone knew such stuff was pretty much dead-on-arrival. Even farm-to-table proposals didn’t pass – despite being near guaranteed to help the local economy and harm no one.
Instead, this session was a defensive one for progressives. The biggest victory by far was fending off Gov. Chafee’s proposals to help struggling cities, which did so by taking away bargaining rights from organized labor.
There were some small victories – a new public records law passed both Chambers and is awaiting Gov. Chafee’s signature, but it was watered down from what was originally proposed and never all that sharp-teethed in the first place.
The big winner this year was the cannabis caucus. A deal was struck that will allow the three medical marijuana compassion centers to finally start selling to patients, and less than an ounce of pot was decriminalized, punishable by a ticket rather than a criminal record.
While nice, there are certainly bigger fish to fry in Rhode Island than putting an end to reefer madness.
The Woonsocket City Council meets tonight to work on the spending plan it must send to the state-appointed budget commission prior to July 1. The two entities have about two weeks to shave about $6 million from city expenses … if they can’t do it the next option would likely be a receiver.
Not only do we have one of the worst economies in the country, we also seem to suffer the most from the effects of global warming. Remember this when temperatures climb into the high 90’s this week … no state is getting hotter faster than Rhode Island.
And yet another way the state is failing: Rhode Island remains one of a handful of states without a permanent stream of money for low-income housing, something state officials and homeless advocates say is a critical part of implementing a homeless prevention plan adopted by the state earlier this year.”
Rest in peace Rodney King, whose brutal beating by the LA Police in 1991 ended the the Cosby Show era of race relations in the United States … he also raised the most important question of a generation when he famously said during the 1992 LA riots after police were aquitted, “Can we all get along?”
The answer to his question is because of people like Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
The Projo lauds state Sen. Dawson Hodgson for making it to an East Greenwich fundraiser when the Senate was in recess on the last night of the legislative session … me too, considering the event was organized by my brother Matt Plain. While Mattie and me have pretty much never agreed on anything political in our lives, the rest of our family is as bipartisan as they come – our sister, mom and step-dad all attended both the RI Future/Working RI Netroots cocktail party just a few nights before they attended the Hodgson fundraiser.
So the other day I received this email shortly after an article I wrote appeared in RI Future (I’ve only edited it due to some sentence breaks:
Sam;
Publishing the contents of the OP discussion list serve on -line with links at RI Future blog is a violation of our safety/security policies.
Of course, anyone is free to criticize OP, publicly or on the list itself, but exposing the discussion list to the public is not acceptable.
Unfortunately, this is seen by OP as a serious infraction.of our rules for the list. We have had to ask members of the press to leave the list for that exact reason – they wouldn’t respect OP confidentially on its’ list..
We’re requesting that you remove yourself from the OP discussion list.
solidarity;
[Name Redacted]
Well, I’m a good sport, so I fired back this:
I’m sorry, I thought Occupy was committed to a higher level of openness and communication; you know, that the 99% should be able to see the 99%’s list. I’m sorry that’s not the case. Go ahead and remove me.
Sincerely,Sam
Sam; I hope this is just a misunderstanding. When people post to the OP discussion list, they have to have a certain level of trust that their posts will not be published in the [public] media (certainly not without their prior permission). That’s just common sense. In the past, people have been targeted by the government, employers (lost jobs), and been the subject of harassment for belonging to social protest movements like Occupy. For instance: there’s currently a war on public education, a war on women, and a war on the middle class, designed, engineered and promulgated by both parties – a broad austerity and state security agenda that we’re opposed to. We have teachers, students, and working people in our movement – people who could be targeted and hurt from exposure. In case you haven’t noticed, the US is not really a ‘free’ society anymore. Publishing the contents of emails from the OP list is wrong on so many levels and has nothing to do with any perceived ‘higher openness’. That’s not the same thing as publicly criticizing OP’s tactics or ideas. The right wing does that all the time and we’re perfectly capable of publicly defending our ideas and tactics, but we draw the line at intentionally opening up our people to potential harassment, intimidation, and reprisals. We don’t really want you to leave the list, but do need your promise that you will not publish or publicly expose posts, discussions, threads, etc.from the OP list. If you will make that commitment and agree not to in the future, we’re perfectly happy to have you stay on the list and participate in OP activity. If you feel that you can’t agree to this, then we will have to agree to disagree and you will be removed.
Rhode Island became the latest state to lessen the punishments for small amounts of marijuana, popularly known as “decriminalizing” it. Six years ago, there were many doubters and few reformers on board. Yet it appears America is fed up with many facets of drug policy. Organizations that have been seen as fringe radicals, such as Direct Action for Rights & Equality (DARE), are seeing their proposals become mainstream positions. This DARE, not to be confused with the other D.A.R.E., has consistently looked to change the misguided (or malicious) attempt to curb drug use through prisons. Once this seemingly impossible reform became inevitable, the members of DARE realized their work was all but done.
A key element to the new law is that people on probation or parole will not be violated and sent to prison. People without actual experience in the criminal justice realm had to be educated on this element. Cynically enough, those who wanted to pass this measure based on saving money (by less incarceration) had to be shown that most imprisonments are due to such violations. Remarkably, the Attorney General stuck to their story that nobody is sent to prison for marijuana… even as evidence and personal stories came forth.
It is likely that the Dept. of Probation and Parole will develop new guidelines for what to do when someone receives a $150 “pot ticket” (which doubles to $300 after 30 days, and to $600 after 90 days). They will likely need to pay even more to attend a mandatory drug program, and failure to do so will result in a violation. This may ultimately prove challenging for people who are unemployed or barely scraping by, as are many people released from prison.
There should be no surprise that the bulk of marijuana tickets will disproportionately come from highly policed areas, and disproportionately affect People of Color, who represent about two-thirds of Providence. DARE, ACLU, PrYSM, and others have consistently presented evidence of racial profiling in Rhode Island that has a similar ring to the NYPD’s “Stop and Frisk” program that is currently under scrutiny by the Justice Department and Gov. Cuomo. Marijuana decriminalization, however, did not gain momentum due to the disproportionate impact on the 21% of Rhode Island residents who are Black, Latino, or Asian. It passed because 12% of Rhode Islanders are willing to admit they smoke pot. The Providence Journal article poll tallies 29% of people who “already” smoke.
When former RI Republican Minority Leader Bob Watson was arrested in Connecticut last year, just prior to a hearing on this bill, some wondered what would have happened if Watson was pulled over in his hometown of Portsmouth… or if he had been before. Watson’s public defense was that he needed the pot for his ailments, i.e. he needed it to get by. Many of that 12% have said the same. I have never encountered a person who wants their friend or family member to be disabled through drug use of any kind, and so my last words to the legislators on the matter were, “if you caught your son, daughter, or colleague with marijuana, what would you do? Whatever it is, what’s good enough for your son, daughter, or colleague is good enough for the rest of Rhode Island.”
Nobody believed we could eliminate mandatory minimum drug sentences in Rhode Island. But we did. Nobody believed we could pass a law that would nullify a probation violation prison sentence if the new charges were ultimately dismissed. But we did. When we started down this road, few believed Rhode Island was ready to reduce penalties even on marijuana… and now some politicians openly call for regulation and taxation of this plant. The push to create a Study Commission (often the kiss of death) by Senator Josh Miller was crucial. It allowed reports such as the study by Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron to gain prominence and dissemination through Open Doors, a service provider for the formerly incarcerated. The study commission put major advocacy partners on notice, such as Drug Policy Alliance, Marijuana Policy Project, and Law Enforcement Against Prohibition- and let them know that we are making change in this tiny little state.
What is next in drug policy other than pushing for full regulation, and a potenial $300 million in economic impact? It is worth noting that marijuana has been a gateway drug to a criminal record, and once someone is on probation they no longer receive the full protection of the 4th, 5th, and 6th Amendments; they are essentially guilty until proven innocent. For those who want to save dollars and those who want a rational or humane approach to drug policy in Rhode Island, we can look at ways for people to get out of what is one of the most regressive probation schemes in the country. RI is one of the leaders in percentages of people on probation and the lengths of sentences.
One proposal we put forth is limiting the probation violation to the time remaining on probation. Currently, someone with a 10 year suspended sentence can be given that term if violated on the last day of the 10th year. This often violates the statute of limitations, carrying a punishment beyond what is permissible by law. Another proposal is to allow probationers and parolees the ability to earn Good Time credits off their sentences. Ultimately, the only ones who would receive credits are those “doing the right thing,” and it would allow Probation Officers more flexibility in curbing inappropriate behavior, short of incarceration. Another proposal, which gained momentum this year, is a Good Samaritan law that would not punish a drug user who calls 911 to save the life of another. This places a higher priority on life than on imprisoning those who are generally addicted to heroin (the most common form of overdose).
No matter what direction activists and politicians go after this key victory, it appears certain that the public is far ahead of the politicians on this matter. It is high time that harmless behavior be treated as such in the courts. It is also time for us to find medical solutions for health problems such as addiction, rather than putting someone in a cage until later.
Bruce Reilly is a member of DARE, Rhode Island’s only organization committed to (among other things) the development and empowerment of those directly impacted by the criminal justice system. He testified on this bill in both the House and Senate, along with other DARE members, and is a national steering committee member of the Formerly Incarcerated & Convicted People’s Movement. He attends Tulane University Law School, and is currently a legal intern at the Brennan Center for Justice.
After persistent rain this June, the sun finally came out on downtown Providence. A roller-blader takes advantage of the nice weather by practicing in Kennedy Plaza’s melted ice rink across from the Rhode Island Foundation. This weekend is supposed to be warm and sunny.
While most of the state has had their eyes glued to what’s happening in Woonsocket the last week or so; the focus on West Warwick has faded, yet the problems remain. After an extremely contentious town council meeting a week earlier, attended by more than a thousand residents (including students, the attendance at the meeting was likely closer to 1500), this week’s joint meeting of the council and the school committee was tame and anticlimactic.
The June 5 meeting was marred by shouting, accusations of politics being played with the students being the pawns and the display of a rude gesture by Councilwoman Filomena Gustafson; all over the issue of the school committee having to cut a million dollars out of their budget that would then result in the loss of school sports and extracurricular activities.
At the outset of that meeting, Council President, Angelo Padula, launched into a tirade about how the school problems were completely the fault of the unions and the school committee and had nothing to do with the council. His disdain didn’t end there though, Mr. Padula continually referred to the attendees as, “You people,” even though many in the crowd shouted that they weren’t just a mob, they were residents and taxpayers.
Letting the council know how they felt, the crowd that night made it clear that the council was at fault and by blaming others, it was a very poor example to set for the children. By the end of the meeting, the council assured the gathered masses that they would meet with the school committee and come to a resolution, even though the two bodies barely speak and have blamed each other of mismanagement for years.
So, the much smaller crowd at this week’s joint meeting of the two bodies was completely surprised when all were seated on the stage and acting professionally. The council explained the budget, followed by the school committee making their presentation and on entering the auditorium everyone received the joint press release from the council and committee. It stated that the committee had met in the interim on June 8 to discuss the issues and resolve the budget conflicts. It went on to say:
“Both parties are happy to say that all matters between them have been resolved…litigation between the parties shall be dismissed; the five percent reduction that has been in place since 2011 has been rescinded and the school committee’s decision to eliminate interscholastic sports, extracurricular activities and advanced placement classes has been rescinded.”
Basically, the council had their hat handed to them by the school committee as all demands brought at the prior meeting had been resolved in their favor as their total funding had been restored, probably as the result of the adverse ruling by Superior Court Judge Rubine. However, Council President Padula once again couldn’t resist pointing the finger of blame instead of accepting responsibility for making poor choices. This time, instead of launching a rant against the unions and the school committee, Padula pointed out that all the town’s financial woes are the result of poor stock market performance and the drain the Station Nightclub Fire litigation put on the town.
School Committee Chair, Jim Williamson was more gracious in his remarks, focusing on the cooperation needed to get the deal done and how it brought new optimism, how it appropriately addressed the needs for the coming fiscal year; but he warned that future budgets were still uncertain and the town faced future financial instability.
Former councilman, Peter Calci, took to the microphone and pointed out just how fragile the town’s finances are, highlighting the fact the town has made and continues to make minimal pension contributions and by doing so, risks the town’s solvency.
While the budget was approved by a vote of 403-96, allowing the council and committee to save face in an election year, there are obviously those in the town who still aren’t happy and don’t buy into the Kumbaya-singing at Monday’s meeting or the pronouncement that the two bodies will continue to work together. That’s obvious by the sign displayed in the back of a truck at the town budget vote on Thursday, reminding people it’s time for a change on the council. Someone has also gotten very creative and posted a YouTube video, mocking Councilwoman Gustafson and her “Ward Four Salute.”
While West Warwick isn’t quite in the same league as Woonsocket right now, the voters are just as unhappy and in both municipalities the rumblings for change are growing stronger.
Still organizing for justice at 82!
Let us all celebrate Henry and the George Wiley Center this Friday at the East Providence Yacht Club at 6pm. On Facebook, you can register here.
A former priest who took the words of Jesus to heart (you know the ones about serving the poor) Henry quit the catholic church and became Rhode Island’s most respected hell-raiser, a community organizer of the highest degree for issues of economic justice, human rights and community empowerment since the mid 60s. Along the way he has forged a stellar reputation within the halls of power and in the community where he has been a determined advocate for that most neglected of populations: the poor.
Over the years, Henry has helped start numerous organization including RI Welfare Rights, The Coalition for Consumer Justice, W.A.G.E., the RI Handicapped Action Committee and the George Wiley Center where he has been the director for the last 31 years. Many of the consumer and community welfare victories of the last almost half a decade can be traced to Henry’s advocacy such as the Utility shut-off policy, the elimination of the sales tax on clothing, handicapped access all over the state, the defeat of the Charlestown Nuclear Plant, universal free breakfast for school children and the Henry Shelton Act, passed last year which makes utility companies work out a clear payment and forgiveness plan for past due balances.
Of course, he wasn’t alone doing this. A large part of Henry’s legacy is how many of today’s advocates in direct action and door to door community organizing started through his work. Indeed, at one point, the Coalition for Consumer Justice had a staff of 65 paid people encompassing canvassers, organizers and directors along with 15 chapters working on local issues and joining together on issues of statewide importance. Henry knows every official who has served as the head of all the agencies he has dealt with over his 4 plus decades and all the elected officials as well. When I was president for 5 years, my favorite part of the Wiley Center board meeting was when Henry would give his report and slip into tales of past encounters and victories over the years. Many a governor, judge, CEO, senator, speaker and mayor have had to learn the hard way that Henry was not someone who would just go away. And Henry almost always won when that happened.
Henry is a living testament to never giving up and although he has been slowed by a stroke over the last few years, he is still organizing and to prove it, he made sure that I mention that there is an action this Monday at the PUC on Jefferson Boulevard at 3pm which you can learn more about here. Support Rhode Islanders struggling to stop utility shut offs!
Help us all say thank you for decades of dedicated commitment to change, advocating and creating power for the powerless. Happy Birthday Henry Shelton! Keep on pushing!
If only we all could keep going like him.
Come join us on the waterfront in East Providence for food and music, and to celebrate organizing for social change in Rhode Island for over 5 decades.
To learn more about the George Wiley Center, visit http://www.georgewileycenter.org/ or read this story from Progressive Charlestown.
Organized labor claims they are big winners in this year’s legislative session because they beat back Gov. Chafee’s municipal aid bill that earlier in the year they said would have destroyed collective bargaining rights in Rhode Island. So this is how we measure success for unions in 2012, victory means mere survival. By such logic, I would argue that it’s Rhode Island’s richest residents who are the big winners this year. Yet another victory for income inequality, and another defeat for the working class.
But there is a gem in the legislature’s disdain for labor and adulation for the rich and powerful … public sector unions have had to adapt, and they have done so by creating a bigger tent – aligning with social progressives on issues like marriage equality and women’s issues and all working people to boost our extremely low minimum wage. Such is the seeds for a real populist movement in Rhode Island – one that would restore power to the people, curb crony capitalism and make our state great once again.
We look forward to Sen. John Tassoni coming back to the State House as a lobbyist … Rhode Island’s least fortunate lose a tireless and effective advocate with him no longer walking the marble halls on Smith Hill.
Here’s how you know we are a society in decline: The Romney campaign is actually rooting against the American economy in hopes of beating the president this November. In fact, this has become the major policy goal of Republicans … shrink government and stifle growth so that the rich and powerful can flourish at the expense of everyone else.
But don’t take my word for it … here’s how Paul Krugman put it.
Bob Kerr takes issue with the all-nighters so common at the end of the legislative session … while they are sure fun to cover (except that I’m still exhausted) there has got to be a better, more open and honest way to make laws.
Hmm, go figure … the Central Falls Charter Commission prefers more democracy to less of it.
As the dust slowly settles on the carcass of 38 Studios, plenty of questions remain, and you can bet the entrails will be picked over thoroughly. Some of the most entertaining questions are about how the debacle happened, since it’s such a delicious tale of arrogant insiders getting their comeuppance. (Of course it would be more delicious if we weren’t on the hook to pay for it.) But there are also dull questions about important matters: what to do with the state’s economic development apparatus, the Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation.
RIEDC was formed under the Almond administration, when the Department of Economic Development was closed and those responsibilities moved over to the Port Authority, which was renamed. The Port Authority was chosen because of its unlimited bonding authority, a fluke of legislative drafting when that agency was originally created. As of 1995, when this happened, the only other agency with this kind of authority, the Public Building Authority, was discredited by DiPrete-era abuses and on the way out. In other words EDC was born with extraordinary powers and has used them extensively, which is partly why the state’s debt nearly doubled during the Carcieri administration.
In the 17 years since then, RIEDC has been through more directors than I can count. Some have been widely admired, and some just looked good. Keith Stokes, the current most recent director has, I believe, set a longevity record by lasting three years, though I welcome reader corrections to my director timetable. He is widely held in high regard, but the agency has a vague and difficult set of goals, so no one should be surprised when the failures are legion and the successes short-lived.
The 38 Studios debacle reminds longtime observers of previous ones, like Alpha-Beta, and the Wyatt jail in Central Falls. And just as the debacles recur, so do the ensuing reports. We’re all looking forward now to a report from the RI Public Expenditure Council about how to shake up EDC. But that’s nothing new, either.
Three years ago there was a report about EDC from a panel of worthies headed by Al Verrecchia, chairman and former CEO of Hasbro. The panel suggested that EDC needed shaking up, but their report ultimately contained precious little of use about how to do that. For example, the report said the agency was without focus and alternately complained they didn’t spend enough time working with already-existing local companies and that they didn’t have a good marketing approach to attract companies from elsewhere. Both might be true, but was the report’s suggestion that EDC concentrate on both really the best way to improve the focus? The report was too easily interpreted as an endorsement of what EDC was already doing. Essentially, the message was “keep it up, but do it better,” even if some of the report text struggled to say something else.
What to do
It’s possible to see the agency’s discredit as an advantage. Might it be possible to dream that we can discard the destructive and expensive things the agency does and replace them with activities that actually help the economy? My vote for what’s really needed around here? Information.
EDC could usefully refashion itself into a research agency. If agency staff actually spent significant time studying the economy and the local markets in an intellectually honest and rigorous way, some practically useful recommendations for action would be bound to arise from that work. This is the kind of thing that no individual company can take on, but an agency like EDC could produce information vital to all of them.
Perusing the EDC web site, there is a lot of information available, but it’s all the kind of thing you can get from the PBN book of lists or from Census Department or BLS web sites. They provide a handy list of tax incentives and programs, but what do they provide to help people make business decisions? That is, beyond “what government program should I apply for?”
On the EDC web site, I can learn which are the top employers in the state, and I can learn which economic sectors employ the most people, but there is precious little one might use to make important decisions. Where can I learn whether there is a shortage of machinists? Who do I ask about unmet credit demand? Is it banks or family and friends who finance most new RI businesses? What proportion of venture-backed businesses survive five years? What stage businesses have the most trouble getting credit? What are the important barriers to export markets for RI businesses?
Who needs this information? Someone who aspires to be a machinist would, of course. Someone who wants to start a business, or a bank interested in expanding its business lending portfolio, might also find it useful. A business contemplating expansion, perhaps. Oh, and General Assembly members who routinely assert that this or that would be good for the economy without any idea whether it’s really true could benefit. But most of all, the people who craft economic development policy would find real information vital. Or they should.
EDC is in a unique position that could allow it to gather — and analyze — useful data about the local economy. They could be doing business surveys, worker surveys, surveys of bankers and investors, analyses of credit markets, classifying foreclosures. They could be hosting conferences of academics to present research about these topics, or offering research fellowships at Brown or URI for economists willing to spend time looking at the RI economy. They could present a public lecture series on the subjects important to the state’s economy, modeled after the Geek Dinners (that a previous EDC director helped begin). In short, they could actually present valuable information to help people make important economic decisions. Would it be expensive? Not compared to the status quo.
Research doesn’t just mean accumulating information in a single place, even if that’s a handy service. It means analysis: counting things, classifying them, and coming to conclusions about them. It means tracking events and interpreting them. It means finding information that isn’t already available and creating the tools necessary to anticipate events and follow trends. It means cultivating a staff able to do these analyses and with the intellectual confidence to follow where the data lead, and whomever they offend.
This, of course, is not the path we’ve taken. What we have now is an agency that does some good service and quite a bit of harm. We have some important programs housed in an agency that frequently acts like nothing so much as a state-funded corporate lobbyist. Our state deserves better and wouldn’t it be nice to have an agency that tells us all what’s going on around us instead of hiding it?
In the proposed budget Woonsocket advertised to its citizens, the city says it expects to spend $122,095,051. But the actual number, said Budget Commission Chair Bill Sequino, will likely be at least $6 or 7 million more than that because of a deficit on the school side of the ledger that was just discovered several months ago.
“We know the ad is inaccurate,” said Sequino, noting that his budget commission and the town council have until July 1 to make the numbers work. “At some point there could be some draconian cuts.”
He said people have talked about lay-offs, pension cuts and across the board pay cuts.
While whatever cuts occur will likely affect the entire city, the deficits are on the school side of the ledger.
“On the city side, they may not have been okay by much,” said Sequino, “but they were in the black.”
In last year’s budget, the school district planned to spend about $59 million. Sequino and others expect they will spend closer to $66 million, if not more.
How the schools ended up spending so much more than they expected is a question Sequino said the budget commission is eagerly anticipating an answer to.
Property taxes were kept low in Woonsocket when Susan Menard was mayor and state aid was plentiful. Then, according to Woonsocket teachers’ union president Jeffrey Partington, then-Governor Don Carcieri threw a money-wrench into the system.
“He gave a tax break to everyone making more than $250,000 and off-set that by taking money away from cities and towns,” Partington said.
Since then, according to information from current-Gov. Linc Chafee, who has recently railed against Carcieri cutting money to struggling cities, Woonsocket has lost out on some $12 million.
For the past several years, the city has been raising property taxes at or close to the maximum amount allowed under state law, but it wasn’t enough to make up for the loss from the state. Meanwhile, the schools kept expecting more education aid from the state. They’ll get an additional $6 million under the new funding formula that goes into effect this year, but the additional money isn’t expected to be fully phased in for at least another seven budget cycles. Woonsocket and Pawtucket are currently suing the state saying that isn’t soon enough.
Partington said the schools initially used ARRA funds to mask the ensuing deficits. This proved to exacerbate the problem.
“We were running expenses higher but we didn’t know it yet,” he said.
In 2011, the town council called for an audit of the school department’s budget and investigators identified a $2.7 million hole.
The newly-hired business manager Stacey Busby convinced the council auditors were seeing something that didn’t exist. But a closer look this year proved her wrong, and the deficit was said to be as high as $7.3 million. In March, the she was fired though the school committee voted against pursuing a criminal investigation.
“I guess she misrepresented what was there,” Partington said. “Everyone is interested in having a balanced budget. Sometimes you just put something down and pray it works out.”
“There’s a lot of legal steps that we would have to go through” before the state department of education would take control of the school system in Woonsocket, said RIDE spokesman Elliot Krieger this morning.
“There has to be a determination that there is a fiscal crisis,” he said. “We would not be the agency to do that.”
Krieger added, “It’s a pretty extreme step. But the state has gone that route before.”
In the early 1990’s, responding a fiscal crisis in the Central Falls school system, the legislature passed a law that allowed for the department of education to take over funding and management of the schools there. In that instance, Central Falls – like Woonosocket did last night – asked the state for help.
Below is the state law that would determine how – and if – a state take over would happen. It says a school committee “may … request the department of elementary and secondary education to assume the supervision, control, and management of the public schools. Upon receiving the request the department, if it is satisfied that the request is warranted and that the best interests of the public schools would be served, may assume supervision, control, and management.”
16-1-10 Assumption of control of city or town schools by department – School lunch program. – (a) The school committee of any city or town in which the taxable property is not adequate, at the average rate of taxation for public school support throughout the state, to provide with the money that may be apportioned from the general treasury an amount sufficient to provide and maintain public schools of a high standard, may at a regular meeting held before the first day of July in any year request the department of elementary and secondary education to assume the supervision, control, and management of the public schools of the city or town for the ensuing year; provided that the city or town has appropriated for the support of public schools for the year a sum equivalent to thirty cents (30¢) on each one hundred dollars ($100) of the assessed valuation of the city or town. Upon receiving the request the department, if it is satisfied that the request is warranted and that the best interests of the public schools would be served, may assume supervision, control, and management.
Krieger said Education Commissioner Deborah Gist has been in touch with Woonsocket officials and RIDE’s finance director has spoken with the state-appointed budget commission.
“There are other things we can do to provide help and assistance,” Krieger said, “like helping to design a budget. It’s not like there is a pot of money but we do have some expertise and technical support.”
Forget receivership – for now, anyway – the Woonsocket School Committee has another idea to solve the struggling city’s budget crisis. The school committee last night voted 4 to 1 to have the state take over the local schools. More later this morning on what happens next.
The Projo has two great pieces of journalism on Woonsocket today … one is a profile of the now-infamous Rep. Lisa Baldelli-Hunt (link not available from Projo) and another on how the local talk radio network factors into Woonsocket politics.
Ted Nesi falls into the old trap of tacitly blaming municipal financial issues on employee benefit packages. He rightly points out that the city failed to put some $6 million into its pension fund since 2008, but neglects to mention that during that same time period Woonsocket lost more than $12 million in state aid.
That said, Woonsocket’s main fiscal problem is a $10 million school deficit, ostensibly a result of bad book keeping by management. But watch how hard the media and others try to pin the problem on public sector unions … maybe Tim White can even find a lazy city employee to follow around.
For the time being, though, Woonsocket teachers won’t lose their jobs. But definitely stay tuned…
Rhode Island is now the 15th state to decriminalize possession of less than an ounce of pot, a move that will save tens of millions of dollars.
No one made covering the State House more entertaining than Bob Watson. He will be missed…
One question every reporter in Rhode Island should be asking: how did Bank RI make a loan to 38 Studios based on collateral that didn’t exist yet.
Johnson & Johnson is dropping out of ALEC, joining Walmart, Coke, Pepsi and the Bill and Melina Gates Foundation and about 20 other well-known major corporations.
Need a little summer? Then watch this video of a deer smelling me I got last night where the Maskerchugg River flows into Greenwich Cove:
Can the Feds order a state to execute a man? This is the question that the Supreme Court may ultimately answer regarding Jason Pleau, arrested last year for killing a man during a robbery. What appeared to be a routine case in Rhode Island, a state of one million people that averages about 30 murders per year, has turned into a legal battle about state’s rights, the 10th Amendment, and the Death Penalty. And the question of whether a Governor can ever defy a President.
The federal death penalty is legal in every state in America. There are over 30 federal statutes authorizing the death penalty for any American, including a generic 1st Degree Murder, and it would be difficult to imagine a case that would not qualify under federal law. Certainly when the people of Rhode Island eliminated the death penalty, they did not consider it would be alright if a courthouse bearing the “United States” logo rather than the Rhode Island “Hope” motto, could sentence a man to die. The same jury pool of Rhode Islanders would be drawn upon, yet anyone with an objection to the death penalty would be barred from serving on the jury.
Attorney General Eric Holder amended the Federal Death Penalty Protocol (DPP) last year, in an attempt to assist Attorneys General such as Peter Neronha (District of RI) regarding when to seek this punishment. There is no regard as to whether a state has abolished the death penalty or not, but states that the Feds should only take the case from a state when “the Federal interest in the prosecution is more substantial than the state or local authorities.” Here, the only factor that seems to apply is the vague “ability and willingness for the state to obtain an appropriate punishment upon conviction.” Perhaps this is a snub at RI State Attorney General Peter Kilmartin, a career police officer who apparently never handled a felony case.
The DPP guidelines do suggest that victims’ family members be consulted, yet this is a quandry in prosecutions: whether the government stands in for a particular victim, or an entire state. A victim’s family in Mississippi tried to stop the execution of Henry Curtis Jackson. He was instead killed by lethal injection yesterday.
After sentencing Jason Pleau to 18 years in state prison for parole and probation violations, a federal grand jury indicted him. The U.S. Attorney then put in a request to take him into custody under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act (IAD). Governor Lincoln Chaffee (known as the Republican who opposed President Bush on the Iraq war and domestic wiretapping) denied the request under Article IV of the IAD. The feds then tried to evade this federal Act with a second type of request. The state asserts that once the federal government puts in a “hold” under the IAD, all future requests to produce Pleau are covered by the provisions of the IAD- no matter what you name it. This is how it played out, and a three-judge panel of the First Circuit agreed (2 to 1) with Gov. Chaffee, who believes the only reason the federal government would want Jason Pleau is to execute him. Particularly after Pleau agreed to serve Life Without Parole in state prison. This is known as the Other Death Penalty.
The Obama Administration, however, asserts that their request was not covered by the IAD for two reasons: (1) the Habeas Corpus ad Prosequendum they filed is outside of the IAD procedures, and (2) the federal government reigns supreme (as laid out in the Supremacy Clause of the constitution) and a governor cannot refuse the request. The problem with the Feds’ first issue is that the traditional method of transferring prisoners between jurisdictions has been supplanted by the IAD, and they did in fact begin IAD procedures prior to the traditional Habeas. The title of the paperwork is irrelevant, and the First Circuit agrees. As for the Supremacy Clause argument, it is difficult for the United States to say they do not need to obey the IAD when they are listed as a party, along with 50 states, D.C., Puerto Rico, and others. If they have some special status, why bother writing rules that apply to the United States at all?
The First Circuit Court of Appeals, however, credits the United States with the trump card: the Supremacy Clause. Three judges interpreted a key case to mean the U.S. is above the limitations of the IAD. Two judges, in their scathing dissent, took the majority to task for what they feel was an “unprincipled” misreading of the key case, U.S. v. Mauro, 436 U.S. 340 (1978). The dissenting two justices called the ruling “unwarranted and unprecedented,” and “fails the test of common sense.” As it stands, the split opinions of five judges are the difference between putting the executioner’s hood over the heads of a Rhode Island jury.
It was only a year ago that I, and about a dozen others, testified in the Rhode Island legislature’s bill to posthumously pardon the last man murdered by the People. Historians testified about the malice of a vindictive crowd, and the racist furor that suspended rational judgment: someone had to pay. In 1844 it was John Gordon, and seven years later this punishment was abolished for it. The Public Defender spoke about the current need for best practices in eye-witness identifications and the necessity of videotaped confessions (two reforms advancing in RI). I spoke about how a similar pair of Irish scapegoats, the Brennan brothers, were railroaded in 1984 for the murder of an Italian landlord in Providence. They are still in prison. Here, nobody has argued that Jason Pleau, who was once the catcher on my softball team, is innocent. However, death penalty supporters are just as certain of guilt when a convicted person is later exonerated.
Rhode Island has filed a petition for certiorari, seeking review in the U.S. Supreme Court. Justices may find their ideologies torn, such as Antonin Scalia who often speaks of states’ rights in the face of an overbearing federal government, yet he rarely finds a wrong when it comes to the power of the government to exert police powers, and administer the death penalty. Some say that judges take a moral position, and then manipulate the law to reach it. Yet as to whether the IAD applies to the federal government, it will be difficult to get around Article II, which reads “(a) ‘State’ shall mean a State of the United States; the United States of America; a territory or possession …” It will also be difficult to affirm the First Circuit’s belief that Governor Chaffee can’t deny the federal government, where the Act reads “the Governor of the sending State may disapprove the request for temporary custody.”
To do so, the Court might have to say Congress lacked the authority to grant a Governor power over the federal government. Yet the federal government signed onto this agreement, and now they want out. Those who advocate for States Rights use it to define marriage, gun laws, and many other issues (it once was a code word for allowing Jim Crow laws), including the Death Penalty. This legal battle will cost the taxpayers about a million dollars, just to see what will happen to Jason Pleau, a man that none of them likely care an iota about. Sometimes I wonder what gets people up in the morning.
One way Woonsocket could help fix its budget deficit will be discussed at the school committee meeting here tonight. School Committee President Anita McGuire-Forcier said she put an item on the agenda that would ask the state to take over the local public schools as it did with Central Falls in the early 1990’s.
“We’re asking the state for help,” she said after leaving a meeting of the state-appointed budget commission. “They left us in this mess they should help us out of it.”
Woonsocket schools have a $10 million deficit this year, which is a major reason the city may need to file for receivership. The school budget is about $60 million annually.
McGuire-Forcier said the state has short-changed Woonsocket on the amount of education aid it gave the struggling city in its previous aid formula. While the department of education has agreed to pay Woonsocket the difference, it wants to do so over the next 7 to 10 years. Woonsocket and Pawtucket are suing RIDE saying it needs to pay up sooner than that.
She also said the state is hurting all urban areas with cuts to municipalities.
“When you do across the board cuts to state aid it doesn’t hurt the suburban districts but it really hurts the urbans,” she said. “They are turning us into ghettos.”
The School Committee will consider the proposal tonight at its meeting.
Rhode Island enters strange new anti-tax territory with the House of Representatives’s decision not to pass a bill that would have raised property taxes for Woonsocket residents.
The tax hike was heavy, but necessary for the financially struggling city to avoid financial ruin. Instead, teachers and police officers will likely lose their jobs, vendors won’t get paid and the city will likely need a receiver.
But, alas, all that has already become the narrative of Rhode Island – cash-strapped city can’t pay its bills so contracts are broken and working class public sector employees and retirees get stuck with the bills. The strange new world is the General Assembly chose this path for Woonsocket.
Woonsocket’s mayor and council made the tough vote to ask the legislature for permission to raise property taxes beyond the cap the legislature put on it. And Gov. Chafee and his staff lobbied leadership hard to approve of the increase.
The House of Representatives was unwilling the increase taxes as a way for the city to pay its debts. And the road to receivership was paved by Lisa Baldelli-Hunt, Jon Brien and Bob Phillips – whose kamikaze tact of taking the city towards bankruptcy may prove the worst thing to ever happen to the city.
But the rest of the House of Representatives had every right – if not an obligation – to save Woonsocket from this potentially perilous gamble its politicians are playing.
Don’t look to Woonsocket Senator Roger Picard for blame – like the mayor and city council, he supported the tax as a last ditch effort to avoid receivership. He also didn’t sign on to a letter other members of the delegation sent to the governor’s office and legislative leadership earlier in the session that stated a preference for a receiver.
“It’s a philosophical disagreement,” he said. “When you have appointed commissions or receivers they don’t have the same type of investment that an elected official does.”
House Speaker Gordon Fox kept on the table the option of voting the tax hike through without the locals support. But in the end, even though the sharpest municipal finance experts in the state as well as the people elected to make such decisions for the city felt appropriate, it was deemed an unpalatable option politically. No one wanted to go into the election season having raised taxes on another city.
So instead of owning Woonsocket’s tax increases, Brien, Baldelli-Hunt, Phillips and the entire House of Representatives instead will own its insolvency.
To applause from the gallery on both sides, the Homeless Bill of Rights passed out of the General Assembly and now heads to the Governor’s desk for signing.
Officially titled the Rhode Island Fair Housing Practices Act, it was introduced in both chambers back in January. A revised version passed the Senate on May 2nd. But the House had shown little movement, and advocates feared it being “held for further study” meant that it would not be passed. However, on June 10th it was suddenly scheduled in the House Judiciary Committee for consideration, and a new revised version passed out of that committee on Tuesday, then being added to the House Calendar.
With zero debate, it passed 60-5. That version was then submitted to the Senate, where it was also passed, in a 33-2 vote.
The Homeless Bill of Rights acts to prevent discrimination against homeless people by various state and local agencies as well as employers and medical facilities.* According to advocates, if signed by Governor Lincoln Chafee, it would be the first of its kind in the nation.
The legislation was sponsored by retiring Senator John Tassoni in the Senate and freshman Representative Chris Blazejewski in the House.
UPDATE: Due to reader comments about the nature of these bills, it seems prudent to expand the original article.
What the Homeless Bill of Rights does is prevent harassment or discrimination towards homeless people. This means kicking people off of park benches or out of libraries when they’re not doing anything wrong. It means that when someone applies for a job, the fact that their mailing address is listed as a shelter can’t be used as a reason to reject them. It means that a homeless person can’t have their stuff seized or searched if they’re not causing trouble. Basically, if the Governor signs this, it’s now a little bit easier for the homeless to enjoy all the little niceties of public life.
_________________________
Correction: An earlier version of this article stated “businesses” instead of “employers and medical facilities.” Thank you to our keen readers for pointing this out.
