Who is a member?
Our members are the local governments of Massachusetts and their elected and appointed leadership.
The eight major declared candidates for governor all demonstrated a firm grasp of municipal issues and general support for local priorities during a forum at the MMA Annual Meeting on Jan. 25 in Boston.
The candidates almost unanimously expressed strong support for MMA priorities such as increasing unrestricted local aid and Chapter 90 road funding, reforming “other post-employment benefits,” and requiring the state to pay for mandates placed on local government.
Each of the candidates – Democrats Joe Avellone, Don Berwick, Martha Coakley, Steve Grossman and Juliette Kayyem, Republicans Charlie Baker and Mark Fisher, and independent Evan Falchuk – appeared on stage individually for the nearly two-hour event. Moderator Jon Keller of WBZ TV and Radio asked each candidate the same set of questions (see below).
The first question was about local aid – specifically, whether it should increase at the same rate as state tax revenues. Keller noted that local aid in the current fiscal year is $400 million less than it was in 2008.
Six of the candidates committed to the principle, while two – Baker and Kayyem – said they would consider it but couldn’t make a guarantee.
On the second question, seven candidates expressed unqualified support for a $300 million funding level for the Chapter 90 local road and bridge program and said they would release the full amount.
While expressing support for infrastructure investments in general, Kayyem declined to comment directly on Gov. Deval Patrick’s decision to withhold $100 million in Chapter 90 authorizations.
Baker had no such reservation. “Before I take my jacket off on the first day I am there, I will release the $100 million to the cities and towns,” he said.
Berwick said the additional $100 million “doesn’t even come close” to meeting the real needs of cities and towns.
The MMA is pushing for a five-year Chapter 90 bill that would provide $300 million per year, indexed to inflation.
On the complicated subject of other post-employment benefits, known as OPEB, Keller noted that cities and towns in Massachusetts face a crushing unfunded liability, but the governor’s reform proposal would deprive cities and town of a tool to manage these costs and would not provide significant savings in the first decade.
Avellone, Baker and Berwick all have substantial experience managing health care organizations. Baker said he would create a committee that would work with communities toward the creation of a joint funding model for paying down OPEB obligations.
Avellone said, “I absolutely do not believe that the Legislature should straitjacket cities and towns around their ability to set premium levels.”
Berwick, suggesting that only comprehensive health care reform can tame health care inflation, said he is not in favor of burdening municipal retirees with higher premiums.
Coakley described herself as “flexible” in looking at the premium freeze. Kayyem also said she would review the matter. Grossman called for a means of balancing the needs of cities and towns against the ability of municipal retirees to shoulder more of the costs.
Falchuk noted that health care costs in Massachusetts are the highest in the nation, a status he attributed to industry consolidation. He argued that Massachusetts should follow the example of Maryland, which created a fair-pricing system for hospitals that makes it easier to predict costs.
There was strong support across the board for requiring the state to analyze costs and pick up the tab when it imposes a mandate on cities and towns. Berwick gave a qualified answer, saying “in general, unfunded mandates are a very bad idea,” but he “wouldn’t make a sweeping” commitment. “I want to be more nuanced on it,” he said.
Kayyem’s answer was similar, but she said she would evaluate mandates on a case-by-case basis.
Questions posed to gubernatorial candidates during the forum at the MMA Annual Meeting:
1. The recession has been rough on municipal budgets. State aid is $400 million lower than it was in fiscal 2008. Meanwhile, local reliance on the property tax is at a 30-year high. Would you support the idea of increasing Unrestricted General Government Aid each year by the same percentage as state tax revenue growth? If not, what better idea do you have?
2. A recent MMA report found that municipalities need $562 million a year to repair and maintain their local roads, but they get only $200 million from the state. The Legislature voted unanimously to increase that to $300 million, but Gov. Deval Patrick’s withholding those additional funds. Who’s right, and how would you manage transportation aid to the cities and towns?
3. Cities and towns face a combined unfunded liability for retiree health care of $30 billion. But the pending reform bill includes a permanent freeze on the health insurance contribution rate in retirement, which would deprive local government of the flexibility to make changes. Also, only 5 percent of the promised savings from that reform bill would be realized within the first decade, and that’s a time when a huge 50 percent growth in those costs is forecast. Do you support or oppose the freeze, and do you have any other ideas for better ways to reduce that liability?
4. Should the state be obligated to conduct a municipal impact analysis on any new or amended mandates and then fully fund any costs of those mandates?