Remarks made by Charles Crowley, Mayor of Taunton on Thursday, May 8, 2008 at the Norton Middle School at the announcement of the Growth District Initiatives and the grant awards for local businesses.
“Governor Patrick welcome once again to southeastern Massachusetts.
It is refreshing to see a governor who is accessible and someone who is genuinely interested in serving the entire state instead of just the metro Boston region.
Governor, you have been to our region more in your first year in office than your predecessors have been in the entire decade previous.
When I met with you along with my fellow mayors from surrounding communities we asked you for a hand up rather than just a hand out and it is proposals like the ‘Growth District Initiatives’ along with ‘Expedited Permitting’ and ‘Transit Oriented Districts’ that you have advanced that have demonstrated your commitment to the teamwork approach that will allow our communities and our region to engage the economic engine that will drive us to a future filled with opportunity.”
Having been involved with the statewide issue of indigent defense for years, the problems caused by having an uneven economy and unequal economic development and transporation are very real to me.
<
p>For a teenager in Athol to find employment, for example, is much more difficult then for a teenager in Boston simply because there are fewer job opportunities, and it is almost impossible to “get around” without a car.
<
p>In the field of indigent defense, whether of the criminally accused, or children in need of services work [CHINS], or child welfare related legal work, the most economically vulnerable citizens are the ones represented by court appointed counsel.
<
p>Because of the nature of my law practice, and the nature of these cases, my cases originate in any – and every – county and part of the state.
<
p>I can second what the Mayor of Taunton had to say in that Governor Patrick is speaking and listening in Hampton County, and Hampshire County, and Franklin County and Bristol County – and bringing not just hope, but actual jobs with the “Growth District Initiatives.”
<
p>Long term, my clients benefit most from jobs.
<
p>And jobs follow expedited permitting and this kind of economic initiative. But to get the vulnerable populations to these growth areas will also take work on the transportation infrastructure as well. Bus service MUST be expanded immediately as part of growth districts.
<
p>Really? There are thousands of black teenagers for whom Menino’s summer jobs program can’t provide jobs. Thousands. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but it’s not so obvious that you’re right either.
<
p>I do agree on transit options — making sure people can get to downtown areas is critical for jobs and for maintaining a quality of life for all people.
I think the Guv visited UMass–and perhaps Western Mass as a whole–more times already than WM Romney had in his entire term.
<
p>BTW, Mr. Rubin, what does Mr. Patrick think about the endowment-tax proposal?
‘we hope it dies in cmtte.’
Sorry – we are still reviewing the proposal. I know that may seem to some as a way to dodge the issue, but it is a relatively new proposal and we are asking members of the administration to review it to better understand the consequences of the proposal.
…I would rather know a proposal or problem is getting a thorough study then get a superficial response.
It took him a while, but Patrick has been coming down here to SE Mass with surprising regularity. It’s been some time since a governor showed any interest in this part of the state…he certainly is welcome.
it’s good to see the Governor is getting out more, but let’s not forget that the Administration has been quite visable through Lt. Gov. Tim Murray…in Western Mass, Central Mass, the North Shore, South Shore, Merrimac Valley and even the Cape…Murray has had quite an unbelievable schedule. His interest and presence is appreciated, especially by city officials and town administrators because he understands what they are up against and is helping to find ways to solve the problems they face.
<
p>He appeared at the Mayor’s Association meeting on the Cape this week. It was clear from the reception that the Mayors were not seeing him for the first time this year because he had met with them individually in their city halls more than a few times. He gets it.
The closer Obama gets to the White House, the more we’ll be seeing of Tim Murray, if ya know what I mean.
I ultimately supported him in his candidacy for Lt Gov because of his outspoken support for commuter rail.
<
p>Where’s the action?
How’s that one coming? Anybody?
Wasteful spending is croaking this state. I just saw the report on the private consulting firm engineers that are inspecting our bridges at twice the price. So, I’d love to hear how that’s going.
You raise a good point. Just yesterday, the Governor met with the Secretary of Transportation Bernard Cohen and Turnpike Director Alan Labovidge to review reforms at the Turnpike. As you may know, the Governor asked Labovidge to take the Turnpike position in order to bring real, structural reform to an agency in need of change. To date, the Turnpike has saved $14 million, and has a number of changes (detailed in the Globe and Herald yesterday and today) for additional reforms and savings.
<
p>The Governor has also directed Secretary Cohen to cut costs on transportation projects, and he responded recently with a plan to reduce the average time for completion of a project from 10 years to 5.8 years. This will lead to millions in savings over the next few years.
Based on the Route 3 (N) expansion a few years back. Although the project ran late, and there were some performance penalties invoked, it was amazing to see the entire roadway rebuilt, including about two dozen bridges in about 4 years. One particular bridge in Chelmsford (Stedman St.) was considered a critical link to the economy of nearby businesses, so it was given a priority and suffered only about 6 months downtime while it was totally reconstructed. I suspect the contractor was able to achieve this through good coordination with Mass Highway, and the benefits of standardization and economies of scale that they were able to realize. Some of these factors could be applied to the reinvigoration of our infrastructure, rather than doing piecemeal work.
<
p>What about the Big Dig. Imho, that’s the best example of wasteful spending in the Bay State that there is, given the amount of graft and overbudgeting and being way behind schedule, not to mention the money that had to be spent on repairs fixing leaks, etc., especially after that JP woman was killed.
And IMHO, people should be in jail for what happened on the Big Dig. It’s never going to happen though, too many politically hard wired types to bring anyone to anything resembling real justice.
<
p>
…I would rather see those who cost us [and me] $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ pay hefty fines, penalties, AND for the repairs needed for shoddy materials, half-hearted work, and poor specifications.
<
p>What is the point of punishment if the general fund still takes a hit?
It’s Ms. 4all….but note that I didn’t say “just” jail…I would hope that jail time would be combined with fines and penalties, etc. But justice needs to be served. The Big Dig was criminal neglect at so many levels.
<
p>Retribution for the victim and the State, deterrence?
But I don’t think I like this dynamic that has developed where someone from the Patrick administration posts something here and people just use it as a an opportunity to for some cheap sniping.
<
p>I wonder if we could find some way to have a more productive dialog here with the administration. Perhaps we could get them to agree to participate in a discussion on specific prearranged topics. This would be a good one for the list.
<
p>
I am open to better ways to communicate with the BMG community. I look forward to your suggestions.
to ask a few questions. Geez, if Mr. Rubin stops short, HR, you’re totally going to hurt yourself.
<
p>And to be frank, your canned and staged “dialog” suggestion isn’t what this open administration said it would do. I’m glad that Mr. Rubin took the time to answer the question, however.
I am not suggest a “canned and staged” dialog. I am suggesting that we could have a substantive dialog on one topic so that we can do it justice and to allow the Patrick administration to allow actual experts to participate.
Kevin, I think you and I see this very differently. Here’s how I see it.
<
p>This first point may come as a shocker to you but here goes: I am Deval Patrick’s boss. He made some promises to me and other Massachusetts voters, and in exchange we gave him a job. Now he owes it to me to perform. If he doesn’t, I can chew him a new one, just like your boss would if you screwed up.
<
p>Doug R works for Deval, but a criticism of Deval is not a criticism of Doug R. However, Doug R is representing Patrick on this forum. Doug knows that our criticism is not of him personally, but I am sure he also knows that if he is going to sing Deval’s praises here, he will take the heat as well.
<
p>So, I suggest that you re-think your “let’s be polite to the VIP’s” line of thought. They are public servants who have chosen to talk to us in this forum. Fine, let’s talk. That doesn’t and shouldn’t mean a free ride.
Will, I agree with your point. I do not take the criticism personally (although being called an idiot in a post a few days ago is never fun), and I completely understand that if I am going to support the Governor’s agenda in this forum, I expect to “take the heat'” as you say. And trust me, I do not expect a free ride, nor do I think that would be in the Governor’s best interests.
<
p>BMG is a wonderful forum that allows us to hear directly from people who care about issues and our Commonwealth, whether or not they agree or disagree with the Governor’s agenda. I honestly believe that I benefit from the dialogue on the site.
<
p>I also take Kevin’s point as well – if there are better ways to maintain this dialogue, I remain open to them.
Doug, I had some ideas for you about how to work with this community effectively, and they were too long for a comment. You can find my thoughts written as a separate post here.
I am all for accountability and as I said, yours is a good question, I just am wondering if there is a better way to for us to get answers.
I take issue with your suggestion
<
p>
<
p>After all, why shouldn’t we be polite to everyone, whether they were elected to serve us or are employed by the state or otherwise.
Promises kept?
<
p>It is wonderful to see a cynical politician being driven around the state in his leased Cadillac. Maybe Deval can get in a bet before he goes to Washington for a well deserved job in an Obama administration?
<
p>Maybe even the lease can transfer to D.C.? I’m sure GMC leasing has that option available.
<
p>Let’s be real! Deval needed to travel around the commonwealth to see all these places for the first time. And, it serves Tim Murray’s purpose of solidifying the reins of power.
<
p>This type of pandering is rmbarrassing to the audience. Deval is worse than a run of the mill figure because he is playing with people’s emmotions and best intentions.
<
p>I stand ready to be savaged for sharing my views. That is what democracy is all about!
<
p>Prove me wrong! I would love to be proven wrong on this one. Alas, I doubt it will happen.
<
p>Some see things as they are and ask why . . .
<
p>Rhetoric has to match actions!
<
p>
but there’s a kernel of interest below. Does driving around the state really change anything? Sure, there’s the exhibition of interest merely by showing up, but ultimately it’s what he [and the lege] does on Beacon Hill that will influence downstate or out west, not what he says when he shows up for a visit.
<
p>And the general resentment of Boston is a bit over the top folks.
maybe he should be governor instead.
It is an entirely different matter when you are not just there to beg for votes.
the Deval and trophy jokes/comparisons write themselves.
It would probably waste tax money buying fancy pedestals and and fancy silk drapes for it to sit on.
tool
Sorry for not giving you wise-ass points. Why don’t you sign up for some additional accounts and give yourself sixes if you care that much.
I don’t get it.
Let me guess…you don’t have any brothers or you spent way too much time playing dungeons and dragons.
But I actually have never heard that expression before in the 20+ years I have lived in MA. Is it some kind of local expression?
<
p>You cant be on guard for what you do not mnow exists.
because you, while I don’t always agree with you, at least make me laugh. 🙂 I love your polls. I can’t say as much for HR “Mr. 4” Kevin, who has all the humor of an 17th century minister on a witch hunt. I think “Cotton Mather” every time I read his stuff. The lad takes this all way too seriously and seriously has his shorts in a bunch.
Doesn’t the above describe more of a dog and pony show of public appearances for the governor across the state?
Is this more steak than sizzle/
<
p>What have been the end results of these public appearances? What have you been able to do to help parents educate their kids and feed them? What has been done to cut costs imposed upon the cities and towns by the state.
People are hurting in their pocket books? What has the governor done to help?
Sizzle more than steak. Please make note.
<
p>Carry on.
Ernie, thanks for the question and for your passion on these issues. The visits to cities and towns across the state are important to help spur growth in regional economies, and to ensure that everyone in the Commonwealth benefits from the the actions of the state.
<
p>To your larger point about what the Governor has done to help, I would argue quite a lot in 16 months:
<
p>1. According the the Federal Department of Labor, Massachusetts has added nearly 20,000 jobs since January 2007, and is 8th in job creation in the country for the first quarter of 2008.
<
p>2. The Governor’s budget made the strongest investment in education in state history, and he has increased spending on proven strategies like early childhood education and extended learning time.
<
p>3. Managed competition in auto insurance has lowered auto insurance rates and provided more choices for consumers, helping, as you say, directly in their pocket books.
<
p>4. To another point you raised, the Governor’s Municipal Partnership Act gave cities and towns tools to help control rising health care and pension costs.
<
p>5. The Governor has also put forth four propossals to help ease the burden on the property tax. While these issues have not been adopted by the legislature, they do show a Governor who understands the problems our cities and towns are facing and who is offering real solutions.
<
p>I could go on, but I don’t want this to be seen as an effort in propoganda, just as a direct response to your question. I know you may not agree, but I do believe the Governor has delivered on the issues you raise in your post.
But really, you don’t want to engage nut jobs like me. It demeans the corner office.
And Ernie – STOP calling yourself names! Please.
<
p>Jobs + transportation are what will help the most folk the most quickly.
not good. I chose my words carefully.
Absolutely. So why do the far lefties and BMGers want their local officials and legislatures to just get more $$$$$ for more teeachers w/o givin g teachers incentives to be good techaers.
<
p>In other words are candidates favored by BMGers puppets of teacherfs unions.
A good pol would not give you or any blog thisd much respect. Really. A good speaker too.
<
p>Lose a few votes maybe. But a net plus deal.
On the municipal partnership act…
<
p>I know we passed a corporate tax loophole cut in the House, even if a certain representative who shall remain nameless placed a late, back room maneuver that more or less gutted it. However, I have three questions: has the Senate made action on it? If so, did they close the expensive loophole that was added to the loophole closing bill in the House? Finally, in that bill, did it include Verizon’s property tax loophole, so cities and towns will be able to tax them?
<
p>If that final question is a yes, it’s important to get that information out to cities and towns as soon as possible, because they’re all going to have hundreds of thousands more cash than they thought they would to balance next year’s budget (assuming they’d be able to tax the telephone poles immediately after the bill is signed).
The Senate did pass their version of the corporate loophole closing bill recently, and in many respects it is closer to the version proposed by Governor Patrick. They addressed some of the issues raised by the House amendment, and overall, it seems very likely that a compromise on closing the loopholes will be agreed upon by the House, Senate and the Governor.
<
p>Neither the House nor Senate included ending Verizon’s property exemption in legislation yet. As you may know, the Appellate Tax Board ruled recently to end the exemption, but Verizon is appealing the ruling and cities and towns will have to wait until the legal process is complete (or legislation is passed) before having access to the funds.
I commend the Governor’s support of combined reporting. I also understand that corporate tax policy is a dry and difficult policy area. However, I am very disappointed that the Governor has chosen the “loophole” language instead of having a serious policy discussion on MA tax policy. I believe that “loophole” is a pejorative term to describe an unforeseen and unintended consequence of a tax law. Separate entity reporting is a specific policy choice, just as combined reporting is. Instead of using incendiary language to dismiss separate entity reporting as “loopholes” I would prefer that the Governor actually make the case as to why combined reporting is a better system of corporate taxation.
<
p>I would also ask for an explanation as to why the exact same 80-20 water’s edge election that is in place in virtually every state with combined reporting is somehow a “loophole.” From a strict policy perspective it would be better not to have a water’s edge election. But given the possibility of interfering with federal tax treaties and potential federal legislation preempting states from requiring world-wide combined reporting, not having a water’s edge election is risky. Going from separate entity reporting to combined reporting will invite significant litigation to begin with, but changing to having the most aggressive combined reporting system in the country will certainly invite all kinds of challenges. It might be more prudent to catch up with every other state first before we try to burst ahead of them all. That being said, I can’t in good conscience oppose the Governor for pursuing a better policy despite the significant hurdles. I just might want MA to crawl before it walks.
<
p>Going further with Ryepower’s point above, changing MGL ch. 59 sec. 18 to clearly provide for taxation of utility poles would allow municipalities to begin taxing the utility poles from now going forward, regardless of the result of the litigation. That would create a more certain source of funding that the towns could rely on instead of waiting and hoping that the ATB is upheld on appeal, then assessing the intervening years and waiting to collect that revenue. Please don’t use the ATB decision as a reason to reduce your efforts to clarify the law going forward as soon as possible.
and he still gets sandbagged. I mean, at least most of the time he earns his 3s. Yeesh.
for teh corber office.
carry on