A Preview Of Next Year’s Legislative Battles
Speaker Bob Gilligan spoke to the Progressive Democrats of Delaware last night to preview next year’s legislative battles. There are really two big issues we’ll see next year: the budget and the 2010 election.
Budget
Gilligan told us that they expect at least a $300M-$400M budget gap next year (that’s before the additional job losses in Delaware City were announced) and he said point blank that they are not going to raise taxes again. Therefore the budget gap is going to be closed by slashing programs. He didn’t know if state workers were going to take another hit, but he thought that they probably wouldn’t get their pay cut back next year. The state programs mentioned by Gilligan were the following:
– Medicaid – Gilligan discussed the “Missouri solution” which was to toughen Medicaid eligibility
– Universities – Gilligan said that three state universities were a lot for a state with a population of less than 1M people.
– SEED – Gilligan stated that the state now pays for 15 years of school: full day Kindergarten, grades 1-12 and 2 years of college at Del Tech.
– Parks – Gilligan stated that the state took over some of the city/county parks in the last decade which has added to the budget woes.
Gilligan stated that programs will be cut, and they may be popular programs. I expect to hear about a lot of unhappy people in the next legislative session. I believe this is where we’re going to see the most fireworks in the upcoming legislative session
2010 Election
It sounds like the House Democrats are going to focus on two big issues in next year’s races: streamlining running of the House and their legislative accomplishments. For the legislative accomplishments from last year he listed the following (incomplete):
– Changing the way the House was run. The Democratic majority cut the staff by a lot, the revoked extra holidays (the year before there had been 12 above and beyond the scheduled 21), removed privileges like free mailing (franking) and travel.
– Open government – Gilligan pointed out, rightly IMO, that this legislation died every year when the Republicans ran the House.
– Banned discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation
– Workplace Fraud Act
– Violent Crimes Compensation Board reform
Gilligan talked a lot about the atmosphere. Delaware Republicans are becoming the party of no, just like the national party. He said they gave absolutely no help to Markell in closing the budget gap, which in part was caused by their own actions. He doesn’t expect that to change in the coming legislative session.
Gilligan also dismissed calls for reform of the redistricting process. He basically said that if Democrats control the House, they are going to use the redistricting process to protect themselves (well, at least he’s honest). He also defended John Atkins, said that Atkins worked very hard and when push came to shove, he was there for the caucus.
I asked Gilligan next session’s HB1 would be. He didn’t really have an answer except that it sounds like the budget gaps will be priorities 1, 2 and 3 next year.
Speaker Gilligan didn’t pull and punches last night. The next session of the General Assembly is going to be very tough. I’m glad I’m not serving on the Joint Finance Committee or the Bond Bill Committee. I’m also glad I’m not Governor Markell who has to propose a budget next month that addresses $300-400 million more cuts to the state’s operating costs. The legislature has no stomach for increased taxes so the shortfall is going to have to come from cuts. As Gilligan said, a lot of pet programs are going to go away.
Great report U.I. Thanks for sharing this.
Apparently, the Speaker had a busy evening. After Speaker Gilligan left the Progressive Dem’s meeting, he came over to the Gillian Building to speak in opposition (along with Senators Peterson and Sokola and Rep,’s Ramone and Manolakos) to a rezoning hearing of the Planning Board on a property at the corner of Milltown and Limestone Roads.
The support of all the members of the General Assembly that showed up was very much appreciated by the 50 to 75 civic members and residences of Old Limestone Rd.
The applicant and his lawyer argued their case rapped in the auspices of economic development and the (short-term or poor paying) jobs that would be created with this “mixed-use” development plan.
Now, if Bob can convince Councilman Sheldon not to introduce the rezoning to Council (since it’s in Sheldon’s district), it will leave it in Council President Clark’s lap to introduce it for Council’s consideration. Oh, Pam Scott’s parents (Paul Clark’s in-laws) live about 200 yards from the property.
I think it’s really important for legislators to communicate the budget problems that Dover is facing to educate everyone on the hard choices Delaware is facing. I don’t think it will be easy because I think our country as a whole has a money for nothing mentality. Our country has been told that wars are free and tax cuts raise revenue. We’re not really used to having the government make hard choices.
I would also say that cuts to the programs mentioned above are not set in stone or anything. These are just particular programs that Gilligan mentioned, but these are obviously on his mind.
I also think it is a mistake for the Democrats not to introduce some signature legislation this session. I think there are plenty of things that can be done which don’t cost money – either a civil rights issue or perhaps consumer protection. I think it will be really difficult to sell voters on we focused on the budget only. It would be nice to have a list of other accomplishments as well.
Bill-I think that Council members are by law REQUIRED to introduce zoning ordinances in their home districts.
It’s always enabled the ‘hometown’ council member to vote against it, while more than enough council members vote ‘yes’.
Council has always been played like a violin on this as the purported ‘opponent’ from the home district gets political cover by voting ‘no’ while the project moves forward.
Hopefully Gilligan, as Speaker, has enough clout to make some calls and try to get other council members to vote no.
I also think it’s a huge policy and strategic mistake to take tax increases, especially for the Fortunate Few in Chateau Country, off the table. Talk about unilateral disarmament!
Let ’em lay in their fancy wines while necessary programs are axed.
Wonderful.
Its going to be a tough one this year. I don’t see how the state will escape job cuts. The cost for the College SEED program Minner’s underfunded manadate is growing. Minner’s STAR program that would have paid for year 3 and 4 is DOA.
Education as you all know is one third the state budget about 1.2 billion dollars. I do believe there is another round of education stimulus coming not assoicated with Race to The Top. However the feds OIG is critical of states cutting their education budget knowing they’ll plug it with stimulus money. The expectation is the states would at least fund education the same as the year before. Stimulus is not just about saving exsiting jobs but was also meant to create jobs. The Race to The Top 75 million is over two years @ 37.5 per year. There was a small cut in state funding for education last year and the year before and futher back when they were called “Minner Give Backs.” The “Minner Give Back” monies were allocated in the budget but the districts were ask to give it back. In Red Clay much of the Extra Time state grant money was given back. There are the “Minner Math Teachers” and if they weren’t eliminated last year they will this year.
Markell is pushing taking the SRO’s out of the public schools and putting them back out on patrol. He plans to replace them with retired police officers. However, not many takers lining up for a now 30K a year job. Also, without uniformed SRO’s the entire program in undermined and puts school safety into question.
There is that full-day Kindergarten, another underfunded state mandate shifting great finanical burden on the local taxpayers. Let’s just call it a state backdoor tax. But in all honesty the final decision was with the local school boards. Red Clay taxpayers did step up and added funds via the last referendum. The districts were politically back to the wall.
DELDOT; just drive around and see how many DELDOT trucks you see out there. Perhaps cuts will come from adminitrative. Perhaps consolidate DELDOT with another department.
“Gilligan talked a lot about the atmosphere. Delaware Republicans are becoming the party of no, just like the national party. He said they gave absolutely no help to Markell in closing the budget gap”
Bob had to say all of that and surely there was support for the 8% state employee pay cut. The unions didn’t give Markell much help there. Markell’s proposal was harsh but he wanted to avoid layoffs. Many employees in the private sector took up to 10% pay cuts and were killed with increased employee contributions towards healthcare cost. There were many layoffs in private sector. How many of the 37,000 peope on unemployment in Delaware were state employees? Markell will have no choice but to ask all agencies to cut staff, the county did it.
Gilligan has a good working relationship with his local GOP counterparts.
Markell has a tough job however I can’t say I feel sorry for him because after all he ask for the job. I don’t think it helps his cause by him taking on new non Delaware government business with the democrat governor’s assoication. It’s a shame Gilligan did step up on that issues. Word has it Markell took the bait for the job as other governors worried about the backlash from their citizens. Markell is driving his own wedge between himslef and others.
Cutting 400 million requires one sharp ax!
I hear Markell want’s blogger to have state licenses at a cost of $5.00 for the left and $500.00 for the right, LOL
Bill-I think that Council members are by law REQUIRED to introduce zoning ordinances in their home districts.
*
WRONG absolutely incorrect, but thanks anyway.
We first heard about this when our group, Friends of Historic Glasgow, was taken by surprise that Dave Tackett sponsored the taking of the La Grange farm through a development record plan that included a scandalous chapter on attempts by Landmark Engineering and Pam Scott-Paul Clarky to deceive and misdirect the Historic Review Board and Planning Board about the nature and value of heritage features existing on the lands protected under a historic zoning code.
Tackett took the sponsorship saying that someone else was going to take it anyway and that if he took it he’d be better able to monitor the process. Sad to say he did very little in that regard and in fact, as Bill suggests above, Paul Clark as President would have to take up sponsorship. In the caseo of La Grange farm, of course, Paul was under a voluntary recusal, since his wife was the land use attorney, but I suppose it would then have fallen to the next in the queue after President – Hollins?
Chuck Mulholland of the Southern NCC Alliance says that the best way to counter an unwanted development application is for the council district rep to refuse to sponsor it and then place the onus on Paul Clark.
There is little recourse now, the way that Coons and Clark have set up the land use process, for citizens to be included in the process in any significant way. Elected Officers of the law forego their sworn duty to protect our heritage and natural resources at an astonishing rate in favor of whatever the well-connected developers insist is their right.
I hope that the state can get creative about controlling costs and not just take the path of least resistance as is indicated by Mr. Gilligan.
on redistricting (it was my question of Gilligan), I am very disappointed.
Gilligan’s view is “the Republicans have screwed the Dems for 30 years by controlling redistricting (with the cooperation of Democratic Senators), so it’s our turn.” I know that it is WAY to optimistic for me to expect the Speaker of the state House to say, “hey, two wrongs don’t make a right”.
Furthermore, I would love to say that our state party brings non-partisan (academically rugged, computer-implemented) redistricting to our state’s district maps, and we are confident enough on our platform and record to believe that this, and not gerrymandering, will enable our party to continue to hold the majority in the state house and senate.
I would love to see our majority leadership recognize that we are not guaranteed to retain our majority perpetually, and by not ending gerrymandering now, we will ultimately be doomed to it again. Passing non-partisan fair redistricting into Delaware law can accomplish that, and would be a wonderful accomplishment to point to when trying to get Democratic legislators re-elected. (Speaker Gilligan, are you listening?)
OK, I know that I’m dreaming.
Count me as disappointed in the Speaker not backing non-partisan redistricting too. I doubt that it would make much difference to the current majority (might increase it), but the best thing that it does is that it makes both sides step out of the really dumbass deals they do in order to create protected districts. Holding on to seats just because you’ve drawn a clever map doesn’t do a damn thing for better government.
I do hope that the budget this year starts to reflect whatever efficiencies that are shown by the promised detailed agency ops review. And I do hope that the Markell Admin will be pretty open about the results of that review.
With respect to open government, the house, under Gilligan’s direction, did pass HB1 easily. It never would have even gotten a hearing in the senate, however, had Karen Peterson not backdoored it on to the floor. My so-called senator, Harris McDowell. doesn’t even think FOIA is necessary.
What the GA can do this session is strengthen the law. We need safeguards that the negotiations that used to go on behind closed doors do not just get shuffled to the caucuses. And the email exception really bugs me. It would be rather easy to redact private information. At the very least, emails between lawmakers should be subject to FOIA.
“The legislature has no stomach for increased taxes so the shortfall is going to have to come from cuts.”
Maybe the state won’t raise taxes, but last year New Castle County did, to the tune of 25%. And Brandywine School District did as well, I think 2.5%, or whatever the most they could do without going to a referendum.
A suggestion–when discussing increased tax rates, either provide only the raw rates, or include BOTH the raw rates and the amount of increase.
Saying that NCCo raised rates 25% is alarming. Delaware Libertarian noted “The average annual property tax bill would rise by about $100 to $501”. That is a bit more useful. Hmmm, my annual real estate taxes (local, county, school) is about $2,300. So while the county bite may rise a ‘whopping 25%’ (Delaware Libertarian’s phrase), my real estate taxes go up only 4% (from $2,300 to $2,400). Perhaps noting that it goes up from 15.6 to 19.5 cents per $100 of appraised value would also be informative.
Similarly, we hear that in June the legislature boosted the state personal income tax rate by 17%. Again, that sounds alarming. However we are talking about a 1% increase, from 5.9% to 6.9%. We are not talking about an increase from 5.9% to 22.9%.
Let’s use statistics to fully inform, and try to avoid cases where a headline statistic could mislead, and needlessly alarm.
UI.
Thanks a lot for the update.
I am unable to attend PDD meetings on a regular basis at the present time and appreciated being brought up to date on last night’s meeting.
John Tobin
While Speaker Gilligan criticizes Republicans for being the party of no, the ideas he brings up (regarding the university system, SEED, etc.) are ones that Republicans should be able to get behind, simply on the basis of reducing the state government’s involvement in education. Cutting costs and eliminating unnecessary state funding and the accompanying bureaucracy should be a bipartisan issue.