Banks at Fault for Many Multi-Family Foreclosures


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Rep. O'Grady illustraes his point with a picture of 63 Kossuth St.

Rep. Jeremiah O’Grady thinks banks bear the responsibility for some of the multi-family rental properties that blight Rhode Island’s urban areas because they have been foreclosed upon.

To articulate his point, he used as an example 63 Kossuth St. in Olneyville, a property he knows well because his company, Olneyville Housing Corp. is restoring the abandoned property “at taxpayer expense,” he said, using federal money from the Neighborhood Stabilization Program.

The property was sold five times between 2002 and 2005, he said. In early 2002 it was sold for $35,000, then $67,000, then $134,000. In 2004, it was sold for $268,000 and in 2005 it sold for $350,000.

“Not surprisingly that building went into foreclosure when there was no one else to flip it to,” he said, “The bank evicted and the [tenants] walked away.”

O’Grady said by the time it sold for $134,000 banks should have known better than to issue such a loan because there was no realistic way a landlord could have made money renting the four one-bedroom units in the property.

“When banks lend on a commercial property then they ought to as responsible lenders lend on the value of that income stream and this is something that lenders did not do, to their detriment, to the detriment of their portfolio and to the detriment of the neighborhoods around them,” he told the House Judiciary Committee last night as it considered a bill that would prevent banks from evicting tenants who live in foreclosed properties.

To service a $350,000 mortgage, he told the committee, the landlord would have had to rent each unit for more than $1,000. The average rent for a one bedroom apartment in this neighborhood, he said, is about $525

“It’s just unreasonable and it’s reckless and that is why the banks should take some responsibility,” O’Grady said.

The legislation wouldn’t prevent banks from making bad loans, but it would prevent them from evicting tenants who rent in properties that go into foreclosure.

“The people who are innocent are the ones who are being punished the most,” said the bill’s sponsor, Rep. John Edwards, D- Tiverton, noting that Massachusetts and New Jersey already have such laws on their books.

But the issue is particularly problematic in Rhode Island, where a third of the foreclosures since 2009 have been multi-family homes, according to a recent HousingWorks RI report.

“The high rates of multifamily foreclosures in the state have resulted in the rental housing market becoming one of the most vulnerable segments of our economy,” says the report. “Each multi-family foreclosure affects multiple rental homes, which in turn threatens tenants with possible eviction. For every multi-family property foreclosed, approximately two to three families find themselves without shelter.”

Bills Would Protect Homeless, Renters, Mortgage Holders


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

A House committee today considers a number of bills that would protect people from banks, and one that would create what’s being called a “Homeless Bill of Rights.”

The Homeless Bill of Rights, sponsored by Rep. Christopher Blazejewski, D- Providence, would “provide all residents with an equal opportunity to live in decent, safe and sanitary accommodations regardless of housing status,” according to a press release. Specifically, the bill would guarantee that homeless people have the same access to housing, voting and social services as do people with legal addresses.

The three other bills before the House Judiciary Committee this afternoon would protect home owners and renters from fallout from the real estate collapse.

One, sponsored by John Edwards, a Tiverton Democrat, would “provide tenants of foreclosed properties greater protection against eviction” and another, sponsored by Stephen Ucci, D- Johnston, would prevent people from being evicted simply because the building they are living in has been foreclosed, according to the press release. So long as the tenant kept paying the rent, they couldn’t be evicted for 60 days after the sale.

Also, Rep. Richard Morrison’s bill that would require mortgage companies to make a “good faith” effort to renegotiate troubled home loans by  appointing a HUD-approved agency as a sort of mediator. “The goal of the process is to facilitate an agreement between the lender and homeowner that will avoid a foreclosure,” said a press release.

CWA Supports Product Stewardship for CFLs


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The House Environment and Natural Resources Committee heard testimony last week on several pieces of legislation aimed at involving producers in the end-of-life management of their products.

This concept, known as Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), creates financial incentives for manufacturers to design products that are less toxic, more durable, and more easily recycled. Rhode Island already has three EPR laws on the books. The collection of electronic waste, mercury auto switches, and mercury thermostats are managed through programs that are created and funded by manufacturers.

House Bill 7443 takes the next step in keeping mercury out of our waste stream, requiring manufacturers of florescent light bulbs either to develop a voluntary program to address the disposal of their bulbs or allow the Department of Environmental Management (DEM) to convene a stakeholder group charged with the creation of a mandatory program.

Sponsor of this bill and Committee Vice Chairperson, Rep. Donna Walsh (D-Charlestown) opened the hearing to a packed room by stating, “Producer responsibility is here to stay.” She also emphasized the flexibility of the bill. “There is a voluntary program in this. There are options.”

“I am excited about the NEMA’s (National Electrical Manufacturers Association) new position on producer responsibility,” said Jamie Rhodes, Rhode Island Director for Clean Water Action. “There was near universal agreement on the need for further action to prevent any additional mercury from being disposed of inappropriately. It is always a positive experience when we can work with manufacturers to develop a plan that works just as well for them as it does for all Rhode Islanders.”

Janet Coit, Director of Rhode Island DEM stated, “It looks like we’re moving towards the same thing.” The driving force behind DEM’s support for fluorescent lamp product stewardship is the hazard of improper disposal of mercury. Coit continued, “Mercury is a powerful neurotoxin and we do want to deal with that.” Liz Stone, spokeswoman for DEM, added, “What it comes down to, is that there are very few places in the state to take your bulbs.  So many people throw them in the trash because they don’t know what to do with them.”
In recognizing the positive steps that industry has taken voluntarily, staff attorney Jerry Elmer of the Conservation Law Foundations added, “Despite the fact that 90% of the mercury in light bulbs has been removed and that we’ve moving away from CFLs, there’s still a lot of mercury in the waste stream that needs to be addressed.” Rhode Island Resource Recovery Corporation estimated that they spend around $6,000 to dispose of the 8,000 – 12,000 fluorescent bulbs which they collect.

While House Bill 7443 gives DEM the ability to promulgate rules to address fluorescent lamps, it contains a specific provision to allow a voluntary program to be created by the industry and submitted to the DEM for approval. In support of a potential NEMA voluntary program, Stone added, “This law allows for a voluntary program and we at DEM prefer that. Laws have generally been passed because the industry needs that nudging.”

Matt Prindiville, Associate Director of the Product Policy Institute, described the success of similar programs in other states. “We have over 200 collection locations in Maine, many of them at retail locations. It’s easy for consumers to find these sites.”

RI municipalities have also supported the concept of EPR. “Fourteen of Rhode Island’s cities and towns, representing 56% of the state’s population, have already passed resolutions in support of producer responsibility,” affirmed Amy Vitale of Clean Water Action during the hearing. “This is an extension of existing Rhode Island laws aimed at reducing human exposure to mercury. Though the industry assures us that fluorescent lamps containing mercury are being phased out, their long lifespan ensures that they will be part of our waste stream for at least the next decade.”

Clean Water Action (CWA) is a national organization with over 40,000 members in Rhode Island, working to protect our environment, health, economic well-being and community quality of life. CWA organizes strong grassroots groups and coalitions, and campaigns to elect environmental candidates and solve environmental and community problems.

Many organizations were on hand to support this proposal, including RI Resource Recovery Corporation, Conservation Law Foundation, Clean Water Action, the RI Product Stewardship Council, Sierra Club, the RI DEM, Environment RI, and the Environment Council of RI.

Litigation Lending: Payday Loans for Plaintiffs


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Rep. Michael Marcello addresses litigation lending at a recent State House briefing.

While payday loans have garnered a lot of attention at the State House this session, the legislature is also considering new regulations on another form of predatory lending – this one is known as litigation lending.

Litigation lending is the term used when a company will loan a potential plaintiff in a lawsuit money up front in hopes of being repaid – with huge interest rates – once a settlement is reached. It may seem like a benevolent service, but it often doesn’t end up being a benefit for the people who use these loans.

“These lenders charge outrageous interest rates to people who – as a result of an injury are in desperate straights – unable to work, without the funds they need to support their families and often facing enormous healthcare bills,” said Donald Migliori, the president of the Rhode Island Association for Justice, a group that advocates for consumer rights in the judicial system.

Rep. Michael Marcello, a Scituate Democrat, has sponsored a bill that would cap interest rates on such loans at 21 percent. Currently, the interest rates on these loans can be as high as 200 percent.

Referencing the payday loan bills, Marcello said yesterday, “This is just one more line for consumer protection.”

To understand just how predatory litigation loans are, one need look no farther than how they came to be. According to a recent article in the Rhode Island Bar Journal, “the origins of the [litigation finance company] industry are illuminating.”

A former Las Vegas loan shark and mobile home park developer named Perry Walton came up with the concept in 1998 after pleading guilty to “extortionate collection of debt” in another scheme, according to the Bar Journal.

“Walton began loaning money to plaintiffs, structuring these advances as ‘contingent obligations’ in order to sidestep usury laws,” according to the Bar Journal. “He then invited would-be lenders to seminars, charging as much as $12,400 to impart the secret of his lucrative new scheme. Two years later, 400 people has been trained by Walton and a new subprime industry was born.”

The Bar Journal referenced an example of a man who was injured at work and brought suit but needed surgery well before a settlement could be reached. He borrowed $25,000 from LawCash for the surgery. Because the 3.85 percent interest rate compounded monthly, he ended up owing $48.94 in interest daily. The man earned $80 a day prior to his accident.

“Every day, in every state, persons who have been injured by others’ negligence turn to [litigation loans] for desperately needed funds,” according to the Bar Journal. “It is only reasonable that they not be further victimized by usurious loans.”

Legislature Considers Better Public Records Act


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Mike Field, of the Attorney General's office, testifies at a hearing on a proposal to update Rhode Island's Access to Public Records Act.

Rhode Island’s public records law may get some much-needed revisions if a bill heard by the House Judiciary Committee last night becomes law.

The proposal, introduced by Rep. Michael Marcello, D-Scituate, would be the first amendment to the Access to Public Records Act in 15 years. It would: decrease the amount of time a public agency has to make public records available from ten to 7 days; require municipalities and government agencies to designate and train a public records officer; require police departments to make initial arrest reports available within 24 hours; and would make correspondences between elected officials regarding policy public documents.

Officials with the Attorney General’s office, which submitted a separate bill that doesn’t reach as far, the Department of Administration and local and state police took issue with the legislation, advocates for civil liberties and open government applauded the effort.

“This may impose some additional burdens on government employees but it should be accepted as an important part of their work,” said Steve Brown, the executive director of the RI ACLU.

Brown said people and organizations that seek public records in Rhode Island often run into problems obtaining them. He said the changes would improve citizen’s access to public records.

While police are against compelling arrest reports to be made available within 24 hours, saying this could be onerous for officers, John Marion, the executive director of  Common Cause RI, said making arrest reports available as quickly as possible is an important function of a free society.

“Arresting someone is the strongest action the state can take against an individual,” he said. “When the state takes away someone’s liberty – that’s what an arrest represents – the state should provide information about that in as timely as manner as possible.”

There is also a Senate bill, sponsored by James Sheehan, D- North Kingstown, that would update the Access to Public Records Act that open records advocates say doesn’t go as far as this one in ensuring that citizens have easy access to public records.

 

Bill Would Cut Payday Loan APR from 260% to 36%


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Rep. Frank Ferri testifies on his bill that would reform paypay loans in RI. In the background is former Bill Murphy, former House speaker, who opposes the bill.

Two weeks ago a House committee heard some compelling testimony on a bill that would curb exorbitant interest rates on so-called “payday loans.” Today it’s the Senate’s turn, as the Corporations Committee will discuss Sen. Juan Pichardo’s version of the legislation.

And according to a press release, Pichardo seems pretty confident the bill will become law.

“With strong support from both sides of the aisle, Senator Pichardo and advocates for the legislation have high hopes for eliminating the cycle of debt caused by high-interest payday loans,” said the release.

Indeed, much of the opposition to the bill comes from special interest lobbyists, such as former House Speaker Bill Murphy.

The bill would lower the annual percentage rate on payday loans from 260 percent to 36 percent.

There were 143,201 payday loans made in Rhode Island last year for a total of more than $53 million, said Margaux Morisseau, with NeighborWorks Blackstone River Valley, a community-building non-profit based in Woonsocket. Only 2 percent of payday loans she said go to people who pay them all back and don’t take out another one.

While detractors of the bill say this is the only way some people can get a loan in a bind, Morisseau said there are several other options. In an email she detailed a few of them:

  • Capitol Good Fund lends $2000 loans at 15% APR.  Their customers have taken out CGF loans to help get out of the payday lending debt trap.
  • West Elmwood Housing Development Corporation is piloting the “Neighborhood Loan Store” that makes loans up to $1500 at 18-25% APR.
  • Navigant Credit Union also recently launched “Smart Start” a safe, easily accessed alternative product at all of their branches. They loan $600, with a 90 day term, no credit required.

Ultrasound Bill Bad Idea for Women, Dr.’s, RI


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Here at RI Future, we give the Providence Journal editorial board no small amount of grief for their reasoning and positions. But we were very pleased to see them take a strong stance against Rep. Karen MacBeth’s bill that will legislate mandatory ultrasounds for women who have decided to have an abortion.

“This approach is a very bad idea,” they wrote in their editorial on the bill this morning. “Doctors and women should be able to make these often difficult decisions with a measure of privacy, and without the cumbersome imposition of the state dictating what should be said and done. Regulations should be based on the health of patients, as much as reasonably possible, rather than on trying to enforce particular religious or moral views of politicians.”

We couldn’t agree more.

As Paula Hodges of Planned Parenthood told us when we first broke this story: “Politicians forcing doctors to use an ultrasound for political – and not medical – reasons is the very definition of government intrusion. Rhode Island lawmakers should not be interfering with personal, private medical decisions that should be best left to women and families and their doctors.”

The Projo points out, as we did last week, that doctors who don’t comply would be subject to fines starting at $100,000 and go up to $250,000. This is a ridiculously large fine, considering there is no medical issue here – only a political one. I suspect the high dollar amount is more about State House politics than anything else in that they might be able to get a few votes be negotiating down the fine.

That said, given the lack of support in the legislature for reproductive rights it might not be all that hard to win over votes on this bill. Less than a third of the Democratically-controlled General Assembly is on record as being pro-choice.

To that end, local women need everyone to let their elected officials know how they feel about this issue that seems to be doing little more than distracting government from dealing with the stuff that is really plaguing our society.

Fla. Judge Rules Pension Reform Unconstitutional


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

If a Rhode Island judge views pension reform laws the way a Florida judge recently did, public sector retirees may not have their benefits cut after all.

“This Court cannot set aside its constitutional obligations because a budget crisis exists in the State of Florida,” wrote Circuit Court Judge Jackie Fulford in her ruling that the state legislature could not enact a new law that required state employees to contribute to their pensions and forgo annual cost of living increases.

Here’s an article on the ruling from the Miami Herald.

Judge Fulford ruled that the law was “an unconstitutional impairment of plaintiffs’ contract with the State of Florida, an unconstitutional taking of private property without full compensation, and an abridgment of the rights of public employees to collectively bargain over conditions of employment.”

While many have argued that Rhode Island state workers do not have a contractual right to a pension, there is language in this state’s law that created the system suggesting that the legislature intended otherwise.

“All employees as defined in chapter 8 of this title who became employees on or after July 1, 1936, shall, under contract of their employment become members of the retirement system and shall receive no pension or retirement allowance from any other pension or retirement system supported wholly or in part by the state of Rhode Island,” reads Chapter 36-9-2, part of the set of laws that created the state employee pension system.

Rhode Island’s landmark pension reform law passed in a special session last year has yet to be challenged in court because no one has standing to challenge it until the cuts actually kick in. For current employees that will be this summer and for retired state workers that won’t happen until January. It is expected that the law will be challenged in court.

Payday Lenders Hire Power Broker Bill Murphy


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Former Speaker of the House Bill Murphy (photo by Ryan T. Conaty: ryantconaty.com)

One of the most interesting battles going on in the state house this year is over the fate of the “payday lending” industry. Payday loans are short-term loans, typically arranged something like this: I loan you $100 now in return for $110 taken from your next paycheck in a couple of weeks.

This sounds good, unless you do the math and notice that this works out to about a 260% annual interest rate.  If you don’t, it’s likely enough that in two weeks you’ll ask for an extension, and it only takes a couple of dozen like you and suddenly my business is booming.  And there are a lot more customers than that around here.

It wasn’t legal to charge interest rates that high until an exception to usury laws was carved out for check-cashing businesses in 2001. According to Margaux Morisseau, who is spearheading the effort to repeal this exception, payday lenders in Rhode Island now write over 140,000 of these loans each year, totaling $50 million, the bulk of which are written by Advance America, based in South Carolina, and Check ‘n Go, nominally based in Ohio, though it might be controlled by partners based in Texas or London. You can admire the process at rhodeislandpaydayloans.com. My favorite quote:

“When it is due date of your RI payday loan, the loan amount and the service charge will be automatically debited against your pay check. An extension of your RI cash advance is also possible by paying an extension fee.”

There are a couple of interesting points to the story (beside the lack of proofreaders for web content). First, it is consistently astonishing to me both how profitable it can be to exploit poor people — and how many financiers are eager to do so. After all, a huge amount of the financial carnage of the 2008 meltdown was built on liar loans and various kinds of mortgage fraud aimed at sucking wealth from low-income families who hoped to afford a home. (And no, the Community Reinvestment Act had nothing to do with this, as you’ll doubtless read in uninformed comments.)

Obviously there is a risk associated with these kinds of loans, but even assuming a generous loan loss provision, we’re talking about more than doubling one’s investment each year. These are returns investors in more, um, traditional businesses can only dream of.

There’s a bill in the Assembly that would repeal this exception and limit interest to 36% — still awfully high, but in the range that banks charge on some credit cards.  Morisseau has put together an impressive coalition to push it, and Representative Frank Ferri and Senator Juan Pichardo have been very energetic sponsors. Morisseau and Ferri found 50 co-sponsors out of 75 members for the House Version, and she and Pichardo got 25 out of 50 in the Senate. Sounds like a slam-dunk, right?

Wrong. On the other side, Advance America has retained Bill Murphy, the recently retired Speaker of the House.

So what can a retired Speaker do in the face of 50 house members who oppose him?  Sure he knows where a lot of bodies are buried, but what can he possibly hold over so many people?  How is this a fair fight?

Here’s how it works. Murphy’s services are not provided gratis to Advance America. They are paying him $50,000 this year, according to the Secretary of State’s web site. How much work will that entail?  A bunch of phone calls and a handful of meetings. Nice work if you can get it.

And you can get it if you try — so long as you’re a current member of the House or Senate leadership. If Bill Murphy can prove to Advance America that he’s worth $50,000 a year for almost no work, then Speaker Gordon Fox or Majority Leader Nick Mattiello or even Corporations Committee Chair Brian Patrick Kennedy can justifiably claim to be worth the same amount to lobbying clients who happen along after they retire from the House. In other words, killing a bill like this on Bill Murphy’s say-so is key to a big payday for them down the road. Preserving a system that benefits Murphy is the way to keep the trough full at which they might hope someday to feed.

Of course, there are lobbyists who do real work for their money — arranging testimony, doing research, preparing press campaigns — and some of those are even ex-legislators. But the real money is in having a name that can make things happen despite how many are on the other side.

Now in fairness, I have no idea whether Fox, Mattiello, or Kennedy hopes to cash in on their service in this way, and in all likelihood, neither do you. But a very compelling indicator of whether they do is if this bill — sponsored by two-thirds of the House — gets out of committee and onto the House floor for an actual vote. Are the people who control the agendae of the House and Senate interested in a democratically run General Assembly, or is their interest in preserving the system by which ex-legislators profit handsomely from what was, in theory, public service?

Appendix:

For comparison,

Dan Connors, former Senate Majority Leader

George Caruolo, former House Majority Leader

Stephen Alves, former Senate Finance Chair

 

Committee Considers Legalized Marijuana


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Marijuana would be legal, and available at designated stores, if a bill being heard at the State House tonight were to become law.

“It would be a brave new world,” said Rep. Edith Ajello, a Providence Democrat who is sponsoring the legislation. “It would be taxed. There would be stores that sold marijuana, legally licensed by the state just as stores are licensed to sell alcohol.”

Ajello, it should be noted, doesn’t think that brave new world will come to fruition this session. Not only does she not think her bill would pass this year, she doesn’t think the federal government would allow the change.

But a related bill, which would decriminalize marijuana, might. This bill, she said, has healthy support in both chambers and is similar to the law in Massachusetts and Connecticut.

That decriminalize bill, sponsored by Rep. John Edwards, D- Tiverton, Portsmouth, would lessen the punishment for possession of less than an ounce of pot a ticket and a $150 fine. Oh yeah, and “forfeiture of the marijuana,” according to the bill that will also be heard tomorrow night.

Law enforcement is expected to oppose the legislation.

Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut and New York have all decriminalized possession of small amounts of pot. In total, 13 states have such reduced penalties for possession.

Ajello said she expects marijuana will be legal in the near future once more people realize how harmless it is.

I do think it is where we will be,” she said. “Marijuana is not thought to be any more dangerous than alcohol and we have legalized and taxed alcohol. I think ultimately we can move through decriminalization to legalizing and taxing.”

Chafee’s Municipal Plan Helps Poorest Towns Most


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

It’s hard to be happy about something that will hurt so many working class retirees across Rhode Island, as would Governor Chafee’s proposed bills to help cities and towns. But Chafee designed his suite of legislation to help the most cash-strapped communities the most, which is the right way to handle the state’s municipal fiscal crisis that is disproportionately plaguing the poor.

Rather than giving every community the ability to suspend annual pension increases, Chafee’s proposal would only allow those with pension funds less than 60 percent funded to exercise this tool, reports the Providence Journal. While no retiree deserves to have the deal they struck changed, at least this wasn’t a blanket exemption.

Chafee also made a number of cost-saving tools only available to the “most distressed” communities. As we reported earlier this week, those four communities are Providence, Pawtucket, Woonsocket and West Warwick. Ian Donnis has a good list of the relief measures offered to these cities and towns.

While Ted Nesi notes that former Governor Carcieri offered some of the same mandate exemptions that Chafee proposed yesterday, the 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. After all, no one is talking about how rough it is for East Greenwich, Barrington and South Kingstown have it. Rather it’s the plight of Central Falls, Woonsocket, West Warwick, Pawtucket and Providence that is pulling our state down.

Chafee: State Aid Cuts Put Poor Towns in Peril


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
Governor Chafee said state aid cuts to cities and towns is a primary reason Rhode Island's poorest communities are struggling.

Governor Chafee said former Governor Don Carcieri and the General Assembly put struggling communities in peril when they cut some $195 million in state aid to cities and towns.

“It’s no wonder Providence is in trouble, it’s no wonder Pawtucket is having a trouble making payroll, it’s no wonder Central Falls went into bankruptcy,”  he said after speaking at a conference on the state’s economy at Bryant University today. “They just couldn’t sustain those kinds of cuts. There is no property tax base to transfer those kinds of cuts onto.”

Chafee said Carcieri and the General Assembly essentially balanced the state’s budget by taking money away from cities and towns – a move that he said the state’s wealthy communities could withstand but the poorer communities could not.

“I thought it was the path of least resistance,” he said. “That way they could go and say we didn’t raise taxes but at the same time they did raise taxes on the property tax payers of those communities. It was a little disingenuous to say we’re not raising taxes when you are passing it down to the property tax payers of the distressed communities.”

He said he would be unveiling a bill “later this week” that will help Rhode Island’s cities and towns. In addition to including enabling legislation that will allow cities and towns to rework annual pension increases as well as addition funding for local school districts. The additional school spending, he hopes, will be paid for by his proposed increase in the meals and beverage tax.

His bill will also include, he said, relief from state mandates for some of the state’s poorest communities, such as Providence, Pawtucket, Woonsocket and West Warwick. Other communities could be included as well, but he indicated it would not provide mandate relief for every community in the state.

He wouldn’t say which mandates would be included.

“It’s the usual suspects,” he said. “They are the ones that many of the town managers and mayors have been talking about for decades.”

Budgeting for Disaster Part V: Granting a Problem


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
FY2013 budget

FY2013 budgetOur tour of the state budget documents continues. We leave the Executive Summary for the time being (we’ll be back for the all-important schedules and for the invaluable predictions of the future), and move into Volume I.

Volume I covers “General Government”, which includes the offices of all the elected officials, and the departments of Revenue, Business Regulation, and Labor and Training. Plus the Department of Administration which holds all the central functions. It’s also got all the quasi-public agencies like the Economic Development Corporation, RIPTA, the Airport Corporation, and Resource Recovery, who runs the state Central Landfill. For each department and agency, there is a summary page, and then a page for each of the major divisions. This is the part of the tour where the guide is supposed to tell funny jokes to fill up the travel time as you cruise from one interesting locale to the next.

The legislature’s budget is in this volume, so let’s look there first. The overall budget for the Assembly is about $41 million this year, and the Governor is proposing to cut it by a little more than $1 million, about half from supplies and expenses and the rest from the grants budget. There’s no change in the number of personnel, and it looks like they’re anticipating a 3% raise for most everyone, and — what’s this? — it’s the rising cost of health care, just like everywhere else. Remember, no matter what you’ve been told, it’s rising health care costs that are pushing up the cost of your government more than anything else.

Legislative grants

Oh, wait, did you want to hear about the infamous grants budget? This is the source of the legislative grants, random bits of money awarded by the leadership to reward this or that legislator for helping out around the place. It mostly goes to non-profits in the legislator’s home district, like say, Dan Doyle’s Institute for International Sport that we’re hearing so much about these days. They apparently got $575,000 in 2007 for a fabulous building on the URI campus that remains unfinished today.

There are also plenty of excellent, well-run non-profits who get support this way. The problem is that the way these grants are awarded has a lot to do with ring-kissing and begging and maybe not so much to do with merit. Lots of ring-kissers have other merits, but when merit isn’t the main criteria, you’ll undoubtedly get some who are better at the kissing than the service. (This makes the occasional screw-up like the Institute into the fault of some specific person, though no one seems to be saying who just yet.)

How much does it cost? On paper, you’ll see a grant budget line item of $2.8 million in the current year, and the Governor is proposing to cut it back to $2.3 million. The way the system works, though, there is much more than that available. The way it works is that lots of the dollars will wind up as line items on the budget of some agency whose mission is vaguely related to the non-profit’s. So a theatre might get a grant and it would come directly from the RISCA budget, not from this line item. This is a problem both because it provides less money for the agency mission, something that you can’t see from the budget documents, and because counting all those grants isn’t possible from the outside.

What else? One can’t help but notice that despite the modest cut Governor Chafee has proposed, the legislature’s budget is up a healthy 42% in ten years, 2003-2012, about 3.5% per year. This is somewhat less than overall state expenses, which are up 48%, but it’s embarrassingly close to the 42% rise over that time in the statewide property tax levy. One thing you’ll hear if you wander around the halls of the State House and talk to legislators is complaints about out-of-control municipal budgets. What those legislators don’t seem to understand is that the town councils and mayors are doing pretty much as good a job as the legislators.

It’s easy to understand legislators not noticing this. What’s less forgivable is the way they keep voting to cut taxes without cutting their own budget. Over that decade 2003-2012, we saw a capital gains tax cut, an income tax cut for rich people, and several high-profile tax credits pass the Assembly. At none of those times did anyone propose a proportional cut in the Assembly’s own budget. Cuts for thee and not for me. If you care about controlling costs in government, this is the kind of behavior that has to be rendered embarrassing (or at least politically dangerous) for elected officials.

Time to move on. Next stop: DMV!
Read the previous posts in this series.

Speaker Fox Says Tax Equity Bill DOA


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Despite nearly half of the House signing onto a bill that would raise taxes on the richest Rhode Islanders, Speaker Gordon Fox said he intends to keep his promise not to touch the income tax structure in this budget cycle.

“At this point I’m closing the door on doing anything with income tax until we have a little more historical evidence about what’s going with the reforms we did a few years ago,” he said.

In 2010, the General Assembly passed a budget proposal put forward by then Governor Don Carcieri to lower the tax rate on those who make more than $100,000 from 9.9 to 5.9. Fox said this will be the first budget year that the General Assembly can see how those tax cuts affect the state’s budget (people are now filing taxes for 2011, the first year the restructured rate was in place). He also said a number of tax exemptions were eliminated when the overall rate was reduced.

“When given all the information I think that a significant number members will support my position on this,” Fox said.

But some legislators, speaking on background, said the bill that would roll back the Carcieri tax cuts for those who make more than $250,000 a year, still has life – though it could look much different if it does pass.

Even Fox, who has described himself as a fiscally conservative Democrat, would not rule out taking another look at the tax code in future budget cycles.

“As we get the empirical data going forward what we’ll do,” he said, “I never want to make any predictions about what we would do in the future, but we’ll see.”

Rep Medina Says He Was Profiled by Police


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

At a hearing on a bill that would protect people from being profiled by police based on their race, Rep. Leo Medina, D- Providence, no stranger to law enforcement, told the story of the time he was pulled over late at night and essentially harassed by an East Providence police officer.

Then Chairman of the Rhode Island Human Rights Commission Michael Evora testified about why some of law enforcement’s objections to the bill contradict best practices used by police in Rhode Island. “I respectfully submit,” he said, “that in some instances the term officer safety is used as a subterfuge.”

Budgeting for Disaster – Part III


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387
FY2013 budget

FY2013 budgetWe continue our tour of state budget documents. The Executive Summary  has a lot of useful information, but the parts that I find myself referring to most often are not the text descriptions of the Governor’s program for the various departments, but the numbers in the back: the summary tables, the planning values the Budget Office used to predict the future, the wonderfully informative appendix C, which shows how much state aid each Rhode Island city or town gets, and appendix D, which does the same for education aid.

In a state with one bankrupt city and several more threatening to dive into bankruptcy, these are the focus of a lot of my attention. What deserves at least as much attention are the same sections from previous years. Let’s start with Appendix C.

The first thing you’ll notice if you flip, click, scroll, or slide to Appendix C is that local aid comes in lots of different forms. There is “appropriated aid”, which comes out of the general state taxes (called “general revenue” in the budget), and “shared” (or “pass-through”) aid, which is money the state collects on behalf of a city or town. For example, “payment in lieu of taxes” (PILOT) money is paid to a town instead of taxes on state property, and is appropriated in the budget, while the meals and beverage tax is a portion of the sales tax, collected on behalf of a city or town and passed on to them.

The meals and beverage tax collected in Providence restaurants goes to Providence and the tax collected in Newport restaurants goes to Newport, and so on. The numbers in the appropriated aid represent actual decisions made by legislators and the governor. The shared aid numbers are just estimates of how much those taxes will bring in.

There are a couple of things worth noticing about these numbers. One is that the state is planning to give the cities and towns $61 million in appropriated aid in 2013, which is exactly the same amount budgeted for 2012. Level funding sounds like a cold shower, but compared to recent history, it’s a warm bath. In 2008, appropriated state aid amounted to about $250 million. Or well, it would have, except the legislature cut $10 million halfway through that fiscal year. Providence got a $2.4 million cut, Pawtucket lost $850,000, and Woonsocket lost $600,000. Central Falls was hit for $250,000.

These are cuts in the neighborhood of 1%, which doesn’t seem that big a deal, although they came halfway through the fiscal year, so the cities and towns had to cut around 2% of their expenses to make up for the lost time. For cities under financial stress, this hurt.

For 2009, the Governor proposed a slight increase in aid, back up to $244 million. But once again, this was cut halfway through the fiscal year, to $215 million. Providence was cut $5.7 million, Pawtucket $2 million, Woonsocket $1.4 million, and Central Falls $600,000. Again, the cuts came along well into the fiscal year, making them at least twice as hard to deal with. For Central Falls, this worked out to cutting more than 7% of the annual municipal budget in a few months.

The pretense of maintaining the level of aid was burst by this point, so the Governor proposed cutting municipal aid by 14% for fiscal year 2010, to $184 million. Are you keeping track? To recap: In September 2007, Central Falls was on track to get $3.6 million from the state, or a bit less than a fifth of their budget. By May of 2009, the Governor was suggesting they get by with half that amount, a 10% cut in their budget.

But even that cut wasn’t enough, and with only months to go in the 2010 fiscal year, the state slashed total aid yet again, from $184 million to $118 million. Providence saw a $12 million cut, Pawtucket $5.1 million, Woonsocket $2.8 million, and Central Falls $750,000. This time, quite a bit of the cut came in the last quarter of the year, leaving virtually no time to make up the cuts. And for the 2011 budget Carcieri proposed to cut total municipal aid all the way down to $49 million. That year, insurgents in the Assembly pressured the leadership to put a little aid back in the budget, but it still only got up to $60 million, down 76% from just three years before.

I’m sure it was a coincidence that Central Falls went into receivership in May of 2010. At least the way everyone talks about Central Falls, their bankruptcy was all the fault of their unions and retirees, and the state played no part besides offering them a receiver to work out their issues. Their annual budget was $18.9 million in 2008, of which $3.6 million was state aid. In 2010, they were promised only $1.8 million, but got only $1.1 million. And in 2011 they didn’t even get half of that.

In 2008, Providence expected to get $65 million from the state, to help with its $302 million municipal (non-education) budget. In 2009, it went down to $57 million, and in 2010, the city still expected to see $49 million, but got $29 million instead. Over two short years, the state cut 10% of the Providence budget, and each time it happened well after the fiscal year was underway. But it’s fashionable to blame David Cicilline for Providence’s fiscal crisis, so apparently there’s no point in asking Governor Carcieri or any of the Assembly leadership what made them think the municipal budgets could withstand this kind of abuse without cracking.

Here’s the part that makes it all a bit worse. A lot of the aid cut technically did not go to the city or town itself, but to you. In the fall of 2009, towns expected $133 million of state aid to reduce the property tax on your car in fiscal 2010. The state was paying a portion of your taxes for you. The towns only got half of that, and almost all the rest was cut for fiscal 2011. Essentialy, the state was telling the cities and towns to make up the difference from property taxes on cars—now! Some did send out new car tax bills, but many just sucked it up and made cuts.

You see a lot of people wringing their hands about Rhode Island’s municipal fiscal crisis—How will we pay for all those retirees? What were those Mayors thinking? Can you believe those unions?—but how often do you see the story of the state budget included in the saga?

When I describe this sequence of events to people, they will point out that state revenues plunged in 2009, so the state had no choice. But this is an absurd position to take. After all, during each year of these huge municipal aid cuts, Rhode Island was increasing the amount of a generous tax cut granted to the richest taxpayers in the state. That is, taxes were cut further each year at the same time aid was slashed to all the cities and towns. Governor Carcieri and Assembly leaders felt that lower taxes on rich people were important enough to slash aid to  cities and towns—a position they still hold.

Next: Education (really)

‘Access 2011’ Looks at General Assembly


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

The General Assembly complied with the state Open Meetings law nearly 100 percent of the time last year, according to our new “Access 2011” report.

House compliance rose from 94 percent in 2010 to a record 97 percent last year. Senate compliance increased from 90 percent to 99 percent over the same time period. The Senate’s mark equaled the record it set in 1999 during the administration of former Secretary of State Jim Langevin, who introduced the first “Access” report in 1997.

“A critical measure of government’s commitment to keeping the public informed about its activities is accountability.”

The state’s Open Meetings law requires most governmental bodies to post meeting notices and agendas at least 48 hours in advance. While the General Assembly is exempt from the law, the House and the Senate do issue meeting notices in accordance with their own rules.

As in previous years, nearly all the violations occurred during the last days of the session. Nineteen of the 20 total Open Meetings violations occurred during the two days before the General Assembly recessed on July 1. In 2010, there were 28 last-minute violations.

Marriage equality back on State House agenda


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387

Same sex couples in Rhode Islanders will have another opportunity at equal protection under the law as Rep. Art Handy, D-Cranston, will again introduce a bill in the General Assembly that would afford the same marriage rights as their heterosexual counterparts enjoy.

“Every year we move forward,” Handy said, who has introduced a similar bill in the previous nine legislative sessions. Sen. Rhoda Perry, D-Prov., will introduce the bill in the Senate.

Last year, Rhode Island passed a law that allowed gay couples to enter into civil unions. But civil unions, especially Rhode Island’s version, is not tantamount to marriage.

“Separating straight and gay couples into different institutions just isn’t legal,” said Ray Sullivan, of Marriage Equality Rhode Island. “Until same sex couples can marry, Rhode Island has not achieved justice under the law.”

Aside from the fact that “separate but equal” has already been deemed unconstitutional, Rhode Island’s civil union law has a provision that allows religious institutions, such as Catholic hospitals, to be exempt from some of the law’s provisions, meaning a Catholic hospital could deny a family member access to their spouse during an emergency situation or a religious school could deny health care benefits to an employee’s same sex spouse.

There is another bill that will be introduced that would repeal this part of the state’s civil union law, known as the Corvese amendment because Rep. Doc Corvese, D-Prov. and an ardent opponent of gay rights, managed to sneak the provision into the bill at the eleventh hour last session.

Because of the Corvese Amendment, Sullivan said. “Rhode Island has far and away the most discriminatory language of any marriage or civil union bill in the country.”

Last session, the same sex marriage bill did not get a straight up or down vote, even with the speaker of the House, Gordon Fox, being openly gay. He told me after last session that not supporting gay marriage was one of the most difficult decisions of his political career.

Senate President Teresa Paiva Weed does not support equal marriage rights for same sex couples. She told me last year that she thinks Rhode Islanders are more comfortable with civil unions than gay marriage. A poll last year indicated that Rhode Island actually supports gay marriage 50 percent  to 41 percent.

Some legislators have said they worry about electoral repercussions from Catholics, but in Massachusetts “every legislator who supported marriage equality and ran for reelection was reelected,” according to Sullivan.

The marriage equality proposal was first reported by Dan McGowan of GoLocalProv.


Deprecated: Function get_magic_quotes_gpc() is deprecated in /hermes/bosnacweb08/bosnacweb08bf/b1577/ipg.rifuturecom/RIFutureNew/wp-includes/formatting.php on line 4387