Raising Taxes to Balance the Budget….or not?

The Salt Lake Tribune yesterday published an article on a group of Utah Senators on a mission to get as many legislator pledges as possible to block any proposals on raising taxes.

But one legislator makes this point:

Senate Minority Leader Pat Jones, D-Holladay, agrees, saying the anti-tax pledge locks in serious policy decisions before hearing from the public.

“I’m not saying I would vote in favor or against [tax increases]. I’m just saying we need to do our due diligence and listen to the public input. … It’s their money and we owe it to the citizens to have public input on what these cuts would mean to them,” she said. “To say we’re going to go ahead and have the solution before we even get the public’s input, I think, is very premature and even irresponsible.”

Wow, what a concept!

So before Utah Legislature Watch authors publish a blog post on the issue, we would like our readers to first read the article and do any other research on it, and then participate in our poll (below).

A Sad Day on The Hill: McCoy Resigns

Senator Scott McCoy (D-Salt Lake City District 2), Utah’s first openly gay senator, has announced his resignation from the Utah Legislature effective at the end of the week, according to a Salt Lake Tribune article.

Although he has indicated he will still seek political office at some point in the future, for now this is sad news for Utahns.

“We feel Senator McCoy was not just an advocate for the [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender] community, but for Utahns as a whole,” said Brandie Balken, executive director of Equality Utah. She said his service helped to break down stereotypes and the group is confident that whoever replaces him will also represent the LGBT community.

Even McCoy’s fellow legislators who often opposed his stances on issues says he will be missed.

Sen. Curt Bramble, R-Provo, who was majority leader during much of McCoy’s tenure and clashed with the outspoken Democrat on occasion, said McCoy’s departure is “unfortunate.”

“I think it will be a loss,” he said. “Scott’s a very capable legislator. Philosophically, Scott and I came at issues from entirely different points of view, but I found in working with him, he was a man of his word. He demonstrated integrity, courage. … Even through some of the challenges we’ve had in the last couple of years, Scott always maintained a very dignified and professional decorum.”

Recognizing the difficulties of being a part time legislator, McCoy has announced that his legal career needs his full time attention right now and that he needed to step down to focus entirely on that.

Democratic Party delegates are currently deciding on a replacement.

“Chris and Chris” Bill: A Marriage in the Making?

Utah’s ABC 4 has posted a breaking news piece about openly Anti-Gay Senator Chris Buttars  teaming up with openly Lesbian Representative Chris Johnson to co-sponsor Johnson’s gay rights bill.

The 2009 Legislative session brought much controversy to the floor over Buttars’ public remarks on gays.  To hear of Buttars even considering such a move is astonishing.

Education Budget: Meeting Today’s Demands

Always a hot topic in the Utah Legislative Session, the budget discussion for education will once again address how to meet the demands of Utah’s changing demographics.

That is, if Utah’s legislators decide to recognize that Utah is not the same as it was a decade, and more, ago.

The Salt Lake Tribune has published an article on how students are doing in the state.  On the surface, Utah looks good:

Utah students have a higher high school graduation rate than the nation on average; they have a higher average ACT score; and they meet or beat national averages on nationwide math, reading, writing and science tests.

But  statistical examination of the breakdown paints a different picture:

When statewide results are broken down by race, Utah’s racial groups, including white students, sometimes perform below national averages for their peers, a Tribune analysis shows.

The article goes on to offer explanation to the “statistical paradox” of Utah’s student performance, especially given the fact that Utah has the lowest per pupil spending and highest class sizes.  Added to this is Utah’s declining high school graduation rate.

According to Education Week reports, Utah had the highest high school graduation rate in the country in 2004. By 2006, Utah had slipped to 26th in the country.

Interviews with teachers and other officials offer further insights about the realities of teaching in Utah.

“As we fall farther behind in funding it should be no surprise to anyone that student achievement follows,” said State Superintendent Larry Shumway. “Our teachers are doing the best they can, but we aren’t providing the support for student learning that we ought to be providing.”

At the root of discussion is money.  There are differing viewpoints on education spending.

[Jay Blain, a math teacher at Cottonwood High in Salt Lake City] Blain believes Utah’s relatively low per-pupil funding and large class sizes are the main reasons Utah students are falling behind.”Resources matter,” Blain said. “Tell me that it wouldn’t matter to have 30 kids in an algebra II class instead of 40.”

Will legislators agree?

[Sen. Howard Stephenson, co-chair of the Utah Legislature's Education Interim Committee]

He said the way to improve Utah education is by attracting more quality teachers to classrooms. But to do that, he wants to boost teacher pay by putting schools on more efficient year-round schedules to save money.Putting more money toward education would “require higher taxes,” he said. In the past, Stephenson has said Utah should be a model for other states when it comes to eliminating waste in education spending.

[Rep. Greg Hughes, co-chair of the Education Interim Committee]

“If test scores were directly tied to funding then the District of Columbia would have the highest student test scores in America,” Hughes said, referring to the troubled Washington, D.C., school system, which spends the third-highest amount of money per student in the country.Though he said he’s not opposed to increasing education funding, Utah simply faces funding challenges other states don’t. Utah has the highest proportion of school-age children of any state in the nation, and about 65 percent of Utah land is federally-owned, meaning it can’t be taxed for schools, he said.  “I don’t know how you ever overcome that,” Hughes said.

One thing for sure.  Utah’s population is not the same as it was a decade ago.  The demographics are changing and have been for quite some time.  I’ts time to put education money into these changes.  It’s not fair to impulsively and prematurely react by stating that taxes cannot be raised to fund education.  While legislators are moving ahead with raising the taxes on unprepared food, a human necessity, they are balking at raising taxes to fund the education for our state’s children?  Is not education also a human necessity?  Where is the logic in not examining ALL possibilities, including raising taxes for this critcal need?

Budget Cuts: The Privatization of Services

The November 19 Utah Legislature Fiscal Highlights Bulletin contained a report about the privatization of DSPD, Division of Services for People with Disabilities.

The DSPD is responsible for providing residential, day services,
family support services, and attendant care for people
with severe mental retardation and other related conditions,
including brain injury and physical disabilities.
The services provided range from limited family support
to a full array of 24‐hour services both in the community
and at the Utah State Developmental Center (USDC).

As a result of state budget cuts affecting personnel budgets at DSPD, the organization decided to restructure its operations.

DSPD leadership met with a variety of stakeholders prior
to implementing the reorganization. As a result of the
implementation strategy, DSPD eliminated 66 positions,
mostly by transition from public employees to private
support coordinators. Eight offices were closed, regions
collapsed, and leases not renewed.

The document goes on further to state:

Transitioning from public to private caseworkers has been a significant change for DSPD. DSPD management has stated “our expected outcomes include, but are not limited to: 1) protecting the people we serve and direct services; 2) significant, on‐going cost savings; 3) greater choice of support
coordinators; 4) competition among private support coordinators driving higher quality; 5) greater uniformity
since we are eliminating the regions; and 6) enhanced
objectivity as state‐employee support coordinators will
no longer act as advocates for the people they serve.”

This picture is not as rosy for people needing services as the article makes it appear to be.  I met with a representative of another agency which also provides services to people with disabilities, as part of my job working with public school children with disabilities.  I was told that with the restructuring of DSPD, there is now a 3-5 year waiting list for people needing DSPD services.  Not only that, but there is virtually no chance of anyone needing DSPD services ever receiving services, no matter how urgent the need.

Privatization of services for the health and well-being of citizens is really, really bad.  Not only are people in need being denied services but with privatization comes its perks (for the business owners) like not having to be mandated to pay those pesky retirement plans for employees and not having to be tied to employee tenure (being able to fire and hire at will).  Slashing funds to government organizations to essentially shut them down hurts people.

When will our legislators stop hurting Utah’s citizens?

Ethics Reform: The People Speak

Authors at Utah Legislature Watch have posted numerous articles in the past about Utah Legislators Ethics.  This year will be no exception since even before the session begins, there is already continued talk about ethics reform.

Last week the Deseret News published an article about a bill that has come out of committee on ethics reform.  the bill proposes the formation of an independent panel which would serve as a clearning house for complaints against legislators.

The proposal, allowing private citizens to initiate complaints, would bring in an independent voice to ethics enforcement on Utah’s Capitol Hill for the first time. Currently, only sitting lawmakers can bring allegations against their colleagues and the complaints are judged solely by other legislators meeting behind closed doors.

Utahns for Ethics in Government is not entirely satisfied wtih this bill, however.  The group is currently working on a citizen’s  initiative that would overhaul the ethics process.  The article quotes member Kim Burningham,

“We still have some major concerns” regarding transparency and fairness, “We believe in a lot more openness.”

Other ethics adovcates are on board with the initiative such as Utahns for Ethical Government.  There continues to be debate between these groups and legislators regarding the language and “loopholes” in the initiave.  The few comments to the D-News article so far allude to legislators being nervous about handing things over to the citizens.

As well they should be.  It’s time for the people to oversee the activities of their employees, the state legislators, to ensure transparency in Utah’s government.

Another proposal to raise the tax on food

Representative Craig Frank has a blog post with a big headline:

Repeal of 1% Restaurant Tax Receives Unanimous Approval

Repealing a tax should be popular right about now. Especially since Senator Howard Stephenson and others are proposing to raise the sales tax on food.

Unfortunately, repealing this tax isn’t as pretty as it sounds. The proposal is, in fact, to shift a one percent restaurant tax to a one-tenth of one percent general sales tax.

Rep Frank says:

Although the Bill proposal removes the 1% sales tax on restaurant food, the Bill also gives Counties throughout the state an option of levying a 1/10 % (one-tenth of one percent) general sales tax in its place. Many counties have used the current restaurant tax’s revenue stream to bond for projects such as convention centers and other “cultural” venues.

Rep. Frank has stated that “it’s not (his) intent to put at risk those Counties who have already leveraged themselves against the previously ‘guaranteed’ revenue stream, but to take the tax from a less logical collection point and place it in a tax base that makes more sense.”

Let me repeat that last phrase: “take the tax from a less logical collection point and place it in a tax base that makes more sense:

Stated more plainly, we’ll abolish a tax on prepared food enjoyed by those who can afford to dine out, and replace it with a tax on unprepared food that is a basic necessity of life.

This shift may be revenue neutral, as Rep. Frank claims, but the burden will be shifted from those who have expendable income enough to enjoy eating out, and will be born disproportionately by the poor and working poor of the state who will be required to pay a greater percentage of their income to fund those convention centers and other ‘cultural’ venues.

In the comments Rep Frank says this proposal has nothing to do with Sen. Stephenson’s proposal to raise sales taxes on food. He is only partially right in that. While theoe may be two separate proposals, they both end up hurting the people most who already find their grocery-buying dollar stretched to the limit.

This proposal by Frank is nothing more than bowing to the restaurant industry. Restaurants benefit from those convention centers and cultural events. If a tax is needed to fund those things, then a restaurant tax seems far more appropriate than a grocery store tax.

This bill should never have made it out of committee and it must surely be defeated when brought to a vote.

Cross-posted at OneUtah

Buttars at it again

Chris Buttars, R-West Jordan, is quoted in the Desert News as saying that the recently passed ordinance (supported by the LDS church) to protect the rights of gay people with regards to housing and employment could result in “unitended consquences”.

“There’s a lot of questions. I’m not jumping to conclusions. I’m going to stand still and let the dust settle,” he said. “I haven’t changed my mind about anything, but I do believe people have fundamental human rights. All people do, and that includes the gays. But you’ve got to do it in a way that doesn’t give all those unintended consequences.”

I’m not sure what Buttars means by “unintended consequences”.  Could he possibly mean “unforseen”????

Besides, just what are “unintended consequences”?  The article fails to quote the anit-gay Utah Senator on that.

Utah’s Budget: Poll

Utah Newspaper Staff Defends Education Budgets

The Salt Lake Tribune Editorial Staff has published its support for keeping the education budget in tact without further repercussions of state budget cuts, an anticipated outcome of Utah’s 2010 Legislative Session in light of the projected $850 million revenue shortfall.

The State Office of Education said in October that public schools can operate on at least the same amount of money appropriated for the current school year — it was cut 5.2 percent from the year before — even though that means about a 2.6 percent reduction in funding per student, since enrollment is expected to increase by about 12,000 students.

This proposal is a concession by state education officials to the realities of the current recession. They know they’re not likely to get more dollars this year than last, but they are warning what will happen if they get less. Utah’s already largest-in-the-nation class sizes are apt to get bigger if spending per pupil drops lower, and large classes directly affect the quality of teaching and learning.

They point out that, while the base level of per-pupil spending — lowest in the nation –was not cut for the current school year, reduced spending on specific programs has affected students. They are reasonably asking lawmakers to use the $100 million set aside this year for education and to use another $100 million from the state Rainy Day Fund.

The editorial goes on to detail reasons for keeping higher education funding and ends with this statement:

It’s time for lawmakers to bite the bullet and make the tax increases necessary to protect education and maintain other vital services