I am fortunate to have been blessed with a wonderful Dad. And on this Father’s Day, his special day, I want to pay a special tribute to him.
Dad, who turned 80 last month, grew up in the Depression years. It was kids from his high school class year of 1943 who joined the World War II efforts in places like the Battle of the Bulge, although the effects from an earlier bout with rheumatic fever ended up disqualifying him from serving.
He went on to become the baritone soloist in his college choir, touring parts of North America. That was one of the earlier experiences in what has been a passionate lifetime love affair with music. Whenever music played at home during my childhood, I remember Dad often losing himself in the music – a practice made much easier by his deep knowledge of most classical music compositions. I also remember many years later, when the Three Tenors were first hitting it big with the general public, calling home to ask him the name of a certain piece they were performing on television, which he rapidly identified after I held the phone in the direction of the TV. Few things brought him more pleasure than attending musical performances at the Music Academy of the West when they lived in Santa Barbara for nearly 20 years or attending first-rate musical performances in downtown Los Angeles over the years by the Los Angeles Opera or Los Angeles Philharmonic. He has had the pleasure of seeing many of the great performers and conductors.
As a family, music was an active part of all of our lives and we had a number of particularly memorable musical traditions. One of my favorites was visiting the homes of numerous friends on Christmas Eve and singing Christmas carols as a family to those friends.
I will always remember the look of horror (or was it just outright disgust?) on his face over 30 years ago when, as the oldest child, I introduced Deep Purple records into a house in which Dad’s definition of modern music was Brahms – with only a few 20th century exceptions! I was convinced back then that riffs from Ritchie Blackmore’s guitar or Jon Lord’s organ were far more interesting than Mozart or Beethoven. In response to such youthful moments, it seemed like Dad would just smile. Now, with the perspective that comes with time and some maturity, it was probably more of a pained grimace!
Dad, a retired Presbyterian minister, met Mom when they were both attending Princeton Theological Seminary. They will celebrate their 53rd wedding anniversary next week.
I remember how supportive he was nearly 25 years ago when Mom began to develop what became a passion in her life, a love for art. That love has led her to be an active docent first at the Santa Barbara Museum of Art and, more recently, at the Huntington Art Collections in Pasadena where she remains active today at the age of 78.
Dad has always loved nature. He maintained a garden at our homes and yardwork brought him great satisfaction – a concept I cannot comprehend even today! To this day, he can tell you the names of all sorts of trees, plants, and flowers.
Dad and Mom moved out to California in 1955, with the entrepreneurial charge to start a new Presbyterian Church in La Mirada, a then-small town of just several thousand people surrounded by orchards near the border of Los Angeles and Orange counties. Ever modest, we kids only found out many years later how Dad helped the Jewish synagogue get organized as he was building up his own church, including providing a meeting place at the Presbyterian Church until they had their own site. Or how, when his building was the only non-school public building in town, providing the first meeting place for the Boy Scouts. Dad built the church to over 600 members in his eight years of service in La Mirada.
Dad was a pastor’s pastor. Kind, empathetic and always willing to help others. The helping of others took various forms ranging from assisting individuals with a variety of needs, speaking out for civil rights in the early 1960’s long before it became politically fashionable, and being one of the original organizers of the Hospice of Santa Barbara – the second oldest hospice in the United States – where he subsequently served as Board member and President of the Board. To this day, he still provides counseling to others as well as periodic seminars focused on providing helpful tools to others in need.
Dad’s work schedule created numerous logistical challenges, to say the least, for our family life. We did not spend a lot of time together when I was growing up. His busiest times of the year were Christmas and Easter – when we were out of school. His work week peaked on the weekend – when we were out of school. He had Monday’s off – when we were in school. And he often had evening meetings at church on Tuesday through Thursday nights – when we were at home.
Nonetheless, we always had dinner together as a family where active conversations were a given. Whether discussing the activities of our individual days or discussing current events, some of the happiest memories of my childhood were from those times around the dinner table and afterwards when we moved into the living room.
Dad had the month of August off for vacation and some of the other happiest memories of my childhood happened during that month. We took two driving trips across the country. Whether it was seeing the grandeur of our great country – like Washington, D.C. or Colonial Williamsburg or Philadelphia or Cranberry Island in Maine or Route 66 or the Smoky Mountains or Utah – or just locking the keys inside the car at our Wyoming hotel, we always had fun. We still chuckle about that one scenic view stop which consisted of looking out upon acres and acres of corn fields. Mom used to read books to us during those trips, books such as Cheaper by the Dozen and the Trapp Family Singers’ story.
We got lost a number of times on those driving trips and it was Dad’s good humor about it that made experiences such as being lost in the warehouse district of Chicago – after dark – or in the heart of Boston – on a Friday afternoon – both memorable and a source of ongoing delight. To the point that we almost looked forward to getting lost again.
Other vacation trips included driving to Victoria, British Columbia and taking annual treks to see one set of grandparents in Northern California. It was on the latter trips where I discovered the majestic physical beauty of that great state and fell in love with its characteristics that have now, unfortunately, been largely lost forever.
Dad taught me some important personal values, usually by example and sometimes by explicit coaching. For those lessons, I will always be grateful.
A particularly happy recent memory was a weekend the two of us spent together several years ago in the Bay Area. Whether it was walking through Muir Woods, touring Napa Valley or having lunch in the beautiful City of San Francisco, it was an experience I will cherish forever.
Over ten years ago, he was able to overcome complications following prostate cancer surgery. He now has what is called smoldering (asymptomatic) multiple myeloma, against which his treatment regimen has been successful so far.
Last month, the L.A. Times did a wonderful article entitled These Retirees Have Centuries of Service to Faith, which was “about people who live at Monte Vista Grove Homes, a Christian retirement community in Pasadena in the shadows of the San Gabriel Mountains. It’s an unusual center for 130 veteran Presbyterian leaders and their spouses, including many of whom have worked around the world.” One part of the article briefly mentioned Mom and Dad:
Even in retirement, many of these Presbyterians are busy. They volunteer at local churches, schools and nonprofit groups.
At home, they deliver mail, staff the reception desk, stand security watch at night, and help frail residents in the assisted living and skilled nursing facilities that are open to nonresidents.
For example, on Thursday, when residents gathered for a presentation of Mark Twain’s “The Diaries of Adam and Eve,” residents in wheelchairs from the assisted living quarters also were in the audience.
After a prayer and a hymn, the Rev. Donald Hawthorne — also known as the whistler of Monte Vista Grove — and his wife, Lee, an art historian, set the tone for a contemporary adaptation of Twain’s commentary on the first man and woman. She read the creation story from Genesis 1. And he did a “musical overture” by whistling such Broadway hits as “Some Enchanted Evening” and “Wouldn’t It Be Lovely.”
Then the Rev. Jack Lorimer, who served 40 years as a missionary in Egypt, and Nancy Macky, a retired English professor from Westminster College in New Wilmington, PA., stepped on stage to read from Twain’s diaries – with gestures and all. They’re no amateurs; both taught drama in college…
Oh, the whistling. He is good at it and, when you know music well and have a bounce in your step, there is much to whistle about!
Dad, I am proud to be your son and to share your name. Happy Father’s Day!
Here is another editorial entitled Government pensions fund second careers about the outrageous problems with public sector pensions:
Manchester Town Manager Steven R. Werbner has applied to become Tolland’s (Conn.) town manager, and he’d probably be a fool not to take the job if it is offered, because if he goes to Tolland, Manchester will make him rich.
Having worked in various town-government positions in Manchester for almost 30 years, Werbner is now entitled to collect an annual pension of about $90,000 a year, even though he is only 52. While the salary Tolland is advertising for its manager’s job — $88,000 to $114,000 — would be as much as $40,000 less than the $129,000 Werbner earns in Manchester, that $90,000 annual pension payment from Manchester would cover at least twice any reduction in Werbner’s total income if he took the job in Tolland.
Given his experience, Tolland probably will offer Werbner something closer to $114,000, so if he accepts the job he probably will end up with annual income of more than $200,000 a year.
If he holds the Tolland job for 10 years or so until he reaches the age at which most people stop working, Manchester will have paid him about a million dollars, not really as retirement compensation but instead as a bonus for working elsewhere.
Werbner’s situation is no fluke…
Indeed, retirements that are really the start of second careers underwritten by generous pension benefits are common in public employment in Connecticut. The rationale for extravagant pension benefits is that they are necessary to attract and keep good people in government. But increasingly these extravagant pension benefits are causing people to leave, not to stay.
The public that pays for making Connecticut a public employee paradise may think that “pension” or “retirement” benefits are meant to support people when they are no longer working, not to give government administrators more compensation than the governor. The public also may think that times are hard in government in Connecticut and that this or that service must be curtailed because public needs are becoming overwhelming even as tax support of those needs is drying up.
In fact government in Connecticut is always rolling in money even as elected officials lack the political courage to confront the primary beneficiaries of that money, the government’s own employees, whose unions are the most politically influential special interests…
…Government-pension benefits should support people who are no longer working, not subsidize people in beginning second careers. State law and municipal ordinance alike should prohibit payment of such benefits to any public employee before a traditional retirement age, such as 62 or 65, or before his or her incurring a disability that prevents him from working, or at least should reduce benefits in proportion to income a beneficiary continues to earn by working…
…should make it an issue in this year’s municipal-election campaign. Connecticut should want its veteran public employees to be able to retire comfortably. Connecticut should not want them to collect luxurious retirement benefits when they are still working and getting paid so much better than ordinary taxpayers.
Making public sector employees well-off, another benefit brought to us by the public sector unions and paid for by the rest of us – the working families and retirees across America.
It is important to remember that the public sector unions oppose any reforms to these rich pension benefits.
Now ask yourself again who represents working people and retirees in Rhode Island and across America?
It often seems like a culture of fear and intimidation pervades Rhode Island.
As I have spoken out publicly during my tenure on the East Greenwich School Committee and during the years since then, the single most frequent comment town residents have said to me was “We agree wholeheartedly with you but we cannot speak out publicly because we are afraid teachers and administrators will retaliate by treating our children unfairly.”
(All of this is quite ironic because one of the primary criticisms upon my appointment to the Committee centered on our children attending a private school. However, time has shown that the lack of involvement has liberated me and other people in similar situations to speak out.)
During the current teachers’ union contract stalemate in town, people have told me stories about how certain teachers – who are not supporting the hard union line – are being socially isolated by the hard line union supporters.
Now, after I emailed out yesterday’s posting which identified the many unanswered budget questions for the East Greenwich Fire District annual meeting next week, one town resident wrote back and said:
Years ago I heard that people do not show up to the Fire District Financial meeting is because they are afraid of retribution–may call for help/assistance and be refused because of their opposition to any increases. May or not be true, but if people feel that way, what can be done?
These are signs of a bad political culture, of preserving an under-performing culture which is dominated by special interests. These are signs of an establishment that is focused on maintaining the status quo – at all costs.
Fortunately, technology has enabled facts to become more broadly available to citizens in this state via blogsites and active citizens. The facts tell a damning story and it is liberating more and more people to speak out. Try as hard as they might – and even as they win short-term political victories – the defenders of the failing establishment cannot turn back the clock. That means they will only get more desperate over time as their ability to dictate outcomes weakens.
There is a budding revolution against those who protect the status quo to the detriment of working families and retirees across Rhode Island.
Now watch that revolution grow.
I’m trying to figure something out here. President Bush, and RI Republicans running for statewide office, generally run very strong in South County. According to a report, South County is among the nation’s leaders in marijuana “consumption.” Given that smoking pot is (I think) safely associable to anti-establishment behavior and that South County votes for “anti-establishment” Republicans more regularly than for “establishment” Democrats, is it possible that we conservative Rhode Islanders should propose the legalization of marijuana statewide in hopes of toppling the current Democrat establishment in our legislature?
[Open full post]David Gelernter of Yale has written this editorial:
…Our schools teach history ideologically. They teach the message, not the truth…They are propaganda machines.
Ignorance of history destroys our judgment. Consider Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill), who just compared the Guantanamo Bay detention center to Stalin’s gulag and to the death camps of Hitler and Pol Pot – an astonishing, obscene piece of ignorance. Between 15 million and 30 million people died from 1918 through 1956 in the prisons and labor camps of the Soviet gulag. Historian Robert Conquest gives some facts. A prisoner at the Kholodnaya Gora prison had to stuff his ears with bread before sleeping on account of the shrieks of women being interrogated. At the Kolyma in Siberia, inmates labored through 12-hour days in cheap canvas shoes, on almost no food, in temperatures that could go to minus-58. At one camp, 1,300 of 3,000 inmates died in one year.
“Gulag” must not go the way of “Nazi” and become virtually meaningless…
…I have met college students who have never heard of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge – the genocidal monsters who treated Cambodia in the 1970s to a Marxist nightmare unequaled in its bestiality since World War II.
And I know college students who have heard of President Kennedy but not of anything he ever did except get assassinated. They have never heard JFK’s inaugural promise: that America would “pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to ensure the survival and the success of liberty.” But President Bush remembers that speech, and it’s lucky he does.
To forget your own history is (literally) to forget your identity. By teaching ideology instead of facts, our schools are erasing the nation’s collective memory…
There is an ongoing culture war between Americans who are ashamed of this nation’s history and those who acknowledge with sorrow its many sins and are fiercely proud of it anyway. Proud of the 17th century settlers who threw their entire lives overboard and set sail for religious freedom in their rickety little ships. Proud of the new nation that taught democracy to the world. Proud of its ferocious fight to free the slaves, save the Union and drag (lug, shove, sweat, bleed) America a few inches closer to its own sublime ideals. Proud of its victories in two world wars and the Cold War, proud of the fight it is waging this very day for freedom in Iraq and the whole Middle East.
If you are proud of this country and don’t want its identity to vanish, you must teach U.S. history to your children. They won’t learn it in school. This nation’s memory will go blank unless you act.
With those insights in mind, it is astounding that a United States Senator would say what Senator Durbin has said.
Some reactions to Senator Durbin’s comments are here and here. Plus these comments from the Chicago Tribune, in his own home state. Hugh Hewitt has more. Power Line also has more here and here. The latter references a Hugh Hewitt article which provides readers with exactly what Senator Durbin said. The editors at National Review add their comments.
Since Durbin’s comments relate to the Amnesty International debacle, there are two related links here and here to postings on AI’s actions.
Senator Durbin apologizes, well sort of. Here is actual transcript of what he said.
Solving a problem first requires acknowledgement of the problem’s existence followed by having the will to fix it.
Rhode Island resident Thomas Wigand offers a compelling view of what is structurally wrong in our state in his editorial entitled Public-sector lords, Social-Security serfs:
Czarist Russia was inhabited by a subservient class, called serfs, the fruits of whose labor — beyond that necessary for a meager subsistence — were taken to enrich aristocrats. In 1861 Czar Alexander II issued an emancipation proclamation, ending this feudal system and freeing the serfs.
Although less draconian than Russia’s serfdom, the Rhode Island General Assembly has imposed a stealth form of serfdom upon a group of Rhode Island citizens.
Our “serfs” are not necessarily poor or working-class individuals exploited for the benefit of the rich. In today’s Rhode Island, serfdom encompasses the private sector: ditch diggers and doctors; union and non-union workers; and senior-citizen retirees.
And who are the new “aristocrats”? Public-sector employees and their public-sector-union bosses.
In the private sector, compensation is determined by the free market, so, over time, it reflects what a particular occupation is actually worth, as based on skills and supply and demand. Therefore, to be balanced and fair for all workers, the average compensation of public- and private-sector workers should be roughly equal.
Such is not the case in Rhode Island, where average public-sector compensation far exceeds average private-sector earnings — meaning that on average, public-sector workers are overpaid…
…no matter how high our appreciation, public-sector workers’ compensation should be comparable to that of the private-sector workers who ultimately pay them.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data for 2001 showed that average salaries in the public sector were nearly 25 percent higher than in the private sector ($41,880, against $33,871). The higher pay also accompanied a shorter workweek: 35 hours, instead of 40 (about 14 percent shorter).
But that is just the edge of the compensation chasm separating the public and private sectors. The really big money in public-sector compensation resides in the state-pension system.
Public-sector employees may receive far more taxpayer money in retirement than they did during their working years. Meanwhile, most of the private-sector workers, who pay for the state pensions, will not receive any pension; they will merely get Social Security.
Let’s compare the “serfs” on Social Security with one group of “aristocrats”: public-school teachers, who, instead of Social Security benefits, receive taxpayer-funded pension benefits:
Private-sector employees contribute 6.2 percent of their pay to Social Security; public-school teachers contribute 9.5 percent of their pay to their pensions. So the contributions are comparable. The benefits, however, are not.
Rhode Island teachers need work only 28 years to get a full pension, with no minimum age at which to start collecting. So teachers can retire at 50-ish and, given current life expectancies, their pension checks may well cover more years than they worked!
Meanwhile, private-sector workers must typically labor for 40-plus years, until they reach 60-something, before becoming eligible to collect Social Security — by which time our comparably aged retired teachers will have been lolling on the beaches of Florida for a good 15 years.
And while the average Social Security benefit is only about $14,000 a year (the maximum being $23,268), teachers’ pensions are calculated according to three consecutive years of their highest pay. So the typical Rhode Island teacher can retire at 50-ish with a pension of well over $50,000 a year — or about 3 1/2 times the average Social Security benefit, and more than twice the maximum Social Security benefit.
State pensions are legally protected; once a participant’s benefits “vest,” they cannot be reduced. Social Security benefits are not legally protected; they do not “vest.” At its whim, Congress can reduce Social Security benefits, even for those already collecting…
Little wonder that the favorite currency of the realm at the General Assembly is “aristocratic titles” bestowed upon friends and family — i.e., state jobs!
Why is public-sector compensation so out of whack? The answer lies in the General Assembly’s power to tax.
In the private sector, revenues are generated and incomes derived from a voluntary exchange of goods or services. Conversely, in the public sector, revenues are generated and incomes derived from compulsory taxation.
The Democratic Party, which has controlled the General Assembly for some 70 years, is itself to a large extent composed of members of the public-sector “aristocracy.”
Meanwhile, the Democrats in the General Assembly — many of whom intend later to be employed in a state job — prostrate themselves before the public-sector-union bosses, who are also their de-facto party bosses.
At election time, this party claims to be the one representing “working families.” If that were ever true, it is true no longer.
The Democratic General Assembly has enacted a panoply of income, sales, excise, estate, and property taxes, ensuring that everyone in the private sector — rich and poor alike — suffers a burdensome extraction of his or her wealth…
(Public-sector beneficiaries would have you believe that they are taxpayers, too. Nonsense. The money they receive from taxes far exceeds the money they pay in taxes — so on a net basis, they are not taxpayers, but tax consumers.)
Ultimately, excessively taxing working families reduces their standard of living. The current state-pension system faces a severe shortfall and, absent major reforms during this legislative session, will require a bailout comprising enormous infusions of working-family taxpayer dollars.
The General Assembly has the power to avoid this. It can thoroughly restructure the state retirement system so as to bring back into balance the overall average compensation between public- and private-sector workers.
The extent to which the Democratic General Assembly levels the compensation field, or declines to do so, will for us “serfs” provide an acid-test demonstration of whom it represents: the working families or the public-sector unions.
Now, do we have the will as working families and retirees across the state to do something about this problem?
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
A URI professor responds to Wigand. Anyone who starts their argument by suggesting questioning teachers’ unions is unreasonable and ends their argument by implying private sector pension problems are more serious than either public sector pension problems and Social Security funding problems can only be a leftist who willfully insists on selective use of empirical data. Tom Coyne has a similar take on the response, as found in his June 25 edition of OnTheRadar, where he says:
[Open full post]Unfortunately, as we have shown in this analysis, the story of why Rhode Island has the nation’s highest ratio of average public sector to average private sector pay is more complicated than he cares to admit. And not flattering to the public sector unions he’s implicitly trying to defend…
This latest response by the Warwick teachers’ union reminded me of when our children were quite young and did what kids that age do when they don’t get their way – throw a tantrum:
The Warwick Teachers Union, responding to what it called a School Committee “ultimatum” over the issue of retroactive pay, says it is prepared to abandon contract negotiations until after the next election, in November 2006.
Mary M. Pendergast, the union president, made that statement during a May 18 meeting of principals in the talks, according to John F. Thompson, the School Committee chairman. Since then, two bargaining sessions were canceled and no more have been scheduled.
The teachers, whose last contract expired in August 2003, have demanded that any new agreement include retroactive pay raises for last year and for the year about to end.
“If we’re not willing to give them what they want, they’ll just wait until they get a School Committee that will,” Thompson said yesterday. “[Pendergast] said that they’ve been through this before and they’re willing to wait.”…
Pendergast yesterday confirmed her remark at that meeting but said it was forced by Thompson’s intransigence on retroactivity.
“To suggest that that’s a plan of ours is ridiculous, totally ridiculous,” Pendergast said. “If anyone is responsible, it’s [Thompson].”
The School Department’s latest contract offer, unveiled in March, includes a 3.5 percent pay increase for this year and in each of the next two years. It includes no money for raises retroactive to the 2003-2004 school year.
Now, though, school officials say their $142-million budget for the next fiscal year, which starts July 1, contains no money to pay teachers retroactive raises for the current fiscal year either.
“John Thompson gave us an ultimatum: we have to forget about retroactive pay or wait out a new School Committee,” Pendergast said. “We are not going to back away from retroactive pay.”
James Ginolfi, a union executive board member, hinted at a more hard-line position on June 1, when he recalled a past contract dispute during a union rally in front of the State House.
“In Warwick, we’re going through a tough situation, but we have a strong union,” Ginolfi said. “In the early nineties we had a similar situation in Warwick, and guess what: you’d think some of the people on the School Committee in Warwick would have learned a lesson because the Warwick Teachers Union is still there and they’re long gone.”…
Now, “They would be prepared to wait until someone came to office who was willing to give them what they wanted,” Healy, the school board’s lawyer, said yesterday.
School officials, however, hope an agreement can be reached sooner. The sides have been in arbitration for almost nine months, and the School Department is trying to arrange an intense nine straight days of meetings with the neutral arbitrator in August.
The arbitration proceeding, which the union has opposed, is nonbinding on monetary issues, which could end up in court…
Now you have another example of why I have labeled such union behavior toward taxpayers as a form of legalized extortion.
As I have written about the East Greenwich contract dispute, the teachers’ union has NO incentive to be reasonable on contract terms if they expect to get retroactive pay – because receiving retroactive pay means they are made whole financially and therefore have no time pressure to reach an agreement.
Just to remind readers, this is the same teachers’ union that recently proposed free lifetime family health insurance for all teachers.
These AFT union people are as delusional as the East Greenwich NEA union people. See You Have To Read This Posting To Believe It! The Delusional World of the NEA Teachers’ Union for an example of equally odd behavior by the NEA in East Greenwich.
This East Greenwich Fire District news article highlights the latest actions of a group that has a historical tendency to increase spending at a far faster rate than the incomes of East Greenwich taxpayers:
The Board of Fire Commissioners will seek voter approval to begin the process of constructing and staffing a new fire station at its annual financial meeting June 20.
The proposal comes at a time of uncertainty in the district’s $4.1 million budget, with about $300,000 in revenue in question as Warwick considers whether to renew its contract for fire coverage in the Potowomut section of the city.
The board will present four separate questions at the financial meeting, one of which is a proposal to purchase a yet-to-be determined piece of land for the new station.
The board…and Fire Chief Thomas Rowan would like to see the new station, if approved, built in the area of the Rocky Hill fairgrounds because of the plans set for that land…
Under the plan, the Frenchtown Road station would remain open at full capacity, while the Main Street station would be reduced to a substation and would mostly serve the downtown and Post Road areas of town. While some may question the need for three fire stations in such a small town, Rowan said the town has continued to grow over the years, while the Fire District, physically, has not…
Commissioners refused to give a purchase price for the land, citing ongoing negotiations, but said they would seek only the land this year, putting off presenting a plan for the construction of a new station until the 2006 financial meeting.
The final price, including land acquisition and constructing and equipping the new building, could be in the $4 million range, Rowan said.
Fire officials stressed that the construction of the new station would not be coming solely out of the residents’ pockets, with some funding coming from impact fees on new construction in town.
Enacted in 2002, the fees builders pay help the Fire District keep up with expansion in town. District Treasurer Craig Delfino said there is about $100,000 in the account already, but that does not include several projects, including most of the construction set to take place at the Rocky Hill fairgrounds…
In addition to the land purchase, the board will ask voters to approve an increase in staffing as it looks to add eight firefighters to the rolls, a move that will cost approximately $160,000.
Commissioner Robert Berlyn said the additions would not necessarily come all at once and may not even affect this year’s budget, but the board would like to fully staff Station 2 at the Frenchtown station and look to the future as it proposes a new station.
Residents might be more shocked at the proposed increase in their fire taxes if the Potowomut contract falls through. The board recently completed a three-year contract with the city that paid the town $200,000 for the fire coverage.
Thinking that the contract may have short-changed the district, fire officials analyzed the number of calls and increased the requested amount to $350,000 this year…
Carnevale said he has sent two letters to Warwick mayor Scott Avedisian without response. He said he would contact the board’s legal counsel to notify the city that the board must have an answer by the end of this week so the commission can adequately plan for the budget, which will swing to a huge increase without the planned revenue.
Although spending in the budget increased more than 12 percent, an increase in the tax base this year would keep the overall increase in taxes to around 7.5 percent. However, if the district were to lose $300,000 in revenue, the increase could be in the neighborhood of 17 percent.
The budget itself represents an increase of $375,000 in spending, but, like many suffering school districts across the state, a large portion of that is due to an unplanned increase in pension payouts.
This year, benefits contributions shot up more than 300 percent over last year, more than $300,000 more than last year’s budgeted numbers…
Other questions that will be proposed at the annual meeting include a request to grant single health care coverage to the members of the Board of Fire Commissioners, a request that residents rejected in a 12-11 vote at last year’s meeting.
Commission members, in a 5-0 vote, elected to add the item to the meeting agenda again, noting that the town’s elected officials are offered coverage and that the members of the commission have not received a raise in their $1,000 pay in more than 20 years…
The Fire District will also seek the approval of a new pump truck at the cost of $300,000. The purchase of the vehicle will be offset by the sale of a tanker truck for $99,000.
The board’s next meeting, where it will continue the budget discussion, will be Tuesday at 7 p.m. in the conference room of Station 1, 284 Main St.
So many questions and so few answers that the taxpayers deserve answers to before anything is approved:
A $4.1 million budget means spending is up $375,000 or 12% from last year’s budget. The Fire District Commissioners need to identify all budget line items which increased or decreased by more than $20,000 over last year’s budget.
What is actual spending for the current budget year and what level of increase ($ and %) does the new budget represent over this year’s actual spending? (Several years ago, the Fire District district budget increase for the new year was understated because they did not compare it to actual spending in the prior year – which was below budget and effectively gave them a much bigger budget increase for the new year.) How much cash does the Fire District expect to have at the end of the current budget year?
If the Warwick contract of $350,000 doesn’t happen, then taxes will go up roughly 17%. Otherwise, they “only” go up 7.5%.
What expenses would be cut if the Warwick contract is dropped so taxes don’t go up 17%? I.e., what is the contingency plan?
Pension costs are up over $300,000. We understand the Fire District has no control over this expense.
If pension cost increases represent over 75% of the total spending increase, that leaves less than $75,000 for all other spending increases – which is hard to understand if they are hiring 8 new firefighters and buying land and a truck. How much is assumed in the new budget for the purchase of the land for a new station and for the new firefighters?
What is the capital budget for next year? Is that where the land and fire truck purchases are?
How many firefighters does EG have now and what percentage increase does 8 new firefighters represent? Does that percentage increase correlate with the percentage increase in the town’s population?
If Main Street is being reduced to a substation, does that save headcount? If so, why are 8 additional heads needed? If not, why not?
Why do 8 firefighters cost only $160,000? What is the full salary and benefits expense for all 8 firefighters when they are on staff for an entire year? What is the total financial commitment for new headcount expenses that the Fire District is seeking approval on next week? One Commissioner says not all of the new headcount will be being hired in the new budget year; if so, why is approval being sought now?
How many additional capital expenditure and operating expense dollars are being submitted for approval next week but won’t hit the tax bills or residents until future years? I.e., how much of the estimated $4 million for the new station land and construction costs and the new headcount expense will be paid for after the end of the new budget year?
Has a formal feasibility study been done on the new fire station? I.e., what sort of formal analysis – with hard data – has been done to justify a new station with a $4 million commitment? If not, why should it be approved now?
I recall a new firetruck being purchased several years ago; not sure what kind of truck it was. Why is another truck needed at this time? What is the age of the old truck and what is typically the useful life of such trucks?
Will the new truck be financed or paid for via an outright cash payment like last time – which makes no economic sense?
I have been told the healthcare insurance coverage is free to the commissioners and the cost will be roughly $5,300 per person. Is this true? Why do they get free healthcare coverage when the taxpayers don’t get free coverage? Why are they putting this up for vote after it was defeated last year? Why when the School Committee is asking the teachers’ union to accept a co-pay are Fire District personnel proposing free insurance?
By being separate from the town and school budgets, the Fire District budget manages to escape the level of scrutiny that it deserves. With a tax increase of as high as 17%, the Fire District is not being financially responsible. I hope they are not seeking approval now for large spending increases that will only hit future years’ budgets. Frankly, it would be kind – at best – to call such behavior disingenuous.
If we can consolidate the Finance departments of town and school, we should consolidate the Fire District back into the town and put their financial actions under a much brighter spotlight.
I hope nothing will be approved by taxpayers next Monday until after they receive satisfactory answers to questions like those shown above.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
An email from Town Council member John McGurk on June 20 includes some words from the Town Manager, Bill Sequino:
From the Town Manager’s office:
I have been asked by several people how the Fire District budget could go up 16% if the state law on a tax cap was 5.5%. It has always been my understanding that the District has to abide by the same law. In an abundance of caution I checked with the Office of Municipal Affairs today and was informed that, the tax cap statute is silent about the Fire District’s tax setting ability. They have no tax cap.
Bill
A more recent ProJo news article provides additional and somewhat different information:
Voters at tonight’s annual financial meeting of the East Greenwich Fire District will be asked to approve a fiscal 2006 budget of nearly $4.4 million — a 16 percent, or $614,000, increase over current spending — and to authorize a bond issue to buy property for an eventual third fire station…
Fire Chief Thomas Rowan said Friday that he was unsure what increase the budget would require in the district’s property tax rate, currently $1.61 per $1,000 of assessed valuation…
Among the new costs reflected in the budget increase, Rowan said, are $178,000 in additional pension contributions, which have been mandated by the state, and $165,000 to hire four additional firefighters.
Rowan said that the district is also applying for federal grant money to hire four more firefighters, for a total of eight new firefighter positions in the coming fiscal year…
In addition to tonight’s budget discussion, Rowan said that the district will stage an “in-depth” presentation on why the town, he said, needs a third fire station to supplement the stations on Main Street and Frenchtown Road.
The new station, Rowan said, would help the fire district keep up with the town’s development — particularly in and around the intersection of South County Trail (Route 2) and Division Road, the prospective site of a new corporate headquarters for Brooks Pharmacy…
The district is eyeing a two-acre site on South County Trail just south of Division Road.
Rowan said that the district has negotiated a purchase price for the property that will be disclosed at tonight’s meeting…
Many of the same questions noted above still remain valid. Here are some additional questions and comments:
Why does spending need to go up 14% when pension expenses only total roughly 30% of the total increase, the Consumer Price Index is increasing by about 2%, and taxpayers’ incomes are going up 1-4%?
It is still not clear why 8 new firefighters are necessary, particularly if Main Street is downsized to a more limited operation.
How long does a government grant for new firefighters last? I.e., when will the financial burden be borne fully by the taxpayers of East Greenwich? What percentage of their costs does it pay?
I hope the “in-depth presentation” will be more than just a sales pitch and will include meaningful analytical data to prove the need for a new fire station is real. It would be more credible if a formal feasibility study was done by an independent third party.
I must say I find it galling that approval for a bond issue will be voted on when there has been NO public discussion in town about such a claimed need.
I now understand the Fire District has $1.8 million of cash in its bank account, an awfully high amount given a $4 million budget. In other words, residents have been overtaxed in recent years by a rather hefty sum. Why do they continue to overtax the residents of our town?
We need answers to some important questions before anything gets approved. That is all we ask so we can make informed decisions at tonight’s meeting.
[Open full post]To give credit where it is due, I note that Warwick Democrat Al Gemma has taken a principled stand against the “organizing” of Home Day Care providers. From the ProJo:
House leaders succeeded in passing a bill last night that would force the state to negotiate with home-based child-care providers over the terms of their work and pay, although the vote fell short of the margin needed to insulate the measure from Governor Carcieri’s promised veto.
The final vote on the bill, sponsored by Majority Leader Gordon D. Fox, D-Providence, was 41 to 27, with 2 abstentions and 5 members absent. Proponents could require as many as 44 votes for a veto override.
Lawmakers spent nearly three hours debating various amendments that made, or proposed to make, significant changes to the legislation. One that succeeded, from Rep. Paul W. Crowley, D-Newport, would no longer require the providers to vote to unionize in order to gain negotiating power with the state.
But Republicans protested fiercely that Democrats were “stifling debate” when House Whip Peter F. Kilmartin, D-Pawtucket, moved to limit discussion on the bill itself to just 10 minutes. That motion succeeded on a vote of 37 to 30.
“Go ahead, you puppets!” hollered Rep. Joseph A. Trillo, R-Warwick, at colleagues as the final vote to pass the bill was tallied.
Still, at least five loyalists broke ranks with House leadership on the issue, including Rep. Arthur J. Corvese, D-North Providence, Rep. Fausto C. Anguilla, D-Bristol, and Rep. Al Gemma, D-Warwick, who called the bill’s ramifications “crazy.”
Even though it passed, there aren’t enough votes to override the veto promised by Gov. Carcieri. I applaud these Democrats for showing some common sense and standing where they always should: with the Rhode Island taxpayer. I hope they maintain this outlook when it comes to pension reform.
[Open full post]Andrew writes about Liberalism’s Dilemma at Tech Central Station.
[Open full post]