Who is a member?
Our members are the local governments of Massachusetts and their elected and appointed leadership.
His Excellency Charles Baker
Governor of the Commonwealth
State House, Boston
Dear Governor Baker,
On behalf of the cities and towns of the Commonwealth, the Massachusetts Municipal Association is writing with comments on H. 3650, the fiscal 2016 budget bill enacted by the Legislature earlier this week and sent to you for review and approval. The investments in local government made during the budget process clearly demonstrate the abiding commitment that state leaders have to embracing a strong fiscal partnership with cities and towns.
We thank you for continuing to support essential municipal and school programs, and for protecting local government from proposals that would restrict or interfere with their management authority and decision-making powers.
Unrestricted Municipal Aid
City and town officials across the Commonwealth greatly appreciate the $979.8 million appropriation for Cherry Sheet Unrestricted General Government Aid (1233-2350) that will help cities and town balance local budgets in fiscal 2016 and ease reliance on the property tax. The $34.1 million increase reflects the municipal aid revenue sharing framework in your budget recommendation filed in March, and the new revenue dedicated to the Gaming Local Aid Fund. The MMA and local officials know that this much-needed increase in unrestricted municipal aid originated with your budget proposal, and we are deeply grateful.
Chapter 70 for Municipal and Regional Schools
We strongly support the $4.51 billion Chapter 70 school aid appropriation (7061-0008) included in H. 3650. This $111,186,013 increase accomplishes several objectives. First, the appropriation ensures that all municipal and regional school districts will be able to reach the “foundation” level of spending. Second, the provision continues to implement the equity provisions and commitments made by the Commonwealth in 2006. Third, the Chapter 70 funding in H. 3650 would provide a minimum aid increase of $25 per student to every school district in fiscal 2016. The vast majority of communities and school districts are only eligible for minimum aid. The below-inflation amount of $25 per student is not sufficient to maintain existing program levels, and thus minimum aid cities and towns have adopted budgets that rely on the $25 per student increase and a larger appropriation from local revenue sources.
Special Education “Circuit Breaker”
We support the full funding of the state’s share of high cost special education placements, a formula that is set in state statute. The cost of providing special education services has grown to more than $3.2 billion annually, according to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE). The circuit-breaker reimbursements help pay for services that communities provide to approximately 10,000 high-cost students with disabilities in school districts across the state. We respectfully ask you to support the full appropriation of $271.7 million (7061-0012), which we believe is the best and closest estimate for full funding of the state’s statutory reimbursement commitment. The special education circuit breaker is an important state-local partnership, and full funding is an important budget priority for cities and towns.
Reimbursements for Charter School Losses
The diversion of Chapter 70 school aid away from public schools to pay tuition to charter schools has imposed a major and growing financial burden on cities and towns, a problem made more acute as the state grants more charters and existing charter schools expand. Local officials strongly support full funding of the Commonwealth’s commitment under section 89 of Chapter 71 of the General Laws to reimburse school districts for the loss of a portion of their Chapter 70 aid that is redirected to fund charter schools. We support the appropriation of $80.5 million (7061-9010) as a step toward full funding in fiscal 2016, which is estimated to require $133.5 million. Even at the $80.5 million level, the account will remain significantly underfunded, yet the gap will be smaller, and local public school systems will have a higher level of resources to offset more painful cuts in services and educational programming. The charter school reimbursement issue is particularly acute for a large number of the state’s lower-income communities, because shortfalls in reimbursements from the state are exceedingly difficult to offset at the local level due to severe constraints on local revenues and thinly balanced budgets.
Kindergarten Expansion Grants
This important grant program is used by 177 cities, towns and regional school districts across the Commonwealth to support full-day access to local kindergarten programs. Funding for the program in the fiscal 2015 general appropriations act was $23.9 million before being reduced through two rounds of 9C cuts to $18.6 million. We strongly support maintaining Kindergarten Development Grants at the fiscal 2015 post-9C level of $18.6 million (7030-1002). Without these funds, communities across the state will struggle to maintain their existing kindergarten offerings.
McKinney-Vento Homeless Student Transportation Costs
In fiscal 2013, the state budget provided $11.3 million to fully fund the state-mandated costs that resulted from the Commonwealth’s adoption of the federal McKinney-Vento Act. The State Auditor ruled that the McKinney-Vento program was an unfunded mandate on cities and towns, and we appreciate the action taken to provide full funding soon after that ruling. Under the program, communities are providing very costly transportation services to bus homeless students to schools outside of the local school district. We are thankful that the Legislature followed your lead and increased fiscal 2016 funding by $1 million over the current year, with an appropriation of $8.35 million (7035-0008). According to the most recent DESE projection, full funding of the mandate would require $20.8 million. We know that your long-term priority and focus is on reducing the number of homeless families in hotels and motels, which is the ultimate solution. In the meantime, we thank you for proposing the $8.35 million appropriation in your March budget submission.
Regional School District Student Transportation Reimbursements
Funding for transportation reimbursements to regional school districts is vital to all regional districts and their member cities and towns, particularly in sparsely populated parts of the state. Communities were sharply disappointed in Governor Patrick’s mid-year 9C cut that slashed nearly 30 percent of last year’s funding, and we appreciate your restoration of a portion of that amount. We respectfully ask you to support the H. 3650 appropriation (7035-0006) to fund this account at $59 million. Cities and towns established regional school districts based, in great part, on the state’s pledge to reimburse 100 percent of the related transportation costs, a promise that has not been met for many years. The $59 million appropriation will edge the Commonwealth closer to funding the statutory commitment, and will support smaller rural communities in their efforts to provide high-quality educational opportunities for their students.
Out-of-District Vocational Education Student Transportation
This account recognizes the significant cost to cities and towns of transporting students to out-of-district placements in vocational schools, as mandated by state law. Communities are required to send in-district students to out-of-district vocational schools if their systems do not match the students’ vocational education program interest. We respectfully ask you to sign the full $1.75 million appropriation in H. 3650 (7035-0007), which partially funds the transportation costs that communities are required to incur when they comply with this state-set obligation. H. 3650 is a major improvement over fiscal 2015 (former Governor Patrick eliminated all $2.24 million in funding last November in his first round of 9C cuts).
Shannon Anti-Gang Grants
The Shannon Grant program has been very effective in enabling cities and towns to respond to and suppress gang-related activities. We support the appropriation of $7 million (8100-0111) to keep this important program moving forward, and thank you again for proposing this level of funding in your House One budget submission.
Safe and Successful Youth Initiative
Please support the appropriation (4000-0005) of $6 million to provide funding for the Safe and Supportive Youth Initiative. The program seeks to reduce youth violence through wrap-around services for those most likely to be victims or perpetrators, and is vital to violence prevention efforts in dozens of communities.
Summer Jobs for At-Risk Youth
Please support the appropriation (7002-0012) of $11.7 million to provide funding for youth summer jobs. This program is critical to providing employment opportunities for at-risk teenagers in our cities and towns, especially with youth unemployment rates climbing.
Community Preservation Act
During fiscal 2015, 156 cities and towns collected the local Community Preservation Act (CPA) surcharge and are eligible for state matching grants in fiscal 2016. The Division of Local Services (DLS) estimates that the balance in the state trust fund will be sufficient to provide a first round match of only 18 percent of the surcharge levied by each city and town. This would be the lowest state match in the program’s history. We strongly support Section 194 of H. 3650, which would provide up to $10 million from any fiscal 2015 year-end surplus to supplement the state match. This is the approach that state leaders have embraced in recent years, and this has leveraged great work at the local level on open space protection, housing and historic preservation. In fiscal 2015, cities and towns received $11.4 million from the state’s fiscal 2014 year-end surplus to augment the state’s CPA match, and in fiscal 2014 cities and towns received $25 million from the fiscal 2013 year-end surplus.
Municipal Elections
Section 66 of H. 3650 would amend the General Laws to provide that if the date set by a city or town for a preliminary or primary election falls on a religious holiday and, in the judgment of the Secretary of the Commonwealth, impairs the rights of voters, the city or town would be mandated to change the date of the election. Cities and towns have the ability to change the dates of local elections when conflicts arise with religious holidays, and municipal leaders are very sensitive to the needs of local voters. This is a major policy change that would shift control over setting local election dates away from cities and towns, and place this control in the hands of one state official or agency. We believe that this proposal needs further review and should not become law as it is currently drafted. We respectfully ask you to not sign Section 66. We look forward to working constructively with your office and all stakeholders to review this matter in greater detail.
Administration of Retirement Boards
We oppose sections 54 and 55 in H. 3650, which would lead to reduced oversight and governance of local retirements boards. Section 54 would extend the time period for procurement of retirement board services (including investment, audit, actuarial and legal services) from 5 years to 7 years. Periodic review of performance and fees and consideration of different vendors is important. It appears to us that contracting for these important services less frequently would subject these essential services to only rare and far-too-infrequent reviews and competition, would diminish accountability, and would weaken the incentive to perform effectively that comes with more frequent review. Section 55 would allow retirement boards to invest in certain types of “follow on” and “successor” funds in a way that would weaken transparency, an important consideration since retirement boards collectively invest billions of dollars. Retirement boards should make certain that all of their investments are appropriately within their policies, guidelines and risk assessments. Under Section 55, it is conceivable that current investment portfolios could change in level of risk or balance without a necessary affirmative discussion, decision or agreement by retirement board members. We respectfully ask you to not sign sections 54 and 55.
Summary
This is a critical time for our economy, and for cities, towns and local taxpayers, and we thank you for your efforts to advance a strong state budget plan that invests in our communities, and for your leadership in promoting a powerful state-local partnership. We respectfully ask that you approve the local aid investments detailed above, and support policies to protect municipal authority and resources. Massachusetts is starting to find some new economic vigor. Yet the Massachusetts economy will only reach its full potential for statewide growth and job creation if all 351 cities and towns have the resources to adequately serve the residents and businesses of the Commonwealth.
Please contact us at any time if you have any questions or need additional information by having your office reach out to me or MMA Legislative Director John Robertson at (617) 426-7272 or gbeckwith@mma.org at any time.
Thank you very much for your support, dedication and commitment to the cities and towns of Massachusetts.
Sincerely,
Geoffrey C. Beckwith
Executive Director & CEO, MMA
CC: The Honorable Karyn Polito, Lieutenant Governor of the Commonwealth
Secretary Kristen Lepore, Executive Office for Administration and Finance
Senior Deputy Commissioner Sean Cronin, Division of Local Services