Communities Count Initiative

Thank you for your post, Governor Patrick! (6.00 / 1)

I run a small business in Northboro, where I sell "green" building materials - recycled/reclaimed wood flooring, bamboo, cork and other renewable flooring materials, countertops made from recycled glass, low-VOC paints and stains, and a myriad of other safe, healthy products for a less toxic home environment.  Will the materials orders for these projects be put out to competitive bidding, and is there any interest in green revitalization?

Small dollar year round fundraising: PeanutButterPAC.org

---

by: JohnT001 @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 14:22:09 PM CDT

Investment (0.00 / 0)

Dear Governor, President Obama has explained that he is trying to promote investment to spur job growth. Private investment dollars are directed at the sectors and companies which hold the best promise to create new jobs, because private investment dollars are intended to multiply.

The tax structure which you inherited changed investment taxes from 0-5% as recently as the late 1990s to 5-12% today. Because of this increased risk Massachusetts entirely missed the jobs growth period of 2003-2006.

While I appreciate your efforts to keep people afloat during these miserable times, we both know that all government spending comes from the private economy, ultimately, and that the private economy offers the best opportunity for job growth. I am not convinced that government-directed investment in green energy or anywhere else is the best way to make our investment dollars multiply. It also has the potential to structure state business along the lines of favored industries, thereby encouraging corruption as companies try to get their industry on the favored list.

Don't you think we would get faster growth if we rebuilt our investment tax structure in a flatter system which takes government out of investment decisions and lets people determine which companies will grow fastest, and then lets them invest as much money as they can into those companies as quickly as they can?

---

by: Seascraper @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 14:25:12 PM CDT

good, better and best...? (0.00 / 0)

First, Governor Patrick, I thank you for taking the time to address us here at BMG and for keeping us up to date on the less glamorous, but decidedly more impactful, aspects of  common wealth.  The program sounds promising and, more promising still (to me), is continued engagement by the administration at the highest levels.  Thanks.

That said, we also have an awful lot of work ahead of us, and I look forward to hearing your thoughts and ideas on how we meet the challenges ahead.

What future plans, if any, do you have to work against the sales tax that was just enacted?  Personally, I was very much in favor of your, targeted, gas tax and outraged at the sales tax passing.   Isee the sales tax as regressive and counterproductive.  Will you revisit this issue in the next budget cycle? Will you let it stand?  Do you think that, should the federal government issue further stimulus, we might use it as an opportunity to work to repeal the sales tax hike?

I'm sure you've heard aplenty, the sentiment that such a regressive tax is in opposition to stimulus: we may, in fact, be working against ourselves here.  That unemployed mother is helped by a job, but hurt by rising prices of daily living.  That young family of which you speak might be able to keep their house but may remain underwater with the increase in groceries.  This Communities Count Initiative seems to address those people who'll be most hurt by the sales tax.  Or, put another way, the raise in sales tax will blunt the efficacy of the Communities Count Initiative.

---

"Providing health care to the uninsured is a job killer, while not providing health care is merely a people killer....   Bonus: Job Openings!!"

--Stephen Colbert

---

by: petr @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 14:32:57 PM CDT

We definitely need a comprehensive revenue discussion (0.00 / 0)

petr, Your stand against the sales tax increase is too one-dimensional for my taste.

You're right that the Governor had some good ideas that turned out to be politically unpopular, so it's up to us to talk up these ideas and win them acceptance!

Still, being against the sales tax increase begs the question of "where do we get the money from?"

I'm attending a meeting tomorrow of ONE Massachusetts, where we will be discussing this very topic (the state's revenue system).

To oversimplify, in order to be considered a good revenue system, we need to ask if it is "fair," "adequate." and "stable."

The sales tax increase, as you point out, fails the first test, at least relative to alternatives such as a progressive income tax. At the moment, however, the lack of "adequacy" in our revenue stream trumps all other considerations. Programs for the neediest people in the state are being mercilessly cut, in the face of rapidly declining revenues. So, the first priority, for me, is more revenue. Within reason, of course. I'd prefer to see other forms of revenue enhancement, such as extending the sales tax to services and entertainment, things that are more likely to be used by those who can afford to pitch in a few extra bucks. We could raise the income tax rate while at the same time raising the personal exemption, to try to hold lower-income people harmless.

And then, there's my favorite rant, about the fact that in this awful revenue climate, our corporate citizens are not being asked to join in on making some sacrifices. A topic for another time.

Well, I've wandered from the Governor's main point here, which I think is a terrific one. We have to recognize that raising taxes (or getting federal grants) for programs like this will go directly into creating jobs and otherwise making people's lives better.

We need to do more of this sort of thing, but without an "adequate" revenue stream, our choices are very limited.

So, in order to do more of this, let's have that revenue discussion.  

---

by: Michael Forbes Wilcox @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 21:44:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

facts on the ground (0.00 / 0)

petr, Your stand against the sales tax increase is too one-dimensional for my taste.
You're right that the Governor had some good ideas that turned out to be politically unpopular, so it's up to us to talk up these ideas and win them acceptance!

All well and good, but I was asking the Governor about his plans, if he has any, regarding the facts on the ground as they are.   While I too would love to swing for the fences, I'm most interested, here, in what he plans as a next step, if anything...

Even in the act of 'going for broke' (that is to say, enacting sweeping change) relatively smaller details and encumberances matter.  Peeling back the layers, one by one, if only as a start can provide momentum and enact justifications we can build upon.  

---

"Providing health care to the uninsured is a job killer, while not providing health care is merely a people killer....   Bonus: Job Openings!!"

--Stephen Colbert

---

by: petr @ Fri Jul 24, 2009 at 09:22:21 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Request for more information about "The Communities Count Initiative" (0.00 / 0)

Are there links to follow or gather information about this initiative, such as:

1.  Where are the initiatives located [what communities, when set up].

2.  What sums are committed to each initiative, as well as how the sums committed are determined.

3.  Is this a public/private partnership?  Is this a state/federal team effort?

So, thanks for your post.  It is interesting enough to lead to "Where is the rest of the story"?

Deborah Sirotkin Butler
AmberPaw dot @aol.com

"Failure to plan is planning to fail."
Proverb

---

by: AmberPaw @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 15:14:21 PM CDT

Thank you for the post, Governor but I am still on the fence about giving (0.00 / 0)

you my support. Getting people to work is important in order to revitalize our communities, increase the tax base and lower cost in terms of public support. However, it seems counterintuitive to diminish financial support and reimbursement rates for Community Rehab Providers who serve people with disabilities and low income individuals who receive DTA grants? Furthermore, cuts in successful job placement programs available to these vulnerable populations have greatly impacted the time support services to help these folks maintain employment.  Now I understand the crunch, but these are programs that are cost-effective once you take into account employment taxes and reduction in public support.

I think there should be a manner in which those who work within the system aren't so intimidated to speak out on how waste and abuse of public resources in order to avoid cuts in programs that do work!  

HGMMA

---

by: HGM MA @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 16:10:48 PM CDT

Sounds like a good program (0.00 / 0)

It's too bad we didn't have more funding available for it.


---
My thoughts are mine and mine alone. They should not be considered representative of any other organization, group or person - save me.

~Ryan.

---

by: Ryepower12 @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 17:53:33 PM CDT

What About Migrants? (0.00 / 0)

Governor Patrick,

While I have not always been a steadfast supporter of yours and have been an admirer of the reforms you pushed through in ethics and pensions.  I'm also very appreciative of the way you embrace web 2.0 by posting here on Blue Mass. Group.

While you're handling of the economic crisis has been far better than most governors, I continue to be disappointed, however, with you're commitment to migrant issues.  I know the cuts for migrant health care have been put on hold, but the fact that it was even a question to exclude documented migrants from health care in Massachusetts is extremely problematic.

While you recently renewed your commitment to in-state tuition for unauthorized migrant youth, I have yet to see you expend any political capital on pushing that through.  

All of this really sends a message to me that you don't value the contributions of migrants to the commonwealth.  Just because some migrants don't vote does not give you the right to treat us as less of a priority.

The U.S. migration debate has lost sight of justice.

---

by: kyledeb @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 18:12:04 PM CDT

I have lived in (6.00 / 2)

or directly around Worcester most of my life.  I call Worcester home, and I don't even cheat when I travel and say I come from Boston to simplify the geography.  ;)

Worcester is a wonderful city, rich and complex.  To the extent that it has been ignored on so many levels by politicians at both high and low levels, Worceester has still managed to carve out a niche in the Commonwealth that is distinct, valuable, and worth preserving.

I am thrilled to see that you are supportive of the efforts here to help revitalize our sense of community and our sense of self.  The Main South area of Worcester used to be one of the city's crowned jewels.  My mother used to walk from Burncoat Street to the Presbyterian Church on Main Street (in the 1920s) to church each Sunday as a girl--that is a long haul.  She used to tell us stories about the beautiful houses and neighborhoods of that area of the city.  From my vantage point, its hard to believe such a thing ever existed.

Thank you for your interest and investment.  This is terrific stuff, and I, as someone who calls Worcester home, am grateful.  

---

by: lightiris @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 21:13:05 PM CDT

Welcome back Governor (0.00 / 0)

As I keep reminding everyone, you're doing a helluva job!  

A bit of advice, however.  If you want to generate some response to your posts, it helps to throw a little spice into the mix.  You're competing against Gates v. Crowley (134 comments and counting).

Murph  

---

by: johnmurphylaw @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 21:51:12 PM CDT

Springfield's South End (0.00 / 0)

Being from Springfield, I am very happy to see attention being paid to my city. We have problems that other communities can't even fathom, problems that we don't have the resources to solve ourselves.

Springfield's South End has a predominance of large apartment blocks and other multi-family units filled with low-income residents. This concentrated poverty is coupled with concentrated crime. Because of this, a series of downtown storefronts are either vacant or underutilized. Since the neighborhood is so close to the heart of downtown, the problems there constantly give the city's overall downtown a bad image. Drug trade is high in the area, violent crime -- although usually between associates -- is also high. This is an anchor around the neck of the entire city because people outside the city tend to project the crime in bad neighborhoods onto the entire city, and many have basically given up on either moving here or even shopping here.

A report published by the Brookings Institute and the Federal Reserve System pegged the poverty rate in three of Springfield's neighborhoods (one of which was the South End) using 2000 census figures at 43%. In reality, the South End is the most poor of the three neighborhoods, and poverty has increased since 2000.

That same study also noted that 34% of the housing units in those neighborhoods were HUD subsidized. However, a 2007 Study provided by the Urban Land Institute reported that the percentage of government-subsidized units in Springfield's downtown (which includes the South End) was an astounding 83%.

No community can exist with 83% of its housing as designated low-income. The other 17% is also low-income, but is just market-rate low-income because living in such a poor area is not attractive to higher-income residents.

With so much concentrated poverty, problems compound to the point where they are unsolvable, and the lack of money in the community (due to the residents not being able to either support higher property values or tax-paying businesses) prevents even the smallest attempts to solve them.

I'm sure that a good number of the residents of Springfield's South End are low-income because of a lack of jobs they can attain. There just aren't many good-paying jobs for people who lack a college, or even a high school education, and even fewer for people who do not speak English as their primary language. Training needs to be provided to open as many opportunities as possible to people who can take them.

But look at what would happen if people are provided with training to raise their income -- because of income restrictions on the housing, they would have to leave their subsidized units, and more low-income residents would have to be found to take there place. That makes the problem of helping this neighborhood [increasing the income of its residents] basically unsolvable by design.

To turn Springfield's South End around, I believe there needs to be a push to economically diversify the neighborhood. More middle-income residents need to be attracted to live there, these residents will contribute to a lower crime rate and increased potential for businesses to serve them.

Unfortunately, state policy virtually guarantees that the housing in that area will be permanently low-income, since many properties are "underwater" with respect to the housing market (the cost of maintaining/rehabbing them is less than the amount of rent they can achieve) -- so in order to avoid boarded-up properties, low-income tax credits are used to rehabilitate them. Once low-income tax credits are used, the property is now guaranteed to house low-income residents for 20-30 years.

State housing programs are geared toward wealthy communities -- where building low-income housing diversifies. However, those same policies, when used in already low-income neighborhoods, amplify the problems and wind up segregating and concentrating rather than diversifying. I believe that the policy should be rewritten to value diversity rather than low-income -- so in low-income communities, some money could be provided to provide housing for higher-income residents. Maybe the length of the restrictions could be shortened to just a few years instead of 30. Maybe the income levels on individual apartments could be float so that as existing residents  earn more, they could remain -- and when they do leave, the unit could be filled by someone with equally high income.

Without a national shift on our economy, resulting in the creation of jobs for people who aren't capable of "skilling up", a permanent class of people who will be low-income is virtually assured.  If we choose that economic path as a state and a nation, then we should at least ensure that this underclass is not predominately concentrated in only a few communities. Concentrated poverty is like a cancer, it feeds on itself and grows and spreads. Hopelessness is contagious.

I would like to know more about this program. There aren't many details in this post, which may be why a post from the state's sitting governor is getting almost no attention.

---

by: NoPolitician @ Fri Jul 24, 2009 at 10:48:37 AM CDT