There won't be a new tier and unions are unlikely to make $450 million in concessions during ongoing labor negotiations, according to CSEA President Danny Donohue.
A sixth tier was the central piece of the Mandate Relief Team's recommendations, but Donohue characterized it as a non-starter, which wouldn't address real problems in the state. A spokesman for CSEA added that it's not a matter of negotiation for them and Donohue concluded that new tiers are a waste of time. He said, "At this rate we'll ahve Tier 39 and we're not going to get anywhere."
Regarding contract negotiations for stateworkers whose contracts expired on April 1st, Donohue said they're willing to work with Gov. Andrew Cuomo, but said they might not be able to realize the savings he wanted. "We're trying to make the governor aware that we're willing to work with him. We have to give on this, but we also recognize we may not be able to give $450 million," Doonhue said. "If you're looking to get $450 million from CSEA that might not happen."
The governor has said that if he can't get the savings he wants, then up to 9,800 workers might get laid off. Donohue suggested that the governor's proposed threat is terrifying, but could just be a negotiating ploy. He concluded, "We'll come to the table and we'll do what we have to.... but we may not be able to get to the governor's number."
Showing posts with label Mandate Relief Team. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mandate Relief Team. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Tuesday, March 15, 2011
Mandate Relief Hurts Environment
Three proposals from Gov. Andrew Cuomo's Mandate Relief Team could end up hurting the environment and cost more money down the road, according to an environmental advocate.
Ross Gould, the Air & Energy program director for Environmental Advocates of New York, said the suggestions on environmental issues are short sighted and misguided.
The three main proposals from the Mandate Relief Team on the environment include an end to various air permit fees, allowing limited burning of collected brush and delaying a requirement for low-sulfur oil for space heating.
"The state won't save any money from this," said Gould. He argued that the long-term health costs will vastly dwarf any minimal savings the state could see in the near future.
Gould noted that 55 percent of the state is already below federal levels of air quality, and he thought that messing with these environmental mandates would only make things worse. He said, "There's no need at this time to roll back any regulations."
Interestingly, on the low-sulfur oil issue, Gould pointed out that even the oil industry supported this measure. This is surprising considering that environmental groups and oil groups are rarely on the same side of an issue. He added that the legislation mandating low-sulfur oil by July of 2012 already included a circuit breaker option in case oil prices got too high.
"Hopefully during this ongoing process they'll see there aren't any savings to the state," concluded Gould.
(Editor's Note: A More expansive version of this article will appear in the Daily Gazette)
Ross Gould, the Air & Energy program director for Environmental Advocates of New York, said the suggestions on environmental issues are short sighted and misguided.
The three main proposals from the Mandate Relief Team on the environment include an end to various air permit fees, allowing limited burning of collected brush and delaying a requirement for low-sulfur oil for space heating.
"The state won't save any money from this," said Gould. He argued that the long-term health costs will vastly dwarf any minimal savings the state could see in the near future.
Gould noted that 55 percent of the state is already below federal levels of air quality, and he thought that messing with these environmental mandates would only make things worse. He said, "There's no need at this time to roll back any regulations."
Interestingly, on the low-sulfur oil issue, Gould pointed out that even the oil industry supported this measure. This is surprising considering that environmental groups and oil groups are rarely on the same side of an issue. He added that the legislation mandating low-sulfur oil by July of 2012 already included a circuit breaker option in case oil prices got too high.
"Hopefully during this ongoing process they'll see there aren't any savings to the state," concluded Gould.
(Editor's Note: A More expansive version of this article will appear in the Daily Gazette)
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Unshackle Says Fees ≠ Relief
A $50 fee for property tax appeals was proposed by the Mandate Relief Team and Unshackle Upstate is not pleased with this proposal.
Brian Sampson, the executive director of Unshackle, contended that New Yorkers are already taxed enough. "Rather than scheming up ways to nickel and dime us to death, our elected leaders should focus their energies on how to reduce taxes," he said.
"Charging a fee for people to contest their property tax assessment when the state, at this point, is not advancing real property tax reform makes no sense at all."
This fee also seems to contradict Gov. Andrew Cuomo's pledge for no new taxes or fees, which could explain why the report was released without any fanfare. In fact, the mandate team's report included a handful of new fees. While Cuomo "accepted" the preliminary report, he didn't say whether he endorsed all of its proposals.
Cuomo's description of the report was this: "This is a good first step in helping cities, towns and villages across New York rein in costs and help taxpayers, and I look forward to additional findings throughout the year."
This proposed fee would raise between $12.5 million and $15 million annually, but it's not clear whether they anticipate assessments would remain the same or decrease with the imposition of a fee.
Brian Sampson, the executive director of Unshackle, contended that New Yorkers are already taxed enough. "Rather than scheming up ways to nickel and dime us to death, our elected leaders should focus their energies on how to reduce taxes," he said.
"Charging a fee for people to contest their property tax assessment when the state, at this point, is not advancing real property tax reform makes no sense at all."
This fee also seems to contradict Gov. Andrew Cuomo's pledge for no new taxes or fees, which could explain why the report was released without any fanfare. In fact, the mandate team's report included a handful of new fees. While Cuomo "accepted" the preliminary report, he didn't say whether he endorsed all of its proposals.
Cuomo's description of the report was this: "This is a good first step in helping cities, towns and villages across New York rein in costs and help taxpayers, and I look forward to additional findings throughout the year."
This proposed fee would raise between $12.5 million and $15 million annually, but it's not clear whether they anticipate assessments would remain the same or decrease with the imposition of a fee.
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Mandate Relief = Property Tax?
Tucked into the Mandate Relief Team's preliminary report are two potential new property taxes that could be imposed by local municipalities.
The first suggestion is an update of the condominium assessment methodology, which could potentially raise $400 million. Because current Real Property Laws treat condos as "rental properties," which is unique in NY, according to the report, assessors must disregard property sales price and determine artificial valuations based on hypothetical rents.
The team's report suggests assessing properties based on their market values, so that low valuations can be avoided.
The team's second suggestion would be the institution of a $50 fee for property tax appeals that could generate between $12.5 million and $15 million annually.
Citing about 250,000 to 300,000 appeals for assessments in recent years, the team argues that local governments should charge an appeals fee to help with the cost of processing the appeals. They acknowledge that many appeals are warranted, but feel that the advent of tax-appeals industry has sparked many pointless claims, which creates the need for the fee.
The first suggestion is an update of the condominium assessment methodology, which could potentially raise $400 million. Because current Real Property Laws treat condos as "rental properties," which is unique in NY, according to the report, assessors must disregard property sales price and determine artificial valuations based on hypothetical rents.
The team's report suggests assessing properties based on their market values, so that low valuations can be avoided.
The team's second suggestion would be the institution of a $50 fee for property tax appeals that could generate between $12.5 million and $15 million annually.
Citing about 250,000 to 300,000 appeals for assessments in recent years, the team argues that local governments should charge an appeals fee to help with the cost of processing the appeals. They acknowledge that many appeals are warranted, but feel that the advent of tax-appeals industry has sparked many pointless claims, which creates the need for the fee.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Not Relieved by Relief
Embodying the ire of the business community in New York, Unshackle Upstate has voiced its discontent with the proposals released earlier this week by Gov. Andrew Cuomo's Mandate Relief team.
“The report put forth by the Mandate Relief Redesign Team (MRRT) has us asking one simple question: ‘Where’s the relief?" wondered Brian Sampson, the executive director of Unshackle Upstate.
He argued that his group expected more from the team in terms of reduced mandates and regulations on local governments and school districts.
Sampson did voice his support for a new pension tier that was proposed by the mandate team to help municipalities and school districts deal with rising pension costs. This change, though, would only impact future employees and wouldn't alter the obligations the state already has.
This was why Sampson said the team's proposals fell short, as they failed to address the Taylor Law and its Triborough Amendment, which he characterized as "archaic mandates."
Sampson concluded with the threat that rank-and-file legislators will embrace the hard choices if the mandate relief team (and more subtly the legislative leaders) aren't willing to.
“The report put forth by the Mandate Relief Redesign Team (MRRT) has us asking one simple question: ‘Where’s the relief?" wondered Brian Sampson, the executive director of Unshackle Upstate.
He argued that his group expected more from the team in terms of reduced mandates and regulations on local governments and school districts.
Sampson did voice his support for a new pension tier that was proposed by the mandate team to help municipalities and school districts deal with rising pension costs. This change, though, would only impact future employees and wouldn't alter the obligations the state already has.
This was why Sampson said the team's proposals fell short, as they failed to address the Taylor Law and its Triborough Amendment, which he characterized as "archaic mandates."
Sampson concluded with the threat that rank-and-file legislators will embrace the hard choices if the mandate relief team (and more subtly the legislative leaders) aren't willing to.
Saturday, January 22, 2011
State Layoffs? PEFFFF
The New York State Public Employees Federation has basically told Gov. Andrew Cuomo to rethink a proposal he floated this week that the state might need to layoff between 10,000 and 15,000 employees.
In a statement on Thursday, PEF President Kenneth Brynien said his organization understood the state's drastic fiscal crisis, but rejected the idea of massive firings.
"It would have a chilling effect on the state's economy and undermine the state's fragile recovery. We should all be working together to create jobs, not more layoffs," said Brynien.
"If the goal is to cut costs, PEF has several suggestions on how to achieve savings without damaging state services and harming the dedicated public employees who provide them. What cannot be lost in this debate is this is not just a spending problem, it is a revenue problem."
This release seems to embody a growing hostility between labor organizations and the Cuomo administration. On Wednesday morning during the Mandate Relief Team's meeting, CSEA's Fran Turner went on the defensive about labor benefits.
Remarks from her and NYSUT representatives were sparked by other teammates who suggested something needs to be done about pension costs. THe threats against union workers included team chairman Larry Schwartz's suggestion that there might be a Tier 6 negotiation.
The response from the labor people was essentially that the state needs to take advantage of low hanging fruit savings in technology advances and health care.
In a statement on Thursday, PEF President Kenneth Brynien said his organization understood the state's drastic fiscal crisis, but rejected the idea of massive firings.
"It would have a chilling effect on the state's economy and undermine the state's fragile recovery. We should all be working together to create jobs, not more layoffs," said Brynien.
"If the goal is to cut costs, PEF has several suggestions on how to achieve savings without damaging state services and harming the dedicated public employees who provide them. What cannot be lost in this debate is this is not just a spending problem, it is a revenue problem."
This release seems to embody a growing hostility between labor organizations and the Cuomo administration. On Wednesday morning during the Mandate Relief Team's meeting, CSEA's Fran Turner went on the defensive about labor benefits.
Remarks from her and NYSUT representatives were sparked by other teammates who suggested something needs to be done about pension costs. THe threats against union workers included team chairman Larry Schwartz's suggestion that there might be a Tier 6 negotiation.
The response from the labor people was essentially that the state needs to take advantage of low hanging fruit savings in technology advances and health care.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)