Burn Down the Mission Courthouse

Well, this is a no-brainer:

Rep. Raymond C. Church has filed legislation rescinding legislative approval granted last year for a new courthouse in the Blackstone Valley, saying the state shouldn’t be borrowing money for large projects when grappling with huge deficits.
“At a time when the state is trying to identify money to close a budget deficit of $171.9 million in the current fiscal year and a structural deficit of $412.3 million next year, it doesn’t make sense to take on more debt,” said Representative Church, a Democrat who represents District 48 in North Smithfield and Burrillville. “Now is just not the time to start a new project like this. Instead we should be looking for ways we can save money, and not building this courthouse will save about $7 million a year for the next 20 years.
The courthouse, which was approved as part of the state budget for the current fiscal year with funding to begin in Fiscal Year 2009, is estimated to cost about $70 million. If the state were to sell 20-year bonds to finance the project, it would likely double the total cost to $140 million.

Another no-brainer is the ouster of any legislator who actually votes against canceling the courthouse.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
16 years ago

We the voters gorged for too long on any bond referendum put on the ballot. Our gluttony has come back to haunt us. After the finger pointing’s done, we need to look in the mirror.

16 years ago

You and your fellow progressives need to “look in the mirror”. I’ve yet to see a single progressive (including you) acknowledge the elementary fact that spending cannot continually be increased at a rate two and a half times revenues.

16 years ago

Thank heavens. The last thing we need is a half billion dollar deficit and our hefty tax bills to be augmented by a pointless $70m monument.
Rhody, you have a point. Certainly, the biggest problem is that our elected officials have been irresponsible with public expenditures because too often, they view our hard earned tax dollars as monopoly money.
But voters, too, as they are standing in the voting booth looking at the list of bond referenda, don’t always realize that they themselves must pay that multi-zero, multi comma price tag if the project passes. Instead of treating each bond item like a personal check, they seem to view it as a casual survey question.

16 years ago

Mike, what do you think I just did?

Show your support for Anchor Rising with a 25-cent-per-day subscription.