The 9-c danger to localities

The Governor’s call for expanded powers to make budget cuts mid-year (the so called 9-c power) has the potential, if applied to local aid, to cause serious disruption to the operations of municipalities throughout the Commonwealth. The Governor’s request came in the context of his signing of the budget for FY2009 after vetoing $122.5 million in legislative spending. The idea of cutting local aid in mid stream after municipalities have set their budgets based on the already low state aid numbers would be devastating and certainly lead to draconian cuts in services. As the legislature contemplates the bestowing of such authority on Governor Patrick it ought to consider exempting local aid from such authority. Having us base our budgets on a local aid number put out by the State and then forcing us to make cuts mid-year would be an outrage. With only a half a year to make the necessary cuts the pain would in effect be doubled. Cities and Towns should mobilize now to insure that local aid, so vital to the delivery of the services that matter most, is exempt from the potential for 9-c cuts.

This entry was posted in Methuen, State News. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to The 9-c danger to localities

  1. Jules Gordon says:

    Your Honor,
    I recall when you you expressed a dream of a pure Democratically run state.

    Do you feel more fiscally secure now that your dream has come true?

    Jules

    Like

  2. Bill Manzi says:

    Well Jules I do not believe that this is a partisan problem per se. Governor Romney used 9-c powers to cut local aid, and he was a Republican.

    Like

  3. Jules Gordon says:

    Your Honor,

    You see my point. Even though your dream came true, the political class in this state is still running amok. There is still nepotism, earmarks, pandering…etc.

    The same is happening at the federal level. The difference is that at the federal level they can print money.

    Governance is going into the toilet.

    I’m curious, was it easier to work with Romney or Patrick?

    Jules

    Like

  4. Bill Manzi says:

    I think Patrick is actually more engaged. Romney is a brilliant person who had a business model that made the governor less accesible. When he began to eye the Presidency he simply gave up on being governor. I think Patrick was less polished politically upon job entry but I feel he is also exceedingly bright and more focused on the job itself. I also think he is getting the political part of the job down pretty quickly.

    Like

  5. Bob LeBlanc says:

    When Gov Romney cut $524,000 from the local aid funding for Methuen in 2003 what action was taken to absorb that cut?

    If the Governor is to be held accountable for the managment of the state budget why should he not have the power to freeze hiring, cut contracts and otherwise make cuts to conform to the constitutional requirement that the state budget be balanced?

    Out of a 23,8 BILLION budget the Governor only vetoed $122 MILLION, leaving the budget still $ 1 BILLION out of balance according to the Massachusetts Taxpayers Association. No profile in courage here by Gov Patrick. I guess you are right the Governor is learning the principles of same-old politics very well.

    I hear that one of our favorite politicians submitted an application for an important position. That should open up opportunities.

    Like

  6. Bill Manzi says:

    Bob,
    I do agree that the governor and the legislature should take steps to make sure our state budget is balanced. In 2003 cuts were made across the board, and created a huge backlash politically. Fire Department staffing was cut, library funding cut, police funding cut, DPW cut. Mayor Pollard utilized her “part of the solution” program, and tried to get our employees to make suggestions on potential cost savings. My objection to local aid being part of the 9-c authority is that the state should do this work before July 1, and stop playing games with the budget. If local aid needs to be cut to meet the constitutional mandate of a balanced budget then let them have the courage to cut it BEFORE we set our budgets up, so we can take the steps necessary to meet our legal requirement to balance our own budgets. Romney was wrong in 2003, and the Legislature would be wrong today to allow the 9-c authority to include the local aid accounts.

    Like

  7. Bob LeBlanc says:

    Bill,

    I agree completely. I am pleased that I was part of the effort to pass the Home Rule Amendment, Proposition 2 1/2 and a fight against unfunded state mandates. All were aimed at increasing accountability and lessen dependance on the property tax.

    I also agree that cities and towns ought to be able to rely on state local aid authorizations and not be caught short during the fiscal year.

    It seems to me that cutting $1 billion out of the state operating budget of $28 billion should have been an easy task.

    Like

  8. Bill Manzi says:

    Bob,
    I think that we are in general agreement here.
    In defense of the Governor and Legislature the health care initiative is already begining to creak from a cost standpoint, and it has been tough financially on this budget.
    My criticism would come in two different general areas. The first is the lack of real reform in some key areas of state government. The second is centered around budgeting that appears not based on empirical data but rather based on a hope and a prayer. (We hope revenues hold up, and if not we pray that the Governor handles it through 9-c).

    Like

Leave a comment