Mayor Jim’s Weblog

The Gamble on Local Aid

Under Proposition 2 and half, cities depend upon local aid to survive.  State aid is based upon lottery receipts.   This year, lottery receipts are down, meaning local aid may be in for a fall.  If local aid is cut, cities and towns are forced to raise taxes or lay off employees.  

The Governor has proposed level funding local aid.   Level funding is certainly better than a cut.  However, even if State aid is level funded, this creates enormous problems for cities and towns.  Our fixed costs for fuel, electricity, heat, pensions and health care are all going up, so level funding means that we have to cut something else to pay for these fixed costs.  

To make up the difference between the shortage in lottery receipts and the amount required to level fund local aid, the Governor has proposed making up the difference using $124 million in licensing fees from legalized casinos.   [Boston Globe:  Patrick says $124m from fees could fill local aid shortfall ]

The problem, of course, is that the legislature has not legalized casino gambling.  There are no licensing fees or other fees from casinos.  The Governor’s proposal is designed to put pressure on the legislature and is certain to touch off a long and protracted debate.

There has been a good deal of comment in the newspapers lately about
police details.  Our police chief has been the subject of a good deal of criticism, most of it unjustified.  I thought I would write and start a discussion about it.

Contrary to popular belief, no Massachusetts law, at least no law that we can find, requires that the police provide roadside details.  In the 49 other States, roadside details are sometimes provide provided by police, and often by civilians known as flagmen.  Here are some details:

What are police details?

You know what they are.  These are the police you see by the road (hopefully) directing traffic while work is being done on the roadway.  Police details are done if a road is being paved, or if construction work is being done that affects the roadway.

There are many times when it is perfectly legitimate to have a police officer directing traffic while construction work is being done.  There are other times when we all scratch our heads and say, why is an officer required here?

Who pays for police details?

The short answer is, you do.  Most of the details, most of the time, are paid for by the utility companies that are doing the work.  They add it to your bill.

But the State and local governments do roadway work all the time, and in those instances, the government (that’s you) pays for the roadway details.  The city of Haverhill paid only a small amount of money for roadwork last year, about $20,000.  However, we have some major projects scheduled next year, and we estimate we are going to spend $80-$100,000 next year of your money on police details. 

Why don’t we use flagmen here? 

The short answer is, it isn’t that easy.  Although no State law prevents it, nearly every city and the State have collective bargaining agreements with their local unions that require that police do the details, not civilians.  Even when it is not in the agreement, the collective bargaining laws require that if work that is traditionally done by a group covered by a collective bargaining contract, you must first bargain over that.   How likely do you think it is that the police union is going to agree to give this up?

It will probably take a State law to bring in flagmen.  That State law would have to say that notwithstanding any collective bargaining agreement, a city or the State could use flagmen to direct traffic at roadsides. 

Would a community save money if you they used flagmen?

That isn’t as clear as might think.  The Massachusetts prevailing wage law requires that if you hire private people to do public work, you have to pay them what is called the “prevailing wage.”  The prevailing wage is a the equivalent wage to what the job would be if it were unionized. 

I have no idea what the prevailing wage is for flagmen, or even if the the prevailing wage law applies here, but it is definitely something that has to be considered.  The prevailing wage is set by a committee of business people and unions, municipal leaders are not at the table when the prevailing wage is decided.  The prevailing wage for lawn mowing is set at $43 an hour, which seems outrageous to me.  (We all know we can get people to mow our lawns much cheaper than that.)

 What is we can’t get enough police to do the details?

Here is where the police can not have it both ways.  In many communities, there simply are not enough police to do the details.  Why can’t a community use flagmen here?  The communities instead resort to hiring retired police officers, axillary police, reserve police, police from other communities, sheriff’s officers, and, sometimes, fire fighters. 

All of these folks, respectfully, are not police.  The argument often given by the police unions that it is critical to have police officers by the side of the road quickly goes out the window when you see non police such as firefighters doing the details.

How can Haverhill save money on details?

This is the critical issue to me, as Mayor.  The easiest answer is, don’t have details.  Details are not required every single time you dig up the roadway, it is in the discretion of the project manager and the police chief when details are needed.  We are looking into when we need details, and when we can do without them.

What are your thoughts? 

Welcome to Mayor Jim’s blog!   This is your chance to give advice to city leaders on the running of the city.

Please be patient!  I am new to this, and am doing this myself from my home.  I do not have a great deal of time to do this and may not be able to respond to every post.

 Thanks for logging in!

Mayor Jim Fiorentini