HR 1147 ... WHEN YOU VOICE NEEDS TO BE HEARD ...

House Advances Measure to Create Hundreds of New Low Power FM Radio Stations

The Local Community Radio Act of 2009 is on its way to a full House vote after sailing through the Energy and Commerce Committee with little opposition. The measure would repeal legislation which requires the FCC to protect full-power broadcasters from interference from Low Power FM stations being placed on third-adjacent channels. We speak to Democratic Rep. Mike Doyle, a co-sponsor of the bill; and Cory Fischer-Hoffman, campaign director of the Prometheus Radio Project. [includes rush transcript]

Guests:

Rep. Mike Doyle, Democratic Congress member from Pittsburgh. He is the lead co-sponsor of the Local Community Radio Act.

Cory Fischer-Hoffman, Campaign director of the Prometheus Radio Project.

RUSH TRANSCRIPT

This transcript is available free of charge. However, donations help us provide closed captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing on our TV broadcast. Thank you for your generous contribution.
Donate - $25, $50, $100, More...

AMY GOODMAN: We end today looking at a bill making its way through Congress that would allow for the creation of hundreds of new Low Power FM stations. The Local Community Radio Act of 2009 is on its way to a full House vote after sailing through the Energy and Commerce Committee with little opposition. The measure would repeal legislation which requires the FCC to protect full-power broadcasters from interference from Low Power FM stations being placed on third-adjacent channels.

Democratic Congress member Mike Doyle of Pittsburgh is co-sponsor of the bill. He joins us from Washington, DC. We’re also joined in the firehouse studio by Cory Fischer-Hoffman, campaign director of the Prometheus Radio Project.

We welcome you both to Democracy Now! Let’s begin with you, Cory. Explain the bill that just passed.

CORY FISCHER-HOFFMAN: So, the Local Community Radio Act would repeal unfair restrictions that were placed on the service back in 2000 because broadcasters were claiming that low power radio stations would cause interference on full-power stations. However, there has been conclusive evidence from a 2003 MITRE report study that shows that interference is not an issue. And so, these restrictions would be removed through the Local Community Radio Act, opening up the airwaves to hundreds, potentially thousands, of more community radio stations across the country.

AMY GOODMAN: Mike Doyle, talk about the significance of the passage from subcommittee through the full committee, now going to the House floor, and how you got involved with this as a congressman from Pittsburgh.

REP. MIKE DOYLE: Well, in my city of Pittsburgh, there are no chances for local community broadcasts like this. This is a unique opportunity to give a voice to people who don’t have a voice right now on the radio. There simply weren’t slots at third-adjacent in the city of Pittsburgh, so larger areas that have lots of big AM and FM full-power stations, it’s impossible for local community radio stations to have a slot on the dial because of this so-called interference issue, which the MITRE study proved to not be an issue at all.

It’s been a long process. We’ve been fought every step of the way by the big broadcasters, who didn’t want this bill to pass. But finally, I think the overwhelming evidence of the study and, on three separate occasions, unanimous votes by the FCC saying that Congress should move forward on this finally brought us to a point where we were able to get this bill up in subcommittee and full committee and pass it. And I’m excited to say that we hope to have this bill on the House floor by the end of the month. And it’s really important that people get in touch with their Congress people in their districts and make sure that they vote for this legislation.

AMY GOODMAN: Cory, talk about the whole movement for Low Power FM—who can apply, for example, for these licenses?—why people should call their Congress members now, why you feel this is important. Who gets these radio stations?

CORY FISCHER-HOFFMAN: Absolutely. Well, low power radio stations are licensed only to non-commercial community organizations, like churches, schools, nonprofit groups. So, just last week, the Prometheus Radio Project, the organization that I work with, got a call from an immigrant organization in Hazleton, Pennsylvania, a community that’s absolutely infamous for its anti-immigrant ordnances. So community groups, as Representative Doyle said, that have been marginalized from controlling the media could have access to the airwaves for the first time.

And so, we see organizations like CHIRP, the Chicago Independent Radio Project, which has organized for local, vibrant media coverage in their own community, so that they can promote independent musicians, they can have local news and affairs. They are organizing to get one of these licenses.

There are already over 800 existing Low Power FM radio stations licensed to community organizations across the country, like the Coalition of Immokalee Workers. Radio Conciencia in Southwest Florida, for example, is broadcasting information in Spanish, but also in Haitian Creole, in Kaqchikel, in Quiche, a number of indigenous languages, so that the communities there have access to information as they organize against sub-poverty wages in the fields of Immokalee, Florida.

AMY GOODMAN: Congressman Doyle, this bill is unusual in the level of bipartisan support it has. Why does it appeal to Congress members across the aisle?

REP. MIKE DOYLE: Well, I think it appeals to members of Congress—Republican, Democrat and liberal conservative; it is an odd group of bedfellows here—because it gives access to groups that have been marginalized on both sides. If you’re interested in civil rights, this is a great bill, because it gives voice to civil rights groups. Religious groups of all persuasions would have access to the airwaves. Local college campuses would have access to the airwaves—labor unions, community groups. It just spans the whole docket, Republican, Democrat, left to right, of groups out there in the local communities that didn’t have a voice previous to this. I think that’s its appeal. And that’s why we’re very optimistic that when we get it on the House floor, we can get it passed.

But I want to take this opportunity to let viewers know that they can go on the internet to www.freepress.net/lpfm and put their zip code in, and they’ll get information on who their member of Congress is. And we urge people to contact them, because this will come up on the House floor in the next couple of weeks, and we have to make sure we get a large vote for it in the House to give it momentum in the Senate.

AMY GOODMAN: And what is happening in the Senate right now, Congressman Doyle?

REP. MIKE DOYLE: Well, there’s a companion bill in the Senate. We’re very optimistic that if we can send this bill by the end of the month to the Senate with a big vote, that it’s going to give us the momentum we need to get the Senate to act. We have strong backers in the Senate. The time has come to give low power to the people, and this is our opportunity to do it. So while we have this momentum, we want to move forward and see if we can get this done by the end of the year.

AMY GOODMAN: Cory Fischer-Hoffman, you’ve dubbed this month “Actober”?

CORY FISCHER-HOFFMAN: Absolutely. We’re asking everyone, as Representative Doyle said, to contact their Congress people. You can go to Free Press’s website, an organization that has been key in this fight for low power radio, as well as the Future of Music Coalition, who’s been organizing with us. We’re asking people to contact their representatives and say, “Please support HR 1147. We want to have a local voice in our community. We want to be able to share local news and information.”

We know that this is essential not only to have local news and information, but also to broadcast perspectives that aren’t often heard on the mainstream media. For many of your viewers and listeners,Democracy Now! is broadcast on numerous Low Power FM radio stations. So it’s absolutely essential that people take action this month and push this legislation forward.

AMY GOODMAN: And who are the forces arrayed against you, against the media democracy movement?

CORY FISCHER-HOFFMAN: Well, in the past, the National Association of Broadcasters, representing some of the biggest industry side and corporate media, have been opposed to this legislation. And while they haven’t come out in support of it, we’ve seen a lot of the opposition neutralized, because the 2003 MITRE report shows conclusively that their technical concerns of interference are really not valid concerns. So, while we feel like their concerns were really around not wanting small local community groups to compete with these big stations, we feel like this legislation is wildly popular. It’s bipartisan. It’s moving forward with a broad base of support within the media justice movement, and we see its passage on the horizon.

AMY GOODMAN: And you predict, Mike Doyle, in Congress, these forces that have been traditionally arrayed against, coming out now as this bill goes to the floor and how you deal with the commercial broadcasters as media concentrates at the same time as it looks like you’re making a move towards decentralization?

REP. MIKE DOYLE: Well, we just want to—we want to err on the side of caution. It’s correct that the forces arrayed against this bill have been silent during the markups in subcommittee and full committee. They have not taken an active role in opposing the bill, even though they don’t support it. We’ve tried to work with groups like National Public Radio to make some changes in the bill to try to gain their support, and they’ve been appreciative of those changes. But we don’t want to take anything for granted. We don’t want a situation where that bill gets on the floor, and NAB, if they are working members and we’re not aware of it—I just think we’re trying to err on the side of caution.

We believe we have a broad coalition of members of Congress that want to support this bill and that we’re on our way to a big vote. There’s no outward indication of opposition from the traditional groups that have opposed it in the past, so that’s all good news. But we want to make sure, once that bill gets on the floor, that we don’t get caught napping. So we’re asking all our supporters to make sure they contact their members of Congress and make sure they support 1147 when it gets to the floor.

AMY GOODMAN: Cory, the campaign’s website?

CORY FISCHER-HOFFMAN: ExpandLPFM.org.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s Low Power FM. I want to thank you both for being with us. Cory Fischer-Hoffman, campaign director of the Prometheus Radio Project, which is based in Philadelphia, and Congress member Mike Doyle, Democratic Congress member from Pittsburgh, the lead co-sponsor of the Local Community Radio Act, thanks for joining us from DC.

REP. MIKE DOYLE: Thanks, Amy.

WHEN DOES A CD PAY BENEFITS ... (?)

The Flu in New Fairfield Get the Facts

Source: Citizens News, Section 1, Nov. 25, 2009 PAGE 23

If you have concerns about the flu and specifically H1N1, tune into Channel 17 to see Superintendent Dr. Castagnola, First Selectman John Hodge, Assistant Superintendent Alicia Roy, Director of Health Tim Simpkins and Emergency Management Director Jan Flynn discuss frequently asked questions they have received regarding the flu in New Fairfield and how town officials are responding.

The Flu in New Fairfield is scheduled to air on Channel 17 at 10am, 6pm & 11pm.  The taped discussion will also be made available at the New Fairfield Library on CD.

- ### -

What is important about this P.S.A. (Public Service Announcement) is not the 'public interest, convenience, and necessity', nor is it the Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent, not the Director of Health, or Emergency Management Director ... what's important is the fact that one of these esteemed, highly paid and intelligent individuals have finally realized other important facts about New Fairfield.  The fact is that NOT everyone in our town has Cable Television!  That simple fact is now directing the attention of those residents that read the Citizens News to head to the library, get a library card if you don't already have one, check out the CD that provides the FAQ's on H1N1 Flu.  WOW!  Our tax money finally at work from the Television Studio at the Senior Center.  [Side note: I've been to the Television Studio, but where is the Community Center?]  Now that the technical details and challenges have been solved with our new Television Studio perhaps the town can record the meetings of all of our town government and make them available on CD at the library.  A significant number of residents in New Fairfield DO NOT have Charter Cable rather use a satellite feed, which excludes local channel programs.  After all the Director of and the Television Studio at the Senior Center is paid for with our tax dollars and for those without Charter Cable those dollars are a waste in that no services are provided to almost one third of New Fairfield with over the air broadcasting and satellite television.  Of course there is one more channel of access perhaps for the younger crowd and that is Internet Television with many different channels available.  Let's not forget a simpler method of informing New Fairfield, "Part 15 Devices, as known as low power, Unlicensed Operation".  Many of us have experienced this capability of AM and/or FM radio while driving into Disney World, or perhaps at a National Park with this method of communication.

Unlicensed Operation

The next four sections cover the permitted forms of unlicensed operation in the AM band (535 to 1705 kHz) and FM band (88 to 108 MHz), and explain the penalties which may be assessed against those forms of unlicensed operation which do not fall within the permitted forms of unlicensed operation. 

Part 15 Devices

Unlicensed operation on the AM and FM radio broadcast bands is permitted for some extremely low powered devices covered under Part 15 of the FCC's rules. On FM frequencies, these devices are limited to an effective service range of approximately 200 feet (61 meters). See 47 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Section 15.239, and the July 24, 1991 Public Notice. On the AM broadcast band, these devices are limited to an effective service range of approximately 200 feet (61 meters). See 47 CFR Sections 15.207, 15.209, 15.219, and 15.221. These devices must accept any interference caused by any other operation, which may further limit the effective service range. For more information on Part 15 devices, please see OET Bulletin No. 63 ("Understanding the FCC Regulations for Low-Power, Non-Licensed Transmitters"). Questions not answered by this Bulletin can be directed to the FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology, Customer Service Branch, at the Columbia, Maryland office, phone (301) - 362 - 3000, e-mail LabHelp@fcc.gov. 

ASSUME THE POSITION ...

Click here to listen to new statewide CCM radio spot - Do the Math! CCM launches statewide advocacy campaign to protect municipal aid as State leaders contemplate mid-year cuts CCM Letter to Governor and Legislative Leaders: ensure there are no municipal aid cuts in December special session Local Property Taxes and Connecticut's State Government: What Residents and Businesses Should Know CCM Public Policy Report: The Unfinished Municipal Relief Agenda

Do the math: cuts in state aid to your hometown equals increases in your property taxes

It's Official: Sales Tax Cut Will Not Occur January 1; Rell Unveils Over $80 Million In Cuts For Cities and Towns

by Christopher Keating

It's official.

The state's planned cut in the sales tax will not take effect January 1. Many legislators had predicted that the contingent tax cut would never happen because of the continuing weakness in the economy.

But the blocking of the tax cut did not become official until the state comptroller certified - as required by a recent law - that tax collections had falled more than 1 percent below the projections set by the legislature when they finished crafting the budget in September.

On Tuesday, the Rell administration announced that the deficit would be reduced by $129.5 million - the amount that would have remained in taxpayers' pockets if the tax cut was enacted.

At the same time, with the state facing a deficit of nearly $470 million for the current fiscal year, Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell is asking the Democratic-controlled legislature to make cuts in a wide variety of programs - including aid to cities and towns.

The Connecticut Conference of Municipalities, which represents most cities and towns, calculated the loss to the towns to be at least $84 million in the current fiscal year. CCM vowed to lobby legislators at the Capitol to block Rell's proposed cuts.

"Cutting more state aid in mid-year wouldn't be a savings,'' said a statement released by longtime CCM spokesman Kevin Maloney. "It would merely shift more of the state budget deficit onto local governments and local property taxpayers.''

CCM continued, "Increasing the state's largest and most unfair tax - the property tax - by cutting municipal aid is bad public policy. Zero cuts in municipal aid must be priority one for state leaders. Do the math: cuts in state aid to your hometown equals increases in your property taxes.''

Rell's budget director, Robert Genuario, acknowledged that the state's 3 percent reduction in aid to municipalities - a cut of $84 million out of $2.8 billion - will present a challenge for cities and towns, but he added that they are only "being asked to be a small part of the solution."

He said that municipalities, non-profit agencies and others affected by the cuts are going to have to think differently about how they operate.  "Everybody's going to have to rethink the way they do business, as the state has been doing for the last year or so, and we are asking everybody to do that and to participate in this process - because state taxpayers simply cannot afford to fund ... the way we used to do business."

The budget cuts are being proposed after a period of relative plenty, Genuario said. During the two-year budget period before this one, he said "there were greater increases in municipal aid than in any biennium over the course of the last decade. So we are starting at a base of municipal aid that is higher ... than it had been at any time prior to this point."

"When the state had a surpluses and increasing revenues, the governor made it  a point to see that municipalities shared in those revenues," Genuario said, adding: "The reverse situation is now in the state, and municipalities will have to be a part of the solution, just as they were a part of the successes."

Tuesday marked the first time that Rell's budget office had publicly released the reality that the proposed sales tax cut of ½ percent will not go into effect on Jan. 1, as called for in the budget approved earlier this year. Throwing out the tax cut amounted to $129.5 million in added revenue, reducing the projected $467 deficit by about 28 percent down to $337 million.

The state comptroller's office has certified in recent weeks that tax revenues have not come within 1 percent of projections, which was required under the budget bill for the cut to take effect, Genuario said.  Both OPM and the legislature's Office of Fiscal Analysis have agreed in recent weeks  that the fiscal trigger for the tax cut has not been met, and so "this should not be a shocker," Genuario said.

Now that the sales tax cut won't take effect in January, it's gone forever - and, to be reinstated, the legislature would have pass a new tax-cut bill, said top OPM deputy Jeffrey Beckham.

"Clearly, we have to act and act now to cut spending - it is the only option left,'' said House Republican leader Larry Cafero, who is considering runnning for governor. "Connecticut's credit rating and fiscal health are at risk if we do not take steps in the next few weeks to reduce state spending in significant ways. We cannot afford the inaction of the last year that led to the fiscal crisis in the first place. We all knew that the Democratic budget the majority party passed in September was not real and out of balance as soon as it became law.

"We are left with fewer options and even less time to start Connecticut back on a path toward fiscal stability,'' Cafero said.

Several hours before Rell unveiled her plan, Republicans received a briefing that was attended by the ranking members of the tax-writing finance committee and other insiders. Some, though, remained mum when asked why so many Republicans were in the state Capitol at the same time on a non-session day.

Senate President Pro Tem Donald Williams and Senate Majority Leader Martin Looney both said they need to study the detailed plan further.

"We have just received the governor's proposed deficit mitigation plan,'' they said in a joint statement. "It will now be reviewed by our 24 caucus members. The governor and her administration took about a month to compile this plan. It will take us several days to examine its merits and disadvantages. We look forward to working with the governor regarding the state of Connecticut's budget and economy.''

They continued, "Obviously the effects of the global recession continue to be felt here in Connecticut just as they are being felt across the entire United States. Thirty-five other states are currently attempting to close new deficits in their existing budgets."

Ellen Andrews, the executive director of the Connecticut Health Policy Project, said, "The governor's recommended cuts are unnecessary, and would have a disastrous effect on some well established and much-needed programs, many of which have struggled for years with underfunding. The vast majority of the cuts would affect people who can least afford them - the elderly, disabled, people with HIV/AIDS, and the poor.''

She added, "Once again, I urge the governor and the legislature to consider better options, such as recovering the $50 million in annual overpayments to HUSKY HMOs that were uncovered in the recent Comptroller's audit.

We really can do better."

NEW FAIRFIELD TEACHER MAKE A DEAL ... DOOR TWO MONTY, THAT'S 2!

This contract represents a certain bargaining strategy  - Basically, the teachers at the bottom in our district, receive less-than-competitive salaries.  The teachers at the top do better.  This gets a "yes" from union negotiators, who are typically experienced teachers closer to retirement.  I can't blame them .. .they want to retire comfortably.  Higher salaries for them in their final years translate into better pensions.

 

That said, from the point of view of our system, if you believe that better salaries attract better applicants, you can see where choices to keep younger/new teachers' salaries low might lead to a situation where we cannot attract the best and the brightest.  That is distinctly unfortunate in my opinion and a bad choice when you consider how very much money we spend in our schools. 

 

Almost everyone on this list knows that our standardized test scores have plummented when compared to other districts in our DRG (Demographic Reference Group) - Or, if you don't, you should contact Dr. Ed Siebert, who has detailed data.  It's also posted online under our strategic school profile.  Yes, we may have an anomaly in certain years - sometimes you find a class that does a lot better than most - but the statistics are frightening.  Our school system has really taken a huge downturn in terms of measurable academic achievement. 

 

I don't know about the rest of you, but we decided to move to NF because of the schools and the kids did get great educations here.  Going forward, if I were making the decision today, I woud look at the relative performance of towns like Brookfield, and conclude that NF's schools just cannot compete. 

 

If  education matters to you (or if property values matter to you) you should be much more concerned about failing test scores.  And, to some extent, salary schedules of this sort, only exacerabate the problem. 

Just my opinon. Great teachers make great schools.  We still have many great teachers, but you do want to remain competitive.  From my point of view, this town has focused on everything but academic achievement and that is a shame. 

TOO HIGH A PRICE ... AND WHAT ABOUT THE KIDS? DUH!

November 22, 2009

We watched an interesting YouTube video the other day. It was brought to our attention by state Sen. James Meeks, the Chicago Democrat who is also pastor of Salem Baptist Church on the South Side. We think our readers should check out the video. It'll open your eyes.

Meeks, who chairs the Illinois Senate Education Committee, has been in a war with the Chicago Teachers Union since he had some tough things to say about public education in a Tribune essay and in a speech at Rainbow Push.

The CTU responded with a vow not to give him another dime in campaign money until he apologized. Meeks promptly wrote a check for $4,000, giving back every dime the union had already given him.

No apology.

You have to love this guy. He's genuinely looking out for kids and doesn't back down to pressure.

Back to the video. It shows the top lawyer of the National Education Association, Bob Chanin, speaking at the NEA's annual meeting in July. Chanin was retiring. This was his swan song.

Chanin makes unmistakably clear what the highest priority is for the union. Hint: It's not the education of your kids.

Chanin closed his nearly 25-minute speech by explaining the influence of the NEA:

Despite what some among us would like to believe it is not because of our creative ideas. It is not because of the merit of our positions. It is not because we care about children and it is not because we have a vision of a great public school for every child. NEA and its affiliates are effective advocates because we have power. 

And we have power because there are more than 3.2 million people who are willing to pay us hundreds of millions of dollars in dues each year, because they believe that we are the unions that can most effectively represent them, the unions that can protect their rights and advance their interests as education employees.

Oh, it gets more interesting.

This is not to say that the concern of NEA and its affiliates with closing achievement gaps, reducing dropout rates, improving teacher quality and the like are unimportant or inappropriate. To the contrary. These are the goals that guide the work we do. But they need not and must not be achieved at the expense of due process, employee rights and collective bargaining. That simply is too high a price to pay.

Too high a price to pay for educated children. Chanin got wild applause from thousands of NEA members at the San Diego Convention Centerfor his remarks.

We tried for several days to get NEA officials to explain those remarks. We wanted to ask if the rest of the union leadership believed that kids ranked behind collective bargaining on the teacher priority list. We're still waiting to hear from them.

We know the answer the Chicago Teachers Union gave the Rev. Meeks: Cross us and we'll choke off your money.

Meeks plans to introduce a bill in January that would give the kids at Chicago's lowest-performing schools a choice. It would give kids at 15 high schools and 48 elementary schools a voucher to pay for another school.

He plans to push to remove the cap on the number of charter schools in Illinois. The legislature raised the cap this year. But there should be no cap at all.

Meeks met on Thursday with Sen. Dan Cronin, the Republican leader on the Education Committee, to see if they can work out a bipartisan agenda.

Good for both of them.

The teachers unions in Illinois get angry when we write about them. They argue that they're pushing a reform agenda, too.

If that's the case, they shouldn't be asking Meeks for an apology. They should be asking for an apology from everyone who cheered Chanin.

Too high a price, eh?

------

Watch the YouTube video of Chanin's remarks:  His entire speech can be viewed at NEA.org

New Fairfield teachers, administrators accept contracts

By Eileen FitzGerald, Staff Writer

Published: 11:17 p.m., Monday, November 23, 2009

Related Stories

• School administrators reach deal11.29.2005 07:00 p.m.
• Danbury city leaders reject teachers contract02.17.2009 01:00 a.m.
• Letters to the editor11.04.2009 01:01 a.m.
• DANBURY12.03.2005 07:00 p.m.
• BROOKFIELD12.29.2005 07:00 p.m.

NEW FAIRFIELD -- Teachers and administrators earned raises and accepted increased medical costs in new three-year contracts meant to be fair to employees and taxpayers.
Both groups of union workers in the town's schools agreed to contracts effective July 2010.
"We set aside most of the language issues. The bottom line was salary and benefits,'' school board chairman Kim Hanson said Monday. "I think it's a good contract. I think it's a responsible contract."

The administrators' contract was settled with union members and school staff, but a meeting with a mediator was needed to settle the teachers contract.

"There was some movement, but not sufficient to an agreement, but once we got into mediation, we settled in one session," finance director Craig McClain said Monday. "We very quickly focused on salary and health insurance for both groups."

The teachers contract covers 240 certified staff.

It provides a 2 percent raise the first year, but staff cannot move up the salary schedule in the first year of the contract. That is the annual step increase that rewards additional education and years of service in the district.

The contract for 2011-12 gives no raise but allows the step increase, which is worth a 2.56 percent increase in pay. The contract for 2012-13 gives no raise but a step increase worth a 3.06 percent increase in pay.

The contract also retains language for additional longevity pay for teachers with 15 and 20 or more years of service.

The range of salaries, based on academic degrees and years of service, up to 13 years, is $42,131 to $84,938.

McClain said the pay raise for teachers will cost $325,000, minus $217,000 of medical benefit givebacks, for a net increase to the 2010-11 school budget of $108,800.


The 11 administrators [eleven administrators for a school system our size is obscene] received a 2.5 percent general wage increase for each of three years. Their range of salaries, based on job title, is $105,834 to $145,891.

Both unions agreed to pay more for insurance.

"The focus of the board was to have the employees share the health premium with an increase of at least one percent a year," McClain said, "and they achieved that."

Contact Eileen FitzGerald
at eileenf@newstimes.com

OBAMACARE = BIG STATE TAX HIKES = LESS REVENUE SHARING FOR MUNICIPALITIES

=HIGHER TAXES AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.  ALSO KNOWN AS "USED FOOD FLOWS DOWN HILL" ... AND WHO GETS THE BLAME?
By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on DickMorris.com on November 20, 2009

Anxious to avoid raising taxes too much to pay for their health care proposals, the Obama Administration and its Congressional allies hit on a great new idea:  Make the states raise their taxes to fund the program instead.
  
Both the House and the Senate bills require that states cover a larger percentage of their people under Medicaid - a joint state and federally funded program.  The idea was to force the state to raise their taxes to cover a big part of the health care bill for treating poor people.  Since the Feds can simply charge any increase in spending to their already overdrawn bank account, but the states have to balance their budgets, the increased state spending for Medicaid will cause sharp increases in state taxes.  And the Governors will get the blame, not Obama and not the Congress.
  
The House bill requires states to give Medicaid to those whose incomes are less than 150% of the poverty level while the Senate requires coverage up to 125%.  For most states, this is a hefty increase.
  
In some states, like New York, where Medicaid covers everyone making 150% of the poverty level already, there will not be any extra required spending.  
 
But not so in California, which only covers 100% of the poverty level.  Were the House bill to pass, the already fiscally beleaguered state would have to increase its Medicaid spending on poor people by 50%, at least an extra $2 billion a year and perhaps more.
 
In many Southern states, the Medicaid program only covers a portion of those living below the poverty level.  For these states, the requirement to cover all those in poverty and then 50% more will cause enormous increases in taxes.  In Arkansas and Louisiana, where swing Senators Pryor, Lincoln, and Landrieu come from, the cost could exceed $1 billion for each state each year. 
  
Unfunded mandates for state spending imposed from on high in Washington have always rankled governors.  The Senators and Congressmen in Washington get the credit for spreading largesse but the Governors in the states get the blame for the taxes that are needed to pay for it.

Since Democrats currently control the vast majority of governorships, this process of making their own party members take the rap for raising taxes is politically self-destructive in the extreme.  But Obama is so desperate to pass his health care legislation that he doesn't care what havoc in his party he reaps in the process.
  
The question now is whether the governors of the fifty states, particularly the Democrats, are going to sit idly by and let their budgets be destroyed by the health care bill.  
  
When the Republicans in Congress insisted on tacking big cuts in aid to legal immigrant benefits for disability and other areas onto the welfare reform bill, it was the Republican governors who forced them to repeal the pernicious cuts the very next year.  They did not want to have to raise taxes to make up for the withdrawal of federal funding.
  
Now the Democratic governors face the same situation.  If Obamacare passes with its expansion of Medicaid benefits - but with no federal funding of the extra spending - it is these Democrats and their legislatures that will have to bite the bullet and pass new taxes to pay for it.
  
Since states are already facing mammoth financial problems as a result of dwindling revenues and swelling expenditures in the recession, these additional burdens could be politically fatal.  Unless Democratic governors want to avoid the fate of one of their late brethren, former Governor Jon Corzine of New Jersey, whose political career was ended in a blaze of new taxes, they might want to call their buddies in Congress and ask them to lay off the unfunded mandates, particularly during this recession.

LETS SAY THANKS ... IT WILL BE APPRECIATED!!!

XEROX IS DOING SOMETHING COOL

If you go to this web site, www.LetsSayThanks.com   you can pick out a thank you card and Xerox will print it and it will be sent to a soldier that is currently serving in Iraq. You can't pick out who gets it, but it will go to a member of the armed services.

How AMAZING it would be if we could get everyone we know to send one!!!    It is FREE and it only takes a second.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if the soldiers received a bunch of these?    Whether you are for or against the war, our soldiers over there need to know we are behind them.

This takes just 10 seconds and it's a wonderful way to say thank you.    Please take the time and please take the time to pass it on for others to do.  We can never say enough thank you's. 
Thanks for taking to time to support our military!

Connecticut Plan To Lift Tax Exemption In Foreclosures Stirs Debate

November 19, 2009

HARTFORD —

Losing a property to creditors will get more painful next year: Some homeowners in foreclosure will be hit with a new tax.

Foreclosures sales have been exempt from Connecticut's real estate conveyance tax for years, but the General Assembly is ending that break Jan. 1.

The state is making the change to help close gaps in its budget, and cash-strapped municipalities are eager to get their share of the new revenue, too. But several state lawmakers say they're already dissatisfied with the change.  (WHO'S YOUR DADDY!)  Maybe AAA Rated Towns should be exempt ... 

"I really believe that this is pouring salt into the wounds," state Rep. William Hamzy, R-Plymouth, told colleagues at a meeting of the banks committee Tuesday.

"Obviously people were looking at various places for revenues," co-Chairman Sen. Robert Duff, D-Norwalk, told the committee. "This wasn't a policy decision driven by the banks committee. But we could react to it next year."

Most residential property sales in the state are subject to a conveyance tax of about 0.75 percent. The sellers pay it, and the proceeds are shared by the state and the town or city where the property is located.

Extending that tax to foreclosure sales is bad policy that hurts the real estate business, said Eugene Marconi, an attorney representing the Connecticut Association of Realtors.

"This is just one more strangling of that particular goose," he said.

Marconi and a delegation of lawyers representing the banking and real estate industries told the committee that the new law further punishes people who are already losing their homes. If their property is sold through a foreclosure auction, they'll be liable for the tax, and if they can't pay it they could be subject to liens extending for 15 years, Marconi said.

"There's a popular misconception that the bank is going to pay," he said.

But a representative of the Connecticut Conference of Municipalities urged the committee to keep the new tax in place, saying it's projected to generate $5 million in new revenue for cash-strapped cities next year and $9 million in the year after that.

The committee took no vote, but the co-chairmen said they'll discuss the topic further during the next legislative session.

Copyright © 2009, The Hartford Courant

WELL, WELL ... SOMEONE HAS CHANGED THE BATTERIES IN THE FLASHLIGHT ... LOOK!!!!

State freezes funds so Danbury magnet school will cost more

By Eileen FitzGerald, Staff Writer

DANBURY -- Money took center stage at a meeting of area leaders whose students attend the regional magnet school run by the city.

School leaders from Brookfield, New Fairfield, New Milford, Newtown, and Redding who send students to the Western Connecticut Academy for International Studies learned Tuesday that state cuts to funding for magnet schools would mean they'll have to pay higher tuition next year.

It was not welcome news since most expect one or two percent school budget increases next year.

Danbury Superintendent Sal Pascarella said the state originally planned to pay Danbury $7,440 per student coming from out of town for 2009-2010 and 2010-2011.

Instead, the state froze aid to last year's rate of $6,730 per student for the biennial budget that started in July. It makes a shortfall of $710 per student or $108, 630 total for the 153 non-Danbury students.

Pascarella said Danbury would increase tuition only for next year, which means that the $1,500 per student tuition would rise to $1,784.

"I have to put this on the table to my board but I thought it right and fair to spread it among all of us,'' Pascarella said at the meeting on the school's Western Connecticut State University campus. "We have so many other needs. We have to share the burden."

New Fairfield Superintendent Joseph Castagnola said he pushed back last year when the tuition increased from $1,000 to $1,500.

"We're all dealing with budget crunches," he said. "I'm getting sick and tired that districts are being asked to do more and more."  (It’s that nice Joe, but the taxpayers will be picking up the tab, Not Joe C.)

Robinson was upset that the state Board of Education sent out a recent memo in support of magnet and choice programs yet does not ensure funds to support them.

"They can't continue to make statements like this and then not fund it,'' she said.

Region 9 superintendent Allen Fossbender made his final push for school before retiring in January.

"This has been extremely important to our educational program,'' Fossbender said. He reminded his peers that the legislature decides the funding.

"If they don't legislate for long-term funding and we militate against enrollment, it's unfair to the Danbury schools just by virtue of the legislation," Fossbender said.

Redding Board of Education member David Lewson praised Fossbender for his leadership. "He's really helped the board and the community articulate the importance of the magnet school not only for Redding but for the region,'' Lewson said.

A state law now allows parents to apply for magnet schools regardless of district support if there are seats, but the district does not have to pay for transportation for students accepted under those terms.

The partner districts will recruit students entering kindergarten to fill seats of the outgoing fifth graders. Parents can apply between Jan. 1 and Jan. 22 and a lottery will be held Feb. 4.

Danbury Deputy Superintendent William Glass responded to a request from Newtown Superintendent Janet Robinson to discuss the magnet's curriculum so districts will know where students are when they return for sixth grade.

She said her district is accelerating its math program and she wants to make sure the magnet students will be ready.

Glass also agreed to Robinson's request that he test the fifth graders Spanish before they leave the magnet school. Robinson said each of the two years that students have returned to Newtown they have had higher levels of Spanish and she wants Newtown to offer the right course level for them.

Magnet school principal Helena Nitkowski said she's working with Newtown parents to ensure the students are socially connected when they return to their town school. In June, the school will have its third class of fifth graders to graduate. It did not have fifth grade its first year.

"Day by day this place is better not only for the community but for the youngsters who come here,'' Pascarella said.

Contact Eileen FitzGerald

at eileenf@newstimes.com

or at 203-731-3333.

PUBLIC WORKS MECHANIC REINSTATED AFTER ARBITRATION FINDS NO JUSTICATION FOR DISMISAL

What is the Town's policy regarding continuing education and certification? Over a 12 year period of time ... how much continuing education and additional certification did Mr. Layman have?  What did the arbitration cost the Town including the back salary and benefits for Mr. Layman?  Is Mr. Layman returning to his former position, if so will there be a witch hunt to find reason to terminate Mr. Layman?

Fired New Fairfield Public Works mechanic reinstated

By John Pirro, Staff Writer

Published: 11:04 p.m., Tuesday, November 17, 2009

Department of Public Works' heavy truck fleet.

In a 108-page decision released last week, the arbitrator said the Board of Selectmen violated the collective bargaining agreement when its members voted unanimously to discharge Robert Layman, who'd worked for the department nearly 12 years.

Layman, who lives in Bethel, was granted full back pay for the nearly 20 months he was out of work, minus any money he collected through unemployment compensation.

"I'm very glad the arbitrator got it right," Layman said Tuesday. "I really have no animosity, and I'm thankful to Local 677 of the Teamsters for their support."

First Selectman John Hodge called the ruling an example

of "the nonsensical arbitration decisions that drive the taxpay-ing public crazy."

"Clearly, the arbitrator was focused on upholding the terms of the collective bargaining agreement and completely ignored the much larger public safety issues of trucks loaded with 50,000 to 60,000 pounds of weight rolling off our narrow, hilly roads with bad brakes," he said.

Layman was fired after state inspectors discovered six of the department's nine heavy trucks failed to meet federal safety standards, and five of them had problems with the air brake system.

Hodge requested the inspections after one of the trucks lost its rear wheel assembly on Route 39.

During the 10 days of arbitration hearings, the town also detailed problems with other vehicles Layman maintained, including police cars and medium-duty plow trucks, Hodge said.

In the wake of the ruling, the Board of Selectmen decided Monday to reorganize the department's vehicle maintenance division. Details of the reorganization will be made public after meetings with the union, Hodge said.

Outgoing Selectman Ron Oliveri defended the decision to fire Layman.

"Even knowing the outcome of the arbitration now does not persuade me we were wrong," he said. "We had to act quickly and decisively on behalf of our Public Works employees and the residents who travel our roads."

Contact John Pirro

at jpirro@newstimes.com

or at 203-731-3342.