Lambert's Council Brings Disappointing Chill in Negotiation Season
Tiverton resident Justin Katz writes a letter to the editor in response to the recently announced agreement between the town and Teamsters Union Local 251.
Resident Justin Katz addresses town officials at the financial town meeting on Saturday.
Photos (1)
Photos
To the editor:
It was disappointing enough when President Jay Lambert's Town Council imposed flimsy $2 garbage bags on Tiverton residents via the pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) program, without a one-bag-per-week credit for what we already pay via taxes. With labor-contract negotiation season upon us, this PAYT disappointment may prove to have been like a taste of October frost before a frigid winter.
First up is the Teamsters contract, covering ten employees from the Department of Public Works. Although the contract is relatively small, if it sets the tone for the rest of the budget, then voters at the financial town referendum (FTR) will have two undesirable choices: continue the decade-long explosion of their tax bills or force cuts to town services.
The contract covers the period from July 2010 to June 2013, dumping the town into the middle of year two. The financial effect of that retroactive action is a 4.8 percent increase for this year, with another 2.5 percent cumulative increase in about six months.
It's true that DPW employees have been a while without raises and that those in the proposed contract are only 2 percent annually. It's also true that healthcare co-pays will increase from 13.46 percent to 14.86 percent. But the bottom line is that the baseline budget for next year will increase 6 percent.
Another bottom line is the great deal that employees already get. The average base salary is over $40,000, with longevity bonuses of up to 5.5 percent, opportunity for overtime and payment for time spent "on call." Employees receive health coverage, life insurance and pensions in the state system. For paid time off, they get 13 holidays, three personal days, 15 sick days and 10 to 30 vacation days per year. In hard economic times, with the town awash in debt payments, property values shrinking and household budgets squeezed, real concessions would not be unreasonable.
Most disappointing, however, are the gimmicks from the council. Year one of the contract includes a 1/2 percent raise masquerading as a "signing bonus."
Apparently for the first time, the town will be paying for employees' commercial drivers licenses, which is reasonable but amounts to a raise if it was previously the workers' responsibility. Future hires won't be eligible for longevity bonuses, but the official impact statement issued by Town Administrator James Goncalo and approved by the council pretends the savings will be realized in this contract when they won't come into play for the better part of a decade, at earliest.
In 2008, voters had reason to believe that, with Lambert & Co., they'd elected representatives who understood the manner in which labor deals grow residents' financial burden year after year. Instead, the council appears all too willing to sculpt tax increases behind the icy wall of contractual obligations.
Justin Katz
Tiverton
Joe Sousa.
6:44 am on Monday, November 21, 2011
Thank you Justin . You are always on top of the situation.
Jim L
7:16 am on Monday, November 21, 2011
who was the driving force behind the terms of this contract?
Tiverton Dad
7:58 am on Monday, November 21, 2011
While we may part ways on the details, for once, I actually agree in substance with Justin. While the union made some concessions, they are not substantial enough. In the past, I have advocated a moratorium on COLAs, with the corresponding savings used to pay down pension debt. The town will still need to budget the funds, but they will go towards preserving our future. Compounding the problem will be Ms. Chabot's "model contract," which will drive the town's department heads into the arms of yet another union. This council has done an abysmal job of managing labor relations.
While there have been some successes--PAYT, the new library, limited business stimulation--Lambert's leadership has allowed this council to run amok with personal agendas, leading to interminably long council meetings that have limited taxpayers' access to their government. In addition, when Lambert had money to invest, he took it to Taunton, which he has every right to do, but taxpayers should consider this a slap in the face from the leader of a council that is supposed to be working toward economic development and expansion.
A list of names of those who supported this municipal contract and Ms. Chabot's model contract would be useful information to voters.
Jim L
8:41 am on Monday, November 21, 2011
while i agree with both you and justin, tiverton dad, i believe that where he opened his business points toward a knowledge of what it takes for a business to survive,Since he opened a hotdog hamburg business, it would need more traffic than Tiverton could provide,it,s not like he started a manufactering business , and to not say so just throws a subtle message that he doesn't care about this town. Such actions as this are what keeps the riff in this town from healing. Would you open a hotdog stand in this town with one on the verge of failing already?
Tiverton Dad
12:36 pm on Monday, November 21, 2011
Um, Jim, is a hot dog stand the ONLY business he could invest in?
Tiverton Dad
12:56 pm on Monday, November 21, 2011
I'm not a town councilor, and I'm not a small business owner. But If I were both, I guarantee you that I would invest in my town. Why are you giving Lambert a free pass anyway? He deserves criticism. Why did you and Jim latch on to the off-hand hot dog comment instead of the the real substance of my post? Is it because you saw my screen name, and the small part of your brain that registers these things said, "Enemy. Attack?" Are you able to handle ideas, or is everything personal with you?
And yes, I put my money where my mouth is by paying my taxes, taking care of my property, helping my neighbors, volunteering hundreds of hours, and always spending my money in Tiverton when it's possible. I just call it like I see it, but you apparently haven't developed that muscle in your head, because you always call it like someone else sees it, and if you don't have any response you resort to tripe and insult. See your post above.
Who supported the "model contract" and who supported this union payout? That's the substance here.
Rug Doctor
12:10 pm on Monday, November 21, 2011
Why so low on the health care co pays? Why so much time off? Yes I am disappointed as well the other unions will use this as "look what they got" and want the same. I understand that this is not a big department however it sets a bad precedent.
Just Another Taxpayer
8:55 am on Tuesday, November 22, 2011
How is the Town going to explain this to the arbitrator who will be hearing the police contract proposals? I can't imagine it bodes well for the Town.
Joe Sousa.
12:29 pm on Monday, November 21, 2011
Why aren't we looking to privatize snow plowing, grass,cutting, and street cleaning. The cost to do this with private sector contractors should be explored ? These services should be put out to bid. I thought we were getting a leaner more cost efficient government,
Rug Doctor
2:23 pm on Monday, November 21, 2011
Mr. Lambert has been a disappointment. Wants lower taxes and approves this contract? Double talking politician... Inconsistant and not up to the job.
oldandtired
8:33 pm on Monday, November 21, 2011
Agree. But I see this as an issue with Nelson and Coulter as well. I have been saying this for months. Promises made and promises broken.
Jim L
4:47 pm on Monday, November 21, 2011
tiverton dad a hotdog stand is the business he chose to invest in, i believe with his brother and he made a good business decision to open it were there is plenty of foot traffic to support it, why would anyone open a business anywhere with out the infractucter to support it.I may not agree with him but this is just a seemingly attempt to do the man an injustice, you could always run 4 office if you find it that easy
Just Another Taxpayer
8:57 am on Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Jim L. the "Hot Dog Stand" is in a strip mall. So much for having a lot of foot traffic.
oldandtired
4:59 pm on Monday, November 21, 2011
The hot dog stand is NOT the point the JimL. Please try to keep up.
Excellent letter Justin.
Joe Sousa.
6:44 am on Tuesday, November 22, 2011
"A legal battle over the sum of $367,165 that began last December between the Tiverton School Committee and the Town of Tiverton, has to date cost town taxpayers $40,308 in fees paid to lawyers for both sides." Tom D.
'We Have Only Just Begun to Fight' $$$$$$$$
Stop wasting our money . End the battle!
IC FAT
Just Another Taxpayer
8:59 am on Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Joe you and your pals on the TCC started the process and since the majority of the Town Council is letting pride get in their way from settling the matter, it is only going to cost residents more in the long run.
Just Another Taxpayer
10:29 am on Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Joe, I glad that have been able to find people who accept you for you are.
Just Another Taxpayer
10:34 am on Tuesday, November 22, 2011
Joe, where and when do you hold your IC FAT meetings? How many members are there in your organization?
Just Another Taxpayer
9:02 am on Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Joe, by your response, I assume you have private meetings that are not open to the public. So much for "transparency".
Just Another Taxpayer
12:24 pm on Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Joe as usual you do not answer a specific question. Joe the Parrot speaks again.
Tom
3:30 pm on Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Right Joe, were all waiting in suspense for you to answer! IC FAT is made up of you the O'Dell's and maybe the woman on the back of your bike.
The real question is how you as a budget committee member are going to question the wisdom of this contract when looking at the budget come February.
Tiverton Dad
4:07 pm on Wednesday, November 23, 2011
He'll do whatever his heroes the O'Dells, Caron, Nelson, Chabot, and Lambert tell him to do.
BD
6:32 pm on Monday, November 28, 2011
Talk about a "shill"!
Silvio Bungnale
4:42 pm on Wednesday, November 23, 2011
Joe, it is with great trepidation that I write this missive due to my desire to not come under attack from your self and your like small minded cronies. It is curious that man elected by the people of Tiverton would be so vicious and dismissive of those who elected him to office. Shill this and shill that and attack everyone who disagrees with you. Do you really think that anyone other than your sycophant simpleton pals are joining your make believe organization. Do you really think that anyone running for office would like the endorsement of ICFAT after seeing how vicious you and your member are on these pages. Please Joe do your family proud and stop running your mouth on these pages. You cost the TCC a lot of creditability and surely ICFAT will go the same way. Like uncle Jack used to say What a maroon.
Breeze McIntosh
9:25 am on Thursday, November 24, 2011
WOW, sweet comeback, Joe!. Do you think it's about time to throw in the towel? Each and every time someone has an intelligent, well thought out response or question for you, your answers are equivalent to that of a five year old. You have this omnipotent knowledge about almost every article/letter that is published! It is truly amazing! You promote your IC FAT and then attack most people on these boards. Great way to gain support, buddy! Where does IC FAT meet? Is there a membership list? Who wants to admit to being a part of it with you? Back yourself up with facts! You are on the budget committee, show us how you can make your ideas work, instead of yelling war cries and attacks. Show us you can be smart too!
Oh, and allow me to craft your response to me..."Whatever, McShill! Your just a shill under a different shill name. Shill me this, Shillman! I shill because it's cool to shill!, shill"
Breeze McIntosh
10:41 am on Thursday, November 24, 2011
Way to go, Joe. Remove ALL your posts....everywhere and forever.
Joe Sousa.
7:14 am on Friday, November 25, 2011
Of note, a significant portion of pension costs are borne at the local level, exacerbating the state’s already-imbalanced tax structure by putting additional pressure on the property tax to fund these liabilities. RIPEC’s analysis of municipal pension obligations indicated that fully funding FY 2010 pension costs would have accounted for 14.3 percent ($290.7 million) of the statewide levy of $2,039.9 million. Based on revisions made by the Retirement Board, the local share for teacher retirement is projected to increase from $142.8 million in FY 2012 to $221.0 million in FY 2013 if no changes to the pension system are made, while communities in MERS are projected to see FY 2013 pension costs increase $32.6 million over FY 2012 pension payments of $33.1 million. Even if locally-administered plans did not increase their ARC payments, and all communities increased their levy to the cap each intervening year, local pension contributions are projected to total almost 20 percent of the statewide levy.
A consequence of funding these obligations without reform is “crowding out” spending on other programs or initiatives as pensions consume a larger share of revenues, or requiring an
increase in revenues.
Just Another Taxpayer
7:51 am on Friday, November 25, 2011
Joe assuming you wrote this letter, I have one questions for you. Your state that "these obligations without reform is crowding out spending on other programs or initiatives. Does this mean that you want to use the savings from the pension reform to fund other items in the state budget?
Breeze McIntosh
8:38 am on Friday, November 25, 2011
Joe does not know what he would like to do with these savings because that would be an assumption that Joe actually wrote the above piece, which he did not. It was wholly obtained from the RIPEC Public Policy Issue Brief, whom I believe he just forgot to credit.
Gloria Crist
1:29 pm on Friday, November 25, 2011
There is no way Joe wrote the above piece. And as for those "volunteer" positions open of which he announces? I can not think of anyone who wants to be associated with anything he does. Me thinks the TCC is about to begin backtracking on how much they "use" him as a mouth piece? Or maybe that is the whole point?
Lance Polestrong
10:41 am on Saturday, November 26, 2011
Joe Souza just discovered cut and paste on his computer, how cute.
Tiverton Dad
9:07 am on Friday, November 25, 2011
Joe the plagiarizer is back in the house.
http://www.ripec.org/pdfs/2011-Pension-Summary.pdf
Gloria Crist
1:29 pm on Friday, November 25, 2011
as expected.
BD
1:46 pm on Friday, November 25, 2011
Joe's like one of those pull-string toys. He programmed to repeat a few differnet lines over and over and doesn't understand any of it.
Gerry Jones
6:27 pm on Monday, November 28, 2011
Justin, Surprisingly a non-partisan view of our inept Council from you. It appears that the TCC lead council has further delayed this vote. Not surprised since they can't have it in executive session and they are getting push back. you are right, justin, day-lighting the "gimmicks" this council has used to hide tax increases. They made promises and they have not kept them. Not one. the very first real vote this council made was to increase fees. Fees, as I am sure you are aware, are just hidden taxes. If you want to talk the talk, then you also have to walk the walk and dave, Robby, Chabbott and the hot dog king have certainly failed all of us. Theu made the promise, it wasn't pressed out of them and now that they have control, they have FAILED MISERABLY. Just look at the PAYT. If that isn't a hidden tax, then I don't know what would be.
Remember this next November. They will all be out telling us what a great job they did and how they held the line. BS!