Are New York and the North Country drowning under costs of government?
I interviewed Garry Douglas today, with the Plattsburgh-North Country Chamber, co-founder of a group called Unshackle Upstate.
He says rising taxes and fees are stifling the economy in the North Country and New York state.
"It is an unsustainable scenario that is shrinking the ship of state," Douglas argues.
Douglas's arguments are really two-fold:
1. To maintain the kinds of services we enjoy in New York, we need a thriving private sector to pay all the taxes. Yet the private sector is eroding rapidly.
2. To offset some of the loss of state revenues (Gov. Paterson is now predicting another $3 billion deficit) New Yorkers need significant wage and benefit concessions from government workers.
Douglas points out that local governments (the ones we North Country folks control) have been just as profligate in their spending, triggering property and sales tax hikes.
"It is absolutely byzantine how many local governments and taxing jurisdictions we have," Douglas says. "We could probably do with one tenth of them."
This isn't just about paying lower taxes.
For the lines to converge, New Yorkers will probably need to settle for far fewer government services.
And government workers will probably have to settle for wages and benefits more in line with their private-sector colleagues.
(According to Unshackle Upstate, government workers in the North Country earn nearly a third more in wages and benefits than comparable workers in the private sector.)
What do you think? Is business as usual the way to go? Or d you agree with Douglas that we're nearing "a total collapse"?
Is it appropriate that many government workers are receiving 3% pay increases at a time when the private sector economy and private sector jobs are shrinking?
Comment welcome below.
(This is an issue people feel passionate about, so remember your manners. Argue, debate -- don't denigrate...)
posted by Brian Mann @ 9/24/2009 07:54:00 AM
30 Comments
30 Comments:
I'd add in addition to a change in wages, a change in policy might be inorder. One example; the states bare road policy that is a huge expense both fiscally and environmentally. This is just one example where policy changes would seem to be part of the cure for what ails us.
Start with cutting state legislative staff, and I might be on board. Never hear that, though, especially not from legislators. They love their lu-lus.
Some good ideas and points, especially consolidation, but it soon starts to descend into an attack on wage growth. And the stats show the wages have been losing ground to inflation and to corporate overseers for at least 30 years. So the government unions become scapegoats for actually standing up and demanding increases, while everyone else's job got moved overseas or lost ground.
Layoffs and attrition are in vogue in the private sector. Perhaps the state should adopt that before reducing wages.
I couldn't agree more with his point of taxing jurisdictions. We have far too many. It's time to consolidate services and dissolve the many town and village governments across the entire state.
The wage issue is another animal. As another poster mentioned, wages have been shrinking for years in the private sector. While I agree some state and local gov't wages are far too generous given the qualifications and actual job duties of some positions in gov't, saying all gov't positions are that way paints too wide a swath. It just isn't the case.
What I would do is be far more aggressive with encouraging the older workers on the state and local gov't payrolls to retire. I.e. offer a real incentive. Give them years of service credit and use of their retirement funds earlier as a means to encourage the highest paid employees out of gov't. And then don't replace some of these positions.
Lastly, cut the red tape and fees placed upon start-up businesses and long established enterprises. Albany is shooting themselves in the foot in order to pick up a few pennies.
Let me put on my libertarian hat here.
No one who is paid with tax dollars should be paid more than $250,000! Period.
I am tired of hearing the excuse - "If you want good help, you have to pay for it."
If we had good help, costs would go down and productivity would go up.
As far as state workers in general are concerned, put in a wage freeze. Many in the private sector aren't getting a raise this year, last year and probably not next year. Those on Social Security aren't getting a raise.
Anyone who has a job in this economy should be grateful. If state workers don't like having their wages frozen (or lowered if they are getting more the $250,000) then let them leave and find a job in the private sector. I hear the Dollar Stores are hiring.
Pete,
I agree that no one in state gov't is worth more than $250,000. In fact, that figure is too high. And that includes SUNY, CUNY, the state ed. department, DOL, DOT, the Authorities, etc...The problem is that most of the costs of salaries, wages, etc. are not in that wage rate. It's mostly the employees making much less than that figure.
I think much of the bloat can be attributed to programs such as CETA from the mid to late 70's that basically subsidized local and state job creation with federal dollars. Unfortunately when the federal subsidy dried up, local and state gov't kept these positions and paid the costs from local money.
Walk into any DOT, DOL, or county social service dept. and ask how many of the over fifty workers were hired though the CETA program. And the sad thing is their only hanging around in order to meet the criteria for collecting their pension and probably health care. Offer the right incentive and they'll leave in droves.
I'd like to hear some feedback from public sector employees.
How do you feel about your compensation?
Do you experience resentment or concern from your neighbors?
How do you feel about the approach of the unions that represent you.
I'm not asking in a 'gotcha' way. I'd love to hear your take on how this all works.
Feel free to post anonymously...
--Brian NCPR
I think I collectively bargained for my compensation.
In the seventies through the eighties I experienced sympathy and was the butt of jokes for my compensation by private sector employees. Now, I experiece some jealousy because of the compensation package I have arrived at after 32 years of service in the public sector. Am I looking forward to retirement? Not really. I enjoy what I do and look forward to continuing to do it and VOTE for many many years to come.
My union works hard to insure not just good compensation but fair play and fair working conditions. Additionally, it strives to make my community a better place to live.
New York may be a high tax state, but we also get a lot for our money. I think many people don't realize that or take it for granted. As a state employee, I am here to serve and not for the money. While someone with a government check may seem to be doing well in the North Country, they would struggle financially in other parts of the state. Many of the current raises are in contracts the state made. I would expect future contracts to have some years with smaller or no increases. Many state employees contribute to their retirement and health insurance, and in the case of the latter still have out of pocket expenses. It is funny how times change. I agree with the person who noted that state employees were ridiculed for their lower wages in the past. Now the tables have turned.
While I'm not in favor of a bloated State payroll, I would have to say that I know quite a few State workers, and while they earn a good living, I don't quite think it's a lavish one (mostly). Plattsburgh, Mr. Douglas's main realm, is very different from most small towns in the Adirondacks, but I think the scale is thrown way off by the fact that many, many private sector employers, especially in the resort areas, hire at extremely low wages, forcing a huge number of residents of these areas to hold multiple jobs just to scrape by - and many of those private sector employees then must depend on some of the programs paid for by our State's high taxes - foodstamps, healthcare, and other services.
As a business owner, I'd have to say I appreciate the bit of disposable income that state employees, teachers, and others distribute in the community.
Keep in mind that benefits make up a large portion of compensation for public emplyees. An entry level wage for a teacher in some St. Lawrence County schools is around $35,000 but they are eligible for family health coverage with a premium cost of $17,000 (paid in full by many districts). Most teachers keep this valuable benefit when they retire.
Years ago( as the poster above said;"...the butt of jokes...")public employees took benefit packages in lieu of wages. Now, those benefit packages are very expensive and those public employees are expected to give away those benefits that they A)worked hard to bargain for and gave up other things to write in to contracts. B)EARN as part of their job.
How about public utilities. Reliant Energy employees compensation packages are far more expensive than even Massena Electric. Couldn't they give a little bit and there by make electricity cheaper so private employers could start business that would provide good jobs. Even if they would the jobs would not be produced.
Several good thoughts posted, but there seems to be a few areas that you're overlooking. NYS is about as business unfriendly as you can get. It's among the very highest taxed states. Why would anyone do business here when everything costs so much? If we got serious about things then change could occur.
First things first- an across the board freeze on state spending increases. Conduct a complete audit of State agencies and do away with redundant agencies and positions.
Freeze school spending and take on the teachers union. The point of school should be education,not sports, not the arts, not building a shrine to the administration as is done in so many schools. I'm a retired State employee, my wife is a teacher. I always had copays on my insurance, the teachers never have. They won't discuss it. Kick the unions, and hard.
Cut duplication in services. Make, and yes I mean FORCE, able bodied public assistance recipients to perform some duty for their benefits. Go through the budget line by line and do away with all but essential items.
CUT TAXES ACROSS THE BOARD. MAKE the State, counties, cities, towns and villages do with less and get people used to the idea they aren't going to be able to complain to someone and get a "freebie". We're soft and decadent. It's time we learned to work again and not to expect someone to hold our hand every step of the way.
There are multiple State agencies that can be completely done away with or privatized. ORDA, the APA, DOCs come to mind. The DEC Forest Rangers, ENCON Police and State Police could all be under one roof and still provide the same services at reduced costs. Privatize all state camp grounds.
Here's one of my pet peeves- Start charging FOR USE OF ALL STATE LANDS! Hunters, trappers and fishermen all have to buy a license to use State lands and game. It's high time the Gorte-tex and granola crowd started paying their fair share. Anyone over 16 years of age should have to buy a land use license equal in cost to the fishing license I'm forced to buy to go out and not catch anything. Look at the damage they do to the High Peaks and the costs associated with it. Make them pay too.
There's a million places we could cut, change and build. Until NY decides to get serious we're going to continue to decline.
I don't mean to pick on the general rank and file of state, county and town employees. If I did, I would be killed by my daughter who works for the state and my son-in law who works for the county.
But with that said, there are those who are paid with federal and state tax dollars who do make in excess of $100,000 plus benefits (health insurance) that are often more than $18,000. This takes place while many in the North Country scrape by without benefits and who make less than $18,000.
As was noted at a recent town board meeting I attended and where work on the 2010 budget was starting, the federal government is suggesting a 3% COLA increase in wages while telling senior citizens not to expect any increase in their Social Security. That particular town board is planning to limit the COLA for their employees to 1.5%.
Shouldn't this be a model for all?
After all, as was noted at the meeting, "Anyone who has a job in this economic climate should be grateful."
Why are there COLA's? You retired. Enjoy it. Wait did you plan your retirement based on that COLA increasing? I see. And other people who have budgeted and planned should not only not recieve wage increases they planned for, they should actually have wage cuts. Okay they will adjust make another plan, not have as much disposable income, and they will not retire allowing young people into the work force.
fewer state mandates and red tape.
pass tier v or better yet change the state constitution so we can make pension changes to those currently working (like making them contribute something to the system).
Reign in medicaid spending. How can we spend more on medicaid than California which has twice the population?
Import drugs from canada.
Crack down on welfare fraud.
no more free health insurance for government retirees.
Get rid of tenure especially teacher tenure.
consolidate state agencies.
Stop the massive subisdies to film and movie industry (located almost entirely in NYC). We should not be subsidizing huge salaries for actors.
No more funding for sports stadiums.
Get rid of member items funding.
No more bailouts.
Cut travel expenses through increased use of information technology.
Turn the heat down to 65 in state buildings.
collect cigarette taxes from native american reservations.
legalize mma.
I work for a state agency... my job is a joke- completely useless. I do other work in our agency that I find rewarding, but I'm not supposed to do. If my real job was eliminated tomorrow, no one would notice.
Teacher's unions are key- all sorts of alphabet agencies are culpable. What we expect out of retirement are a completeloy different set of expectations than our parents had, and we feel entitled to them.
The DEC officer who enforces the burning ban on the property of someone whose spouse and he make $8-$10 an hour, and who feel lucky to have the job- what kind of respect or willingness to comply do you think they're going to have?
There is a reference above to eliminating sports and the arts from schools - big mistake - sports (phys ed) and the arts are a PART of education. Now, that said, cut some of these grossly overly expensive inter-scholastic sports programs. The cost of football teams is absurd... and add to that the travel costs of these teams. Physical education and the arts should be an integral part of our students education, just as much as readin', writin' and rithametic.
Teachers are worth their pay and benefits and deserve it (although they probably should look to hold off for awhile on any increases at a time when the economy is so bad and people are losing jobs left and right) They are required to have extensive education (Masters degrees) which is expensive and time consuming to get. They put in a lot of hours and have a great responsibility - why is that not worthy of a decent salary? Now... let's talk about the overly bloated administrations of many schools - very high salaries for some questionable responsibilities. Obviously there needs to be administration but some of it can easily be cut or split out to a couple of lower paying and probably more valuable positions. I can imagine a ratio of two administrative positions that could create three regular jobs in a school system.
Full disclosure: I am not a teacher (although I was for a couple of years about 25 years ago) and do not work in a school district nor do I have a spouse working in a school district. I do not work in the public sector - I am self-employed which is probably one of the hardest hit segments of the economy. I don't even have kids in school.
No problem getting rid of tenure for teachers and school administrators. Provided school boards can not hire any relatives, as is so often the case in the NC
The two largest states with the two largest deficits, California and NY, are two of the most liberal left wing states in the country. If you add Mass. to that equation, another state in the red, and their blind liberal leadership this is a trend that should not be ignored!
Jeez, the most useless leader in Congress, Nancy Pelosi, is the epitomy of and ring leader of this trend!
Of course teachers and other school employees pay co-pays. Every time they use their insurance they pay a co-pay between $15 and $75 depending on the service received. On prescription medication, they pay $10 to $30 depending on the medication. Co-pays are paid at the time of service directly to the provider and lowers the amount billed to the insurance company.
If the red states paid their own way, maybe the taxes in the liberal blue states would not be so high. New York gets $.79 for every dollar we send to the federal government. Massachusetts gets $.77 for every dollar. California gets $.79 for every dollar. Meanwhile, those low tax red states, those self-reliant conservatives, are funding themselves with our money. Mississippi gets back $1.77 for each dollar it sends to Washington, DC. Alabama gets $1.71. Kentucky gets $1.45. Louisiana gets $1.45 (not counting Katrina aid). South Carolina gets $1.38. Tennessee gets $1.30. West Virginia, probably the most red of the red states, gets an amazing $1.83. Conservatives talk a good game but liberals pay the bills. That is a major reason taxes are comparatively high in New York, California, and Massachusetts. Imagine what our taxes would be in New York if we got just 90% of our federal tax money back. The real “welfare queens” are the red states!
My figures are from the Tax Foundation website. The Tax Foundation is a conservative organization.
I'd like to know who in the government is making such huge money they can take a pay cut. I've worked for St. Lawrence County for almost 6 years and I only make 28K a year. Oh wow, I make such huge money, let us government workers all take a cut in pay. Then I'll be on welfare like so many others. If they want to start cutting wages, maybe they should look at cutting some of the wages at these ginormous jobs that start out at almost 50k a year such as correctional guards and troopers.
I would like to second both of the above comments.
It is unfair for the welfare, red states to be funded by the high tax states.
No one making $28K should be asked to subsidize those making more than $50K, $100K and even $250K.
State Police should be inline with NYC cops, who run more risks than the State Troopers do.
And by the way, what is it with the State Troopers trying to look like Marines with their hairdo?
Pete- State Troopers wages were determined by an arbitrator several years back and were based on salaries of other full service police agencies in NY and around the nation. Since State Troopers work in NYC, LI and the rest of the state 24/7/365 I don;t see how you can have a problem with that. The crime is that NYC pays it's police so little for the job they do.
As for SP haircuts it's they style. It'll change at some point. That's a pretty lame thing to complain about.
Anon said, "Of course teachers make co-pays..." I stand corrected. When I said co-pay what I meant was they don't contribute to their health insurance costs.Health care cost for my wifes Union are born entirely by the employer. I apologize for my "brain fart". Co-pay was the term that jumped to mind since I have a co-pay on things like glasses and my wife doesn't Her prescription co-pay is also less than mine.
Weighing in here a bit late - one way to lower the tax burden at the county level is for Albany politicians to lift the requirement that counties pay 25% of Medicaid costs. New York is the ONLY STATE IN THE US that does this.
JPM
As far as I am concerned any job that is paid by the tax payer such as School teachers or state workers or federal workers should not have any affiliation with a union let the tax payer decide in payroll contracts.
And that's the rub here in the NC. There are not enough taxpayers to pay for the services people are receiving.
Bret4207,
For a moment let us consider a broader concept of contributing to the cost of health insurance.
Health insurance costs are paid for in several ways. Premiums paid by the employer, premiums paid by employees, co-pays, and deductibles. It is all money and all pays for a part of medical services. Payments made by the employees are savings to the employer whether made by the mode of co-pay, deductible, or premium.
If the case of St. Lawrence County school employees, they wanted to avoid paying a part of the premium. They preferred to pay increased co-pays. The amount of that increase in co-pays relieved their employer, the school districts, of 8% of the premium payments they would have had to pay if there was no increase in co-pays. Anytime an employee pays any portion of a bill, it is equivalent to lowering the premium no matter the form of the payment. Money paid is money paid.
School boards preferred the contribution to premium to show the public how tough they are on their employees. Had the school boards accepted the offer of increased co-pays at the beginning of the negotiations instead of three to four years later, they would have saved more than a million dollars.
Ego instead of intellect ruled them and we all paid a little more in property taxes. Most of the representatives sent by the school boards were completely unprepared for the negotiations. They did not understand the differences and similarities between co-pays, deductibles, and contributions to premium. They did not understand the financial structure of their own self-insurance program. They did not know the vocabulary of health insurance i.e. UCR, cpt, preferred provider, etc. They only knew what they thought would look good in the newspaper!
In fairness, I must say, there were a few, a very few, board members who did understand. Mostly, they had been involved in previous negotiations when the preferred provider system was set up. Unfortunately, they were not listened to and the county wide negotiations failed. The shouting matches between these two factions of the board members were more heated than anything that took place during negotiations.
So, do the employees and retirees of the school districts in St. Lawrence County pay for health insurance? When an employee pays an increased co-pay, you lower your employer’s premium. In this case, the premium was lowered by 8%. If you don’t think that is significant, imagine getting an 8% raise in salary.
Post a Comment
<< Home