Governor Dan “Transparency” Malloy announces negative news late on Friday – again

3 Comments

Dannel Malloy ran on a promise that he would make Connecticut State Government “open and transparent.”

But that claim has become a joke over the past four years.

Time and time again, Malloy and his administration have released information they deem negative on Friday afternoons or leading up to holidays.

In the night before the night before Christmas, the Malloy administration announced up to 12 percent pay raises for his top aides, and even then, failed to reveal that Malloy has signed an order guaranteeing his political appointees automatic raises in the future.

Now comes the news of a second round of budget cuts that begins to address the large state budget deficit that Malloy claimed did not exist until ten days after Election Day.

In this case, as the CT Mirror reports, “Connecticut’s public colleges and universities – a frequent target of governors’ emergency cuts in the past because of the large operating grants they receive in the state budget – sustained a $6.2 million cut on Friday. And that’s after losing $6.5 million during the first round of emergency cuts Malloy ordered in mid-November.”

CT Newsjunkie highlights the latest round of cuts noting, “Second Round Budget Cuts Hits Disabled Hardest.”

The largest cut of all, “was aimed at the Department of Developmental Services, which lost $8.4 million.  And more than half those funds came from employment and other support programs for people with disabilities, or from volunteer services.”

Yup, when in doubt go after the most vulnerable people in our society.

Oh, and why drop the news late Friday afternoon?

As CT Newsjunkie noted,

“In his statement, Barnes said the administration held off on releasing the list of cuts to reporters until Friday afternoon in order to meet with a Republican legislative leader during a public, mid-day lunch.

“We waited to release this until after meeting with the Republican leadership, in anticipation of their suggestions,” Barnes said.”

You can read more at:  http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/archives/entry/second_round_of_2015_budget_cuts_hits_disabled_hardest/  and http://ctmirror.org/2015/01/23/governors-budget-cuts-again-hit-social-services-universities-and-courts/

Just how deceitful can Malloy be on Connecticut’s budget deficit – here’s how!

8 Comments

For those who want a snap-shot about how political power has corrupted Connecticut’s budget process – this is the post.  It is a lengthy article but it provides readers with an extremely important understanding of the level of deceit surrounding Connecticut’s fiscal health.

The CT Mirror’s Keith Phaneuf is the state’s leading reporter when it comes to the Connecticut State Budget.  His article in last night’s CT Mirror is entitled, “Malloy to order a 2nd round of emergency cuts as deficit swells.”  Christine Stuart, of the CT Newsjunkie, also covers the latest news in a piece entitled, “Second Round of 2015 Budget Cuts On The Way.”

As Keith Phaneuf explains;

“Gov. Dannel P. Malloy will order his second round of emergency spending cuts in two months as the current fiscal year’s budget deficit reached a new high Tuesday, approaching $121 million.

Eroding tax receipts and other revenues – first outlined in a report last week – added $39 million to a deficit that stood at $32 million on Jan. 1.

But the governor’s budget agency, the Office of Policy and Management, also disclosed Tuesday in its monthly budget report to the comptroller that “deficiencies” — likely cost overruns in various agencies — have grown by another $50 million. And most overspending, by far, involves Medicaid.”

So, immediately after the election, the Malloy administration announced that a state budget deficit of approximately $100 million had suddenly appeared.  In response to the news, Governor Malloy identified well in excess of $50 million in cuts to various programs.

Now, a month later, and despite those cuts, Connecticut’s budget deficit has jumped to over $120 million.

In order to fully understand the scheme that was instituted by Governor Malloy and his operation, you must carefully follow the bouncing ball…

Connecticut State Law (Section 4-85 of the Connecticut State Statutes) requires that if the State Budget Deficit exceeds one percent of the appropriated budget, the Governor MUST submit a deficit-mitigation plan to the Connecticut General Assembly.  Any proposed cuts in excess of what the Governor is allowed to implement on his own (that is cuts in excess of three per cent of the total appropriation from any fund or more than five per cent of any individual line-item appropriation) requires the approval of the General Assembly.

In order to ensure that there is some degree of honest oversight, it is the State Comptroller and NOT the Governor or the Office of Policy and Management who has the legal duty to determine if a shortfall exists and whether it is in excess of one percent of the general fund appropriation.

To facilitate the Comptroller’s responsibilities, on the 20th of each month, the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management (Ben Barnes) provides the State Comptroller (Kevin Lembo) with a letter summarizing all the issues related to state revenue and expenditures.  The OPM Secretary has the legal obligation to accurately report whether state revenues are up or down from the previous month and whether any state agency is over-spending its budget allotment.

The Comptroller has his own budget experts and both OPM and the Comptroller are also supposed to look at the information provided by the non-partisan Office of Fiscal Analysis to guide their assessments.

Throughout the recent gubernatorial campaign, Governor Malloy constantly and consistently declared that there was no state deficit, nor would there be a state deficit this year (or next year).

Two weeks before Election Day, OPM Secretary Barnes issued his mandatory monthly letter (October 20, 2014) informing State Comptroller Lembo that revenues where on track and that no state agency was spending or would be spending more than their budget.

Although Lembo used his “Letter of the First” to warn about the problems that lay ahead, he certified on November 1, 2014 – five days before the Election – that there was no state budget deficit.

However, the notion that in a General Fund Budget of $17.5 billion, every single line-item was perfect and there would be no overspending in any area was beyond absurd.  Traditionally state budget overspending is in the range of $100-$200 million or more.

But with Election Day approaching, Malloy and his operatives stuck by their claim that there was absolutely no state deficit.

However, on October 31, 2014 Keith Phaneuf reported, “Nonpartisan analysts tracking $84M in potential cost overruns in state budget.”

Phaneuf wrote, “Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s administration isn’t projecting any troubles for the current state budget, but the legislature’s nonpartisan analysts have identified almost $84 million in potential problems. The Office of Fiscal Analysis reported “deficiencies” or potential cost-overruns in five areas. Nearly half of the deficiencies, about $40 million, are in the Department of Social Services. Another $27 million involve health care for state employees and retirees. Comptroller Kevin Lembo warned last May that a shortfall in this area was likely because of a projected surge in retirements among state prison guards.”

But with Election Day so close, and the election hanging in the balance, Malloy and his campaign utterly rejected the notion that the non-partisan Office of Fiscal Analysis was correct and they were wrong.

But day’s after Malloy won re-election, the Malloy administration began to divulge the truth.

Eight days after Election Day, Phaneuf reported, “Malloy to order emergency cuts, restrict hires to counter impending deficit” writing,

“To reverse an impending state budget deficit, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s administration has told agencies it will order emergency spending cuts and freeze all-but-critical hiring…In a memo sent late Wednesday to all agency heads, the governor’s budget director, Office of Policy and Management Secretary Benjamin Barnes also reinforced existing caps on overtime work.”

Nine days after Election Day, Phaneuf reported, “It’s official: CT’s budget is $89 million to $100 million in the red,”adding,

“The state budget received its first official deficit reports Friday when nonpartisan legislative analysts and Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s administration projected shortfalls ranging from $89 million to just under $100 million.

“And while the administration issued the larger of the two deficit forecasts — $99.5 million — budget director Benjamin Barnes, insisted it quickly would be closed, and reasserted Malloy’s insistence that tax hikes are not an option.

“This is consistent with what the administration has been saying,” Barnes said, “that no matter what the projections are, we will manage and administer the budget so that there will be no deficit. It is important to remember that this is a prediction of what would happen now and in the future should we do nothing — and doing nothing is not an option.”

The whole situation revealed the grim political gamesmanship in which Malloy and his advisers were engaged.

Before Election Day – On October 20, 2014 – the Malloy administration’s official letter to Comptroller Lembo said there was no state deficit.

After the election – On November 20, 2014 – the Malloy administration’s official letter to Comptroller Lembo admitted that there was a $100 million state deficit.

And the deceit continued…

On December 20, 2014 OPM Secretary Barnes bragged that the $70 million in cuts instituted by the Malloy administration meant that the State deficit was down below $40 million.  According to Keith Phaneuf’s report at the time, “Malloy’s budget chief, Benjamin Barnes, also warned in his last forecast on Dec. 20 that no major growth in state revenues was anticipated at this time. But Barnes also did not project any decline in the state tax revenues and, equally important, Barnes did not identify any additional areas of overspending.

And yet thirty days later – On January 20, 2014 – comes the “stunning” news that revenue has declined and “new” areas of overspending have suddenly been identified.

Now the Malloy’s administration suddenly admits the state deficit has jumped from less than $40 million to almost $121 million, despite the $70 million in cuts – because state revenue is actually down an additional $39 million and state agencies have spent $50  million more than authorized (mostly in the area of Medicaid).

Before the Election – no state deficit.

Within sixty days after the election – that overall problem has grown by nearly $200 million.

The fact is that every state agency has professional staff monitoring their budget on a daily basis.

The Office of Policy and Management has an entire office of professional staff monitoring the state budget.

It is beyond inconceivable that Governor Malloy and his team suddenly discovered the sudden decline in revenue and yet another significant and growing problem with overspending.

But instead of telling the truth, Governor Malloy, his administration and his campaign decided that their best strategy was to lie about the existence of the state deficit and the magnitude of that deficit.

Was their rationale due exclusively to the fact that they wanted to make it seem like Governor Malloy was a good fiscal administrator?

No, the real issue is more complex.

Recall that this blog post begins with the statement,

Connecticut State Law (Section 4-85 of the Connecticut State Statutes) requires that if the State Budget Deficit exceeds 1% of the appropriated budget, the Governor MUST submit a deficit-mitigation plan to the Connecticut General Assembly.  Any proposed cuts in excess of what the Governor is allowed to implement on his own (that is cuts in excess of three per cent of the total appropriation from any fund or more than five per cent of any individual line-item appropriation) requires the approval of the General Assembly.

The fundamental problem facing Governor Malloy and his political spin operation was more than simply the truth that a state deficit existed.

The problem was that if they had told the truth – the whole truth – it would have been clear that the size of the budget deficit was greater than $170 million and that put it in excess of the one percent trigger that would have, in turn, required Malloy to develop a public Deficit Mitigation Plan laying out where all the cuts would be taken to eliminate the entire deficit.

While Malloy was proclaiming that if he was re-elected, there would be no tax increases, no cuts in vital programs and no need to approach the state employee unions about concessions, the last thing Malloy and his political team could afford was not only revealing that there was a deficit, but actually detailing where the cuts would take place.

The key constituencies that Malloy needed to win are those that are most likely to be alienated by the type of cuts Malloy was going to implement to balance the budget.

Keeping the fact that there was a state deficit secret was important to Malloy’s campaign strategy, but even more importantly, the Malloy campaign needed to make sure that under no circumstance did anyone discover that the projected deficit actually exceeded one percent of the general fund.

Had that been known, Malloy would have to have laid out an entire plan – a plan that would have been seen as devastating to the very people Malloy needed to win, so it was necessary to stay silent in order to trick them into casting their vote for him.

For that very reason, even when the news of the deficit started to be released (safely after the election), Malloy had to ensure that that it was revealed slowly… in phases… so that it never exceeded that $170 million trigger.

First came the news of a $100 million deficit, which he claimed he “knocked” down with a round of cuts.

Now comes the news of a larger deficit…which he says will bring along a second round of cuts

But holding the news until after the election, and then manipulating when the truth was revealed, Malloy not only made it through Election Day, but has managed to avoid having to produce the required Deficit Mitigation Plan altogether.

Next month Malloy will be announcing his proposed budget for Fiscal Years 2016-2017, but right now he is doing the “happy dance,” knowing that he successfully manipulated the law, and thus was able to trick the people of Connecticut … BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER ELECTION DAY.

And that is why these past two months are a case study about how political power has corrupted Connecticut’s budget process.

Kids Not Testing

1 Comment

In an op-ed published in today’s CTMirror, Robert Cotto, Jr., a lecturer in educational studies at Trinity College and one of the only elected member of the Hartford Board of Education makes the case for dumping the corporate education reform industry’s obsession with standardized testing.

Robert Cotto opens his commentary pieces with;

“As the debate over Connecticut’s state budget looms, the legislature must consider smart ways of maintaining support for our state’s children and families. They must also figure out how to save while doing the least harm.

Reducing the number of standardized tests that kids take could be a way to save more for what matters most in education.

For years, Connecticut required students to take tests in only grades four, six, eight, and ten. In order to comply with the federal No Child Left Behind Act, Connecticut began giving tests to all children in grades three through eight and ten. Twice the number of children tested and new tests equaled more money spent. State spending for the tests more than doubled from $5.3 million in 2005 to $13.4 million in 2006.

Recently, the State of Connecticut allocated more than $18 million each year for tests. However, this amount does not reflect the hidden costs of spending on test preparation. With Connecticut’s No Child Left Behind waiver, both the amount of testing, consequences, and funds to impose the controversial “Common Core” will likely increase.

Reducing the tests that students take in each subject to only grades four, six, eight, and ten could save millions of dollars. The funds saved could help limit any budget cuts that will affect communities across the state, particularly for the most vulnerable children and families.  Cutting testing in this way could also result in yearly savings of up to $9.5 million. That’s half of current state spending to administer the tests.

At best, the evidence is mixed regarding the impact of spending more on testing and ratcheting up punishments.

And Cotto adds;

“Children best develop their abilities, talents, and interests when their schools, parents, educators, and communities support them together. In school, this would mean focusing on quality teaching and leadership, building on children’s academic strengths and interests, developing balanced and culturally relevant curriculum, confronting racial and economic isolation, and standardizing fairness in resources and support.

Outside of schools, this means supporting the well-being of children and families. In places likes Finland, the investment in children and families health and well-being, in addition to fairness in school resources and quality, has resulted in educational equity and shared prosperity. Instead of building up our system of testing, we must build up our system of support for communities.

Helping kids inside and outside of school. That’s a winning strategy.

With limited testing, there could be more time and funds for supporting kids’ academic progress and development. Time not used for testing could go towards building on children’s academic strengths and talents. Funds saved could mitigate cuts to schools, like the disappearing library, and supports for communities’ economic progress, health, and well-being.

With less testing, we can focus on support for students and develop better methods to assess the goals of public education. Maybe we can save even more as we recognize that public education will be better with more attention to learning and support for communities, but limited testing every two or three grades.”

Take the time to read his entire piece at:  http://ctmirror.org/op-ed-smart-money-is-on-children-not-testing/

Breaking News: State employee layoffs coming to UConn

8 Comments

Updated with statement from UConn spokesperson (see end of blog post)

According to high-ranking UConn administrators, who asked to remain anonymous due to concerns about retaliation, a series of layoff notices will be going out soon to state employees at the University of Connecticut, including unionized employees.

Despite a 6.5 percent increase in tuition and fees that have already been approved for next year, inadequate state support will mean that a significant number of UConn employees will be receiving layoff notices, the first time there have been a substantive number of layoffs at the University in at least 20 years.

The UConn administrators report that the initial round of layoffs will be hitting the School of Law, the School of Social Work and at other major programs at UConn.

Governor Malloy’s record cuts to Connecticut’s public institutions of higher education have already been taking a tremendous toll.  As the State of Connecticut reduces its state budget support for UConn, the Connecticut State Universities and Community Colleges, students and their parents are being told they must pay more and get less.

In a related move to cut spending, the Connecticut Board of Regents is blindly rushing to approve a “Transform CSCU 2020” plan that will dramatically diminish the Connecticut State University and Community College System.

The disturbing news of impending layoffs comes on the heels of the decision by Governor Malloy’s political appointees on the UConn Board of Trustees to dramatically increase UConn President Susan Herbst’s salary and compensation package.

Voting at a special board meeting on December 29, 2014, the UConn Trustees approved a new compensation package that will push President Herbst’s  salary to $831,000 by 2019.  Herbst’s new contract increases her salary by 5 percent each year and provides that the UConn Board of Trustees or a committee shall review her salary annually and may increase, but not decrease her compensation package.  In addition, Herbst will receive an $80,000-a-year “deferred compensation” payment, along with a $38,000 “supplemental retirement benefit.”  The new contract also promises her a $40,000 performance bonus each year and guarantees her two “retention bonuses” totaling $200,000, one in 2016 and one in 2019.

But when the Trustees met at the specially called meeting to approve the UConn President’s new compensation package, they failed to reveal that a plan to layoff state employees at the University of Connecticut was already taking shape.

The news that UConn is facing a massive budget crisis is not news, but the use of layoffs is in stark contrast to Governor Malloy’s campaign message, which was that if re-elected, he would not raise taxes or cut vital services and would not need to engage the State’s public employee unions in any negotiations about concessions.

The state employee unions used that commitment to support a massive political effort that helped Malloy beat his Republican opponent by about 40,000 votes.

Despite Malloy’s rhetoric, state employees, including those at UConn, will be feeling the devastating impact of the projected $1.4 billion budget deficit in next year’s state budget.

As the CT Mirror reported last March, “The University of Connecticut is facing a $46.2 million budget deficit for the fiscal year that begins July 1 — a 4 percent shortfall in the funding needed to continue existing programs.”

The CT Mirror added, “Further tuition increases, cuts to research funding, scaling back financial aid and stalling faculty hiring have not been ruled out to close the gap, a university spokeswoman said.”

According to reports produced by the University of Connecticut, State funding for UConn has decreased by more than $55.3 million a year since Malloy took office.

The Malloy budget cuts take the University of Connecticut back to 1995 when a New York Times article entitled, “UConn Plans Tuition Rise And Layoffs,” reported that, “Tuition at the University of Connecticut will rise 10 percent in 1994-95 and some part-time faculty members will lose their jobs this fall, the school’s trustees have decided.”

The New York Times added, “This is the sixth consecutive year that the university has called for a double-digit tuition increase. Over five years, tuition has doubled and the university has trimmed about one-fifth of its faculty and staff.”

In 1995, the State of Connecticut provided a block grant to the University of Connecticut that covered 32 percent of the University’s total operating budget.

Thanks to Malloy’s on-going cuts, the State of Connecticut’s operating grant now only provides 18.7 percent of UConn’s total operating costs.

It has been twenty years since those disastrous cuts, yet the on-going lack of state support for the University of Connecticut is jeopardizing the quality of the University and putting a UConn education more and more out of reach for Connecticut families.

As noted previous, the result of these constant budget reductions has resulted in a tremendous shift onto the backs of students and their parents.  The cost of tuition, room and board for an in-state student has at UConn has gone from $9,784 in 1995 to $23,496 this year.

And now UConn students are being told that although they will need to cough up 6.5 percent more to go to the University of Connecticut next fall, they can expect fewer staff and reduced programs.

In response to a request for a comment, UConn spokesperson Stephanie Reitz issued the following statement, it provides an interesting spin on how the University is going to explain the upcoming cuts.

“At this time, any workforce reductions at the university are very limited in number, affecting very few employees, and are due to reorganizations within a particular office, department, or school, not because of financial need or any reduction in state support.”

OMG!  You mean Connecticut really does face a budget crisis?

7 Comments

Keith Phaneuf’s lead article in yesterday’s CT Mirror reads, “Malloy doesn’t get predicted revenue boost, big deficits remain.”

The news…

“A new analysts’ report Thursday found tax receipts and other revenues still likely to grow as originally anticipated last summer – when major deficits were projected for the next two fiscal years.

That means the governor — who has called those earlier estimates “extremely conservative” – still must close shortfalls topping $1.3 billion next fiscal year and $1.4 billion in 2016-17. Malloy, whose budget plan is due to legislators on Feb. 18, repeatedly has ruled out tax hikes.”

A political campaign dedicated to lying to Connecticut’s voters is in the past, and with the release of the “Consensus Revenue estimates,” Malloy’s Budget Director, Ben Barnes, announced “The revenue estimates for the biennium will be the basis for the Governor’s budget proposal.”

So despite a year of constantly denying the very real looming deficit, the Malloy administration finally admits that the dire “predictions” produced by the Independent Office of Fiscal Analysis are true.

Throughout his re-election campaign, Malloy claimed that not only would tax receipts grow by about seven percent during the next two years, but as the CT Mirror recalls, “Connecticut could expect more, according to the governor. And the revenue from that extra growth would make the deficit relatively easy to manage, provided municipal aid was kept flat and agencies did not receive inflationary spending increases.”

Is the news a surprising development?  Hardly…

Here are just a handful of the budget related posts on Wait, What? over the past year;

10-24-14: Can we have a little honesty about Connecticut’s state budget problems?

No, because – That’s not how it works! That’s not how any of this works!  

Rather than honestly confront the projected $1.4 billion budget deficit in next year’s state budget and the shortfall of more than $4.8 billion over the next three years, the two major party candidates for governor have decided to simply lie their way to Election Day in the hopes that voters will not discover the magnitude of the fiscal problems Connecticut will face over the next few years.

10-1-14: Forgive them, for they know not what they do – Not!

Both Malloy and Foley say that, if elected, they will not raise taxes, not cut vital services not reduce the state workforce and will not need to negotiate contract changes with state employees.

The notion that such campaign promises could be met is not only laughable but it is a sad commentary on how far from the truth Connecticut’s gubernatorial candidates will stray in their ongoing efforts to get elected.

8-13-14: State Deficit?  What State Deficit?”

In a recent interview with the CT Mirror, Governor Dannel “Dan” Malloy said,

“We really don’t have a deficit.”

However, if the truth be told, according to the non-partisan Office of Fiscal Analysis, the State of Connecticut continues to face a monumental fiscal crisis.  In fact, here are the projections from the experts for the fiscal years following this November’s election;

Fiscal Year 2016:  A $1.4 billion Connecticut state budget deficit

Fiscal Year 2017:  A $1.6 billion Connecticut state budget deficit

Fiscal Year 2018:  A $1.8 billion Connecticut state budget deficit

Malloy says the Office of Fiscal Analysis is wrong, although he uses their numbers when he complains that he inherited a $3.7 billion state budget deficit from former Governor Rell.

[…]

Meanwhile, the cornerstone of Malloy’s campaign is his claim that he won’t propose or accept any tax increases during the next four years, he won’t need to renege on his deal with the state employee unions nor will he have to ask for further concessions from state employees and he won’t cut vital services here in Connecticut.

8-5-14 All is well in the Land of Oz

“We really don’t have a deficit…I know that’s hard to believe.” (Dan Malloy)

Malloy tells the CT Mirror;

  • Connecticut doesn’t have a deficit
  • There will be no cuts to key services
  • There is no need to discuss concessions with state employees
  • He will not propose or accept any tax increase during his four years as governor – even to shift the tax burden by making the wealthy pay their fair share so Connecticut can reduce the disproportionate pressure on the middle class.

And how is Malloy going to achieve this incredible feat of having more services, no additional taxes and no deficits? As the CT Mirror explains, 

“The governor said he’s confident that both the nation’s and Connecticut’s economy are on the cusp of a major surge.”

7-14-14:  Connecticut deserves a government that will tell its citizens the truth

As the CT Mirror explains in the series on where the candidates stand of the state budget, Pelto: State budget deficit reveals a broken fiscal system; 

“Former state Rep. Jonathan Pelto doesn’t have any trouble standing out from the rest of the 2014 gubernatorial candidates. For Pelto, a $1.4 billion shortfall – more than four years after the last recession ended – typifies a broken fiscal system that threatens Connecticut’s schools, state workers’ pensions, and middle class families.”

6-6-14:  Look there goes a flying pig!

The truth is that Connecticut is facing a projected state budget deficit of at least $1.3 billion dollars for the fiscal year that begins after this year’s gubernatorial election.

But today Governor Dannel “Dan” Malloy boldly announced… “We don’t face a deficit.”

In a late afternoon CT Newsjunkie story entitled, Malloy Dismisses Deficit Projections, Won’t Ask for More Concessions, the Governor not only explained that the deficit was going to disappear but he took the opportunity to repeat his iron-clad pledge that he will not propose or accept any new taxes in a second term.

As Malloy explained, “There will not be a tax increase.”

And to top things off, Malloy said that he was ruling out asking state workers for more concessions should he be re-elected as Connecticut’s Chief Executive Officer.

While the Governor’s hyperbole is impressive, there is not a state employee, retirees, public school teacher or retired teacher, let alone a public official or taxpayer who believes that Malloy’s portrayal of reality is accurate.

Hearing about Malloy’s remarks, one can’t help but dwell on that classic idiom about pigs flying or the one about Hell freezing over.

5-6-14:  Malloy’s “NO TAX” pledge will send Connecticut into the abyss

As a result of Governor Malloy’s gimmick ridden state budget, the candidate who wins the 2014 gubernatorial election will take office facing a projected state budget deficit of $1.3 billion or more.

By using one-time revenues for on-going expenses, purposefully under-funding various government programs and utilizing a series of budget gimmicks, the new 2014-2015 state budget is just about as irresponsible as they come.

The moment Malloy signs it into law he will be creating a budget deficit for this year and a catastrophe in the budget that will follow.

But as irresponsible as Malloy’s latest budget is, nothing compares to the damage that will come with his recent “NO TAX” pledge should he be elected to a second term.  Malloy sealed his fate when he recently told reporters that he would, “neither seek nor accept any further tax increases” in a second term.

Pandering to phantom voters, Malloy has engaged in a George Bush “read my lips” moment.

By making an “ironclad” NO TAX increase pledge, Malloy joins the Republican candidates in assuring that the people of Connecticut must live with a tax system that crushes the middle class while coddling the rich.

4-30-14:  Post-election state budget deficit projected to be an incredible $1.4 billion

As Wait, What? readers have been reading for months, the Malloy administration has been painting a rosy picture of Connecticut’s state budget situation thanks to the unparalleled use of budget gimmicks and inflated revenue estimates.

Readers have been repeatedly informed that Malloy’s irresponsible approach to budgeting would leave Connecticut with a $1 billion state budget deficit in each of the three years following the November election.

Based on the latest revenue projects, yesterday’s Wait, What? post increased that projected budget deficit to at least $1.2 billion and this afternoon, the Malloy administration, along with the General Assembly’s Office of Fiscal Analysis, announced that the person who is elected to be governor in November will face a budget deficit of close to “$1.4 billion or 7.4 percent of annual operating costs.”

And the list of articles warning about the fiscal realities facing the state goes on and on and on.

Whether you read Keith Phaneuf’s pieces in the CT Mirror or the news analysis and commentary pieces here at Wait, What?, the message has been the same….Governor Malloy and his administration have been lying to the votes of Connecticut.

And now, months after the campaign is over and just weeks before Malloy presents his 2015 state budget proposal, the governor’s budget office finally admits – Connecticut is facing a budget crisis well in excess of $1 billion.

Go Figure…

Re-post – Is it Malloy’s greatest “Wait, What?” Moment?

5 Comments

Re-posting for Monday Readers;

As Governor Malloy and his administration prepare to roll-out his new “Transportation Initiative,” the Governor’s press office issued a press release Friday (January 9, 2015) to proclaim that the Governor will soon be proposing legislation to amend the Connecticut State Constitution in order to, “ensure revenues earmarked for transportation cannot be diverted for other purposes.”

Although the process to change Connecticut’s State Constitution takes two years or more, Malloy said, in his prepared statement, “We must make sure every penny we raise for transportation goes toward our vision to transform Connecticut – now and in the future,”

This incredible “Wait, What?” statement comes from the same individual who has consistently worked to balance Connecticut’s State Budget by raiding various funds and transferring money from dedicated accounts to the State’s General Fund.

But Governor Malloy now says that he is committed to ensuring that the money collected for a particular purpose will actually be spent on that purpose…

For starters, one might ask, on behalf of Connecticut’s state employees, why Governor Malloy still hasn’t created the “Health Care Trust-Fund Lock Box” that he promised to do as part of the 2011 SEBAC state employee concession agreement.

The SEBAC concession agreement provided that all state employees give up 3% of their pay to help fund future state employee retirement health care premiums.  At this point, the program is generating about $120 million dollars a year, but the money isn’t even being put aside in a special “Lock Box” fund and invested for long term growth, as Malloy promised.

The State employees have fulfilled their end of the bargain, and although the State doesn’t start matching those contributions until 2017, the SEBAC agreement required that the funds collected are to be deposited into a special “Trust Fund.”

Yet to date, the Malloy administration hasn’t even taken that necessary step….

And now Malloy is proposing a Constitutional Amendment to protect future transportation revenue?

The political maneuver is nothing short of laughable.

What follows is just A PARTIAL LIST of the budget transfers Malloy and his administration has used over the past four years to make the state budget appear balanced;

  • Transferred $2.2 million from the Boating Fund to the General Fund, eliminated the boating account and required all future revenue from watercraft registration and numbering fees to be deposited in the General Fund.
  • Transferred $600,000 from the Transportation Strategy Board in the Department of Transportation to the General Fund.
  • Transferred $7.5 million from the Regional Performance Incentive Account to the General Fund
  • Transferred $1.2 million from the Banking Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $450,000 from Workers Compensation Administration Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $2.3 million from Consumer Counsel and Public Utility Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $500,000 from Insurance Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $4. 7 million from the School Bus Safety Belt Account to the General Fund
  • Transferred all revenue from fines, civil penalties, or restitution for violating banking law from the Banking Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred multiple PROBATE COURT ADMINISTRATION FUND “surpluses” to various non-probate programs and the remaining to the General Fund
  • Transferred $3. 6 million from the Public, Education, Government Programming and Education Technology Investment Account to the General Fund
  • Transferred $2 million from the Biomedical Research Trust Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $2 million from the Community Investment Account to the General Fund
  • Transferred $2 million from various accounts within the Office of Policy and Management to the Litigation/Settlement account
  • Eliminated the Municipal Revenue Sharing Account Malloy created in his 2011 tax package to aid cities and towns, “saving” the General Fund nearly $100 million a year
  • Transferred $35 million from the Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority (CRRA) to the General Fund
  • Transferred and additional 6.9 million from the Public Education and Governmental Programming Account to the General Fund
  • Transferred an additional $11 million from the Banking Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $5 million from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) to the General Fund
  • Transferred $30.4 million from the Clean Energy Finance and Investment Authority (CEFIA) to the General Fund
  • Transferred $10 million from the Municipal Video Competitiveness Account to the General Fund
  • Transferred $10 million annually (for 10 years) from the Tobacco Settlement Fund to the “smart start” preschool program so the $100 million would not need to come out of the General Fund
  • Transferred $10 million from the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) to the General Fund
  • Eliminated $20 million statutory transfer from the Tobacco Settlement Fund to the Stem Cell Research Fund, thereby keeping the money available for the General Fund
  • Transferred and additional $1 million from the Probate Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred an additional $4 million from the Tobacco Settlement Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $15 million from the Connecticut Student Loan Foundation to pay for one-time expenses of the Connecticut State Universities and Community Colleges

And that doesn’t even cover some of the other “fund transfers” that Malloy made.

And when it comes to actually supporting transportation, Malloy’s first term in office was marked by failing grades.

At a campaign stop last fall, Malloy told a special forum on transportation,

“This stuff is a passion to me,” and he added, “This administration is committed to build out the infrastructure of this state.”

But as a special CT Mirror investigative series in September 2014 pointed out, Malloy’s record on transportation is anything but impressive.

[For the details read Keith Phaneuf’s pieces in the CT Mirror – BUDGET CHOICES, FISCAL MANEUVERS UNDERMINE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING  IMPROVING TRANSPORTATION IN CONNECTICUT: A DECADE OF SLOW GOING, A ROUGH ROAD AHEAD FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS.]

While Malloy said he had made transportation a priority and would do even more in a second term, the CT Mirror revealed;

  • Nearly $3.5 billion in financing for transportation projects has been approved — but the funds actually haven’t been borrowed and spent.
  • And as a result of the Malloy administration’s decision not to refill many important positions, the State Department of Transportation has almost 150 fewer engineers and employees than when Malloy took office, making it impossible to get a large number of projects underway.

And while Malloy may not have raided the Transportation Fund as much as former Governor Rell had done, he still siphoned off money that was supposed to be earmarked for improving Connecticut’s transportation system.

The actual level of state spending on transportation in FY14 was $91 million less had been approved by the legislature and this year’s budget diverted another $20 million.

The Transportation Fund is supposed to get most of its dollars from Connecticut’s 25-cent-per-gallon retail tax and the state’s wholesale fuel tax.  However, despite four tax increases in the wholesale fuel tax which increased Connecticut’s revenues by 40 percent since 2005, Governors Rell and Malloy have used nearly $1.4 billion on non-transportation programs.

And now Governor Malloy is saying that Connecticut should adopt a Constitutional Amendment so that taxpayers can be sure that revenue for transportation programs are actually spent on transportation programs????

Yeah, this could very well be Governor Dannel Malloy’s greatest “Wait, What?” moment (to date.)

The Malloy Leadership Model – Raises for political appointees – Secrecy whenever possible

8 Comments

It was the night before the night before Christmas and with the vast majority of Connecticut citizens focused on the short work week and the upcoming holidays, the Malloy administration quietly announced that they were handing out major salary increases to approximately 200 of the governor’s political appointees.  In fact, although some of these individuals already made more than the Governor, Malloy gave a number of his top aides no less than 12 percent pay raises, skyrocketing those salaries even higher.

As explained in a Wait, What? post last month entitled, “Malloy political appointees score big with “Christmas” salary increases,” although Malloy spent the 2014 gubernatorial campaign claiming there was no state deficit, nor would there be one next year, a $100 million hole in the budget “appeared” in the week following Election Day and the non-partisan Office of Fiscal Analysis has consistently warned that the State of Connecticut will be facing a $1.3 billion budget shortfall in next year’s budget.

But as incredible as the news was that Malloy handed out large pay raises back on December 23, 2104, the Hartford Courant’s investigative reporter, Jon Lender, has now reported that Malloy’s extreme generosity toward his political appointees pales by comparison to what Malloy actually did on that day that he ordered the pay raises.

As Lender explained in his recent weekend story, “Political Appointees’ Christmas Raises Came With Unannounced Gift: A Provision For Future Pay Hikes,” the pay raise directive that Malloy signed not only granted his aides those lucrative raises but he also changed the entire payment arrangement for top political appointees (who are coded as Labor Unit 01 in the state payroll system).

Through the years, the decision about whether to increase the pay of Labor Unit 01 (political appointees) required direct gubernatorial action, ensuring the public, via the media, would know when a governor decided to give his or her aides raises.

But on December 23, 2014, Malloy not only signed the required executive directive granting his aides up to 12 percent raises, but he added language that reads,

“Note – Effective January 1, 2106, employees in Labor Unit 01 shall receive cost of living adjustments and annual increments granted to managerial and confidential employees in the MP pay plan in Labor Unites 02 and 03.  The EX [Executive Pay Plan] pay plan shall be adjusted accordingly.”

As Lender reports, Malloy’s action means that going forward a governor’s top political appointees will automatically get the same salary increase that Connecticut non-union, non-political, 3,000 classified employees will get.

The move not only means Malloy’s political appointees will get automatic get pay increases each year he is in office, but that unless the edict is directly repealed, the political appointees of future governors will also reap the benefits of Malloy’s decision to provide an unprecedented level of special treatment for political appointees.

Lender adds that the, “provision calling for those raises in future years was quietly tacked onto the end of the official Dec. 23 order that authorized the raises – which was signed by Malloy, his budget director Ben Barnes, and Commissioner Donald DeFronzo of the Department of Administrative Services (DAS).”

Barnes also serves as Malloy’s budget director and was one of the political aides that got a 12 percent pay raise in December.  Malloy’s Chief-of-Staff also pulled in a 12 percent pay raise at the time.

As an indication of the Malloy administration’s never-ending strategy of secrecy, Lender notes, “But this provision wasn’t mentioned in the press release that a Barnes deputy issued as darkness fell at 4:32 p.m. on the day before Christmas Eve.”

Lender and the Hartford Courant provide a link to the pay raise memo which can be found at: http://das.ct.gov/HRDocs/EItem/2147-E.pdf

Lender’s piece adds that, “Both Barnes and the Democratic governor have defended the raises by saying most of the political appointees hadn’t gotten raises during the governor’s first four years in office – or had not come close to keeping up with unionized employees and non-unionized managers. As Barnes put it, the state needs to ‘attract and retain top-notch talent.’”

When Lender asked OPM Secretary Barnes why the larger change in policy wasn’t reported in the press release, Barnes claimed that the Malloy administration wasn’t attempting to withhold the information, but, “It didn’t seem that it was as relevant as the fact of the raises.”

So Malloy’s position is that he needed to give his political appointees up to 12 percent raises in order to “attract and retain top-notch talent,” and that he decided it wasn’t necessary to tell the public about the maneuver to that automatically grants raises to political appointees in the future because it, “wasn’t relevant.”

It would appear that Governor Malloy and UConn’s Board of Trustees, who approved a massive boost in salary and benefits for President Susan Herbst between Christmas and New Year’s went to the same school of public relations.

You can read more about this issues at Wait, What? -Malloy political appointees score big with “Christmas” salary increases  and at the Hartford Courant: http://www.courant.com/politics/hc-lender-appointees-raises-0111-20150109-column.html

Is it Malloy’s greatest “Wait, What?” Moment?

9 Comments

As Governor Malloy and his administration prepare to roll-out his new “Transportation Initiative,” the Governor’s press office issued a press release Friday (January 9, 2015) to proclaim that the Governor will soon be proposing legislation to amend the Connecticut State Constitution in order to, “ensure revenues earmarked for transportation cannot be diverted for other purposes.”

Although the process to change Connecticut’s State Constitution takes two years or more, Malloy said, in his prepared statement, “We must make sure every penny we raise for transportation goes toward our vision to transform Connecticut – now and in the future,”

This incredible “Wait, What?” statement comes from the same individual who has consistently worked to balance Connecticut’s State Budget by raiding various funds and transferring money from dedicated accounts to the State’s General Fund.

But Governor Malloy now says that he is committed to ensuring that the money collected for a particular purpose will actually be spent on that purpose…

For starters, one might ask, on behalf of Connecticut’s state employees, why Governor Malloy still hasn’t created the “Health Care Trust-Fund Lock Box” that he promised to do as part of the 2011 SEBAC state employee concession agreement.

The SEBAC concession agreement provided that all state employees give up 3% of their pay to help fund future state employee retirement health care premiums.  At this point, the program is generating about $120 million dollars a year, but the money isn’t even being put aside in a special “Lock Box” fund and invested for long term growth, as Malloy promised.

The State employees have fulfilled their end of the bargain, and although the State doesn’t start matching those contributions until 2017, the SEBAC agreement required that the funds collected are to be deposited into a special “Trust Fund.”

Yet to date, the Malloy administration hasn’t even taken that necessary step….

And now Malloy is proposing a Constitutional Amendment to protect future transportation revenue?

The political maneuver is nothing short of laughable.

What follows is just A PARTIAL LIST of the budget transfers Malloy and his administration has used over the past four years to make the state budget appear balanced;

  • Transferred $2.2 million from the Boating Fund to the General Fund, eliminated the boating account and required all future revenue from watercraft registration and numbering fees to be deposited in the General Fund.
  • Transferred $600,000 from the Transportation Strategy Board in the Department of Transportation to the General Fund.
  • Transferred $7.5 million from the Regional Performance Incentive Account to the General Fund
  • Transferred $1.2 million from the Banking Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $450,000 from Workers Compensation Administration Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $2.3 million from Consumer Counsel and Public Utility Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $500,000 from Insurance Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $4. 7 million from the School Bus Safety Belt Account to the General Fund
  • Transferred all revenue from fines, civil penalties, or restitution for violating banking law from the Banking Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred multiple PROBATE COURT ADMINISTRATION FUND “surpluses” to various non-probate programs and the remaining to the General Fund
  • Transferred $3. 6 million from the Public, Education, Government Programming and Education Technology Investment Account to the General Fund
  • Transferred $2 million from the Biomedical Research Trust Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $2 million from the Community Investment Account to the General Fund
  • Transferred $2 million from various accounts within the Office of Policy and Management to the Litigation/Settlement account
  • Eliminated the Municipal Revenue Sharing Account Malloy created in his 2011 tax package to aid cities and towns, “saving” the General Fund nearly $100 million a year
  • Transferred $35 million from the Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority (CRRA) to the General Fund
  • Transferred and additional 6.9 million from the Public Education and Governmental Programming Account to the General Fund
  • Transferred an additional $11 million from the Banking Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $5 million from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) to the General Fund
  • Transferred $30.4 million from the Clean Energy Finance and Investment Authority (CEFIA) to the General Fund
  • Transferred $10 million from the Municipal Video Competitiveness Account to the General Fund
  • Transferred $10 million annually (for 10 years) from the Tobacco Settlement Fund to the “smart start” preschool program so the $100 million would not need to come out of the General Fund
  • Transferred $10 million from the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) to the General Fund
  • Eliminated $20 million statutory transfer from the Tobacco Settlement Fund to the Stem Cell Research Fund, thereby keeping the money available for the General Fund
  • Transferred and additional $1 million from the Probate Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred an additional $4 million from the Tobacco Settlement Fund to the General Fund
  • Transferred $15 million from the Connecticut Student Loan Foundation to pay for one-time expenses of the Connecticut State Universities and Community Colleges

And that doesn’t even cover some of the other “fund transfers” that Malloy made.

And when it comes to actually supporting transportation, Malloy’s first term in office was marked by failing grades.

At a campaign stop last fall, Malloy told a special forum on transportation,

“This stuff is a passion to me,” and he added, “This administration is committed to build out the infrastructure of this state.”

But as a special CT Mirror investigative series in September 2014 pointed out, Malloy’s record on transportation is anything but impressive.

[For the details read Keith Phaneuf’s pieces in the CT Mirror – BUDGET CHOICES, FISCAL MANEUVERS UNDERMINE TRANSPORTATION FUNDING  IMPROVING TRANSPORTATION IN CONNECTICUT: A DECADE OF SLOW GOING, A ROUGH ROAD AHEAD FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS.]

While Malloy said he had made transportation a priority and would do even more in a second term, the CT Mirror revealed;

  • Nearly $3.5 billion in financing for transportation projects has been approved — but the funds actually haven’t been borrowed and spent.
  • And as a result of the Malloy administration’s decision not to refill many important positions, the State Department of Transportation has almost 150 fewer engineers and employees then when Malloy took office, making it impossible to get a large number of projects underway.

And while Malloy may not have raided the Transportation Fund has much as former Governor Rell had done, he still siphoned off money that was supposed to be earmarked for improving Connecticut’s transportation system.

The actual level of state spending on transportation in FY14 was $91 million less had been approved by the legislature and this year’s budget diverted another $20 million.

The Transportation Fund is supposed to get most of its dollars from Connecticut’s $25 cent per gallon retail tax and the state’s wholesale fuel tax.  However, despite four tax increases in the wholesale fuel tax which increased Connecticut’s revenues by 40 percent since 2005, Governors Rell and Malloy have used nearly $1.4 billion on non-transportation programs.

And now Governor Malloy is saying that Connecticut should adopt a Constitutional Amendment so that taxpayers can be sure that revenue for transportation programs are actually spent on transportation programs????

Yeah, this could very well be Governor Dannel Malloy’s greatest “Wait, What?” moment (to date.)

The Hoax called “Transform CSCU 2020.”

3 Comments

Thanks to an appointment from Governor Dannel Malloy, former IBM Executive Nicholas Donofrio serves as Chairman of the Connecticut Board of Regents.  Over the last thirteen months, Donofrio and his wife donated $40,000 to the slush fund that the Governor’s campaign operation used to get around Connecticut’s campaign finance law, thereby allowing them to funnel an additional $5.1 million into his campaign, in addition to the $6.5 million taxpayer funded check he took from the state’s “Clean Election Fund.”  With those donations Donofrio can pride himself on being one of Malloy’s biggest campaign contributors.

So perhaps it should come as no surprise that at the recent Board of Regents meeting in December, Chairman Nicholas Donofrio addressed Malloy’s controversial “Transform CSCU 2020” initiative by asking his fellow Regents, “Anyone against this?”

And except for the two non-voting faculty representatives on the Board of Regents who have highlighted the very real problems with “Transform CSCU 2020,” there was not a word of concern raised by any of the members whose duty it is to set policy for the seventeen universities and colleges that make up Connecticut’s State Universities and Community College System.

The failure of Malloy’s appointees to the Board of Regents to speak out spoke volumes about the growing disaster that is taking shape as a result of the failed leadership of the Board of Regents and Regent President Gregory Gray.

The truth is that Transform CSCU 2020 is more than a hoax.

Transform CSCU 2020 is nothing short of a plan to downsize and limit the incredible potential that is Connecticut’s public institutions of higher education.

Here is the background;

As part of his Election Year budget, Governor Dannel Malloy held a press conference at Manchester Community College on February 12, 2014 outlining what he called “Transform CSCU  2020” – a “major initiative” for Connecticut’s State Universities and Community Colleges.

Malloy told the assembled crowd, including Connecticut’s media,

“We know that 70-percent of jobs in 2020 will require postsecondary education. That’s why it is imperative that we garner support for these necessary investments in our students.

Let’s move our state university and community college system into the 21st Century. Let’s do that together.”

Reading from the day’s same political script, Gena Glickman, the President of Manchester Community College, added,

“We’re here today to celebrate the governor’s goal to support student success by his investment…. It’s this investment that will better position us to be on the leading edge with our academic programs and will increase public higher education’s role in sustaining and expanding economic vitality for this state of Connecticut.”

But when the dust settled and this year’s fiscal year began on July 1, 2014, Malloy’s “major initiative,” which was paid for with “one-time” revenues, didn’t even begin to fill the budget shortfall created by the Governor’s unprecedented cuts to the state’s public colleges and universities.

Putting aside the Malloy administration’s false claims surrounding “Transform CSCU 2020” is the harsh reality that Malloy and his administration have been engaged in a four year war to undermine, devalue and denigrate the vital role played by Connecticut’s four State Universities, twelve Community Colleges and Charter Oak College.

When Governor Malloy took office in January 2011, the total direct block grants that the State of Connecticut provided these institutions totaled more than $326 million.

While Governor Malloy put hundreds of millions of dollars on the state’s credit card to pay for new buildings at Connecticut colleges and universities, he implemented a series of unprecedented budget cuts that dramatically shifted the costs of operating Connecticut’s public institutions of higher education on to the backs of Connecticut’s students and their families.

As a direct result of Malloy’s budget cuts, the Connecticut State Universities and Community Colleges began this year’s budget (FY15) with a very real deficit that was in excess of $40 million.

On that day in February 2014, Governor Malloy claimed that his “major initiative” would, “move our state university and community college system into the 21st Century.” But in truth, the plan called “Transform CSCU 2020” wasn’t even enough to fill the budget hole that he had created, let alone provide the “extra” money the universities and colleges needed to “move into the 21st Century.”

As noted, what makes Malloy’s “Transform CSCU 2020” initiative even worse is that it is funded using one-time revenue, which means that the deficit that for Connecticut’s state universities and colleges in next year’s budget will be $42 million larger than the one that is already undermining the schools ability to provide the services that Connecticut’s students need and deserve.

Rather than actually “invest” in Connecticut’s institutions of public higher education, “Transform CSCU 2020” was a one-time payment funded with $23 million in surplus state dollars from the year before and a transfer of $19 million from the Connecticut Student Loan Foundation.

Even more insulting is that as part of their management of the initiative, the Board of Regents inappropriately spent $1.8 million on an out-of-state consulting group called The Boston Consulting Group.  The Regents and its President claimed that expensive contract was needed in order to develop an appropriate plan for the “Transform CSCU 2020” initiative.

But now the Regents are claiming that the consultants were never supposed to develop a plan, but were merely retained to provide a series of “road maps” for the Regents to follow.

So what was Chairman Donofrio’s referring to when he asked, “Anyone against this?”

You can call it a “plan” or a “series of roadmaps,” but at no point did Regent Chairman Donofrio or the other Regents properly explain that the legislation actually allocating the funds for “Transform CSCU 2020” already mandated where much of those funds were to be spent.

Those specific areas included, (1) $6 million for the “Go Back To Get Ahead” program, (2) $1 million for the Early College program and (3) $10.8 million for the “Developmental Education” program.

As can be seen in the chart below, the law even required how the $10.8 million was to be allocated across the institutions.

“Transform CSCU 2020” was billed as a program to move Connecticut’s State Universities and Community Colleges into the 21st Century.

The Regents and their President claim to have a “plan,” but in reality, Malloy’s initiative was nothing more than a one-time allotment of funds that were used as a  pay off to a politically connected consulting group, fund a portion of the remedial education courses at the institutions, and help a small group of students get back into college.

If the Connecticut General Assembly doesn’t act quickly, Malloy and his Regents will certainly be “Transforming” Connecticut’s State Universities and Community Colleges…and the “transformation” will be designed to undermine the vital role these institutions are supposed to be serving.

Oh, and here is how the law mandated the $10.8 million portion of the “initiative” to be spent.

Developmental Education Fiscal Year 2015
Asnuntuck  $                215,866
Capital  $                472,009
Gateway  $                991,308
Housatonic  $                688,552
Manchester  $                947,411
Middlesex  $                375,163
Naugatuck Valley  $                915,054
Northwestern  $                174,910
Norwalk  $                812,099
Quinebaug  $                232,158
Three Rivers  $                570,663
Tunxis  $                554,372
Community College Total  $             6,949,564
   
Central  $                469,565
Eastern  $                469,565
Southern  $                469,565
Western  $                469,565
CSU Total  $             1,878,260
Adult Education:
Asnuntuck  $                  61,259
Capital  $                133,948
Gateway  $                281,317
Housatonic  $                195,400
Manchester  $                268,860
Middlesex  $                106,465
Naugatuck Valley  $                259,677
Northwestern  $                  49,637
Norwalk  $                230,461
Quinebaug  $                  65,883
Three Rivers  $                161,945
Tunxis  $                157,322
GRAND TOTAL  $           10,800,000

It’s the Season of Giving as political appointees rake in raises

5 Comments

Last week it was Governor Malloy’s top aides who were doing the money dance with their raises of up 12 percent.

This week, it is UConn President Susan Herbst who is doing the celebrating.

When Governor Rell and Governor-Elect Malloy announced Susan Herbst’s appointment as UConn’s President on December 20, 2010, she was provided with an initial compensation package of $575, 000.

That salary was 50 percent higher than UConn’s president made ten years earlier (2000).  With her new raise, Herbst’s annual compensation will reach at least $831,000 by 2019, an increase of nearly 45 percent over where she started.

As the CT Mirror and other outlets reported this week, Herbst’s, new contract increases her salary by 5 percent each year and provides that the UConn Board of Trustees or a committee shall review her salary annually and may increase, but not decrease her compensation package.

In addition, Herbst will receive an $80,000-a-year “deferred compensation” payment that she can invest in a tax-deferred account for her retirement, along with a $38,000 “supplemental retirement benefit”.

The new contract also promises her a $40,000 performance bonus each year, should she keep the Board of Trustees in her good graces.

The contract also guarantees her two “retention bonuses” totaling $200,000, one in 2016 and one in 2019.

As part of the contract, Herbst agrees to live in the Storrs presidential mansion, but will also take up residence at the 7,000 square-foot “Hartford Property,” which is located just down from the Governor’s Mansion on Scarborough Street in Hartford

The contract also provides that the University will continue to provide staff to maintain the two homes and “assist with university related entertaining.”

Of course, the University will continue to provide the President with a state car and driver.

In addition, the University of Connecticut’s Foundation will continue to provide what has been a long-standing practice of providing the President with a leased car, of which the University is responsible for all necessary repairs, insurance and maintenance.  If President Herbst does not want the extra car, the Foundation will provide her with an annual check for $15,000.

As one would expect, in full political spin mode, at the same time that Governor Malloy’s political appointees announced Herbst’s new contract, the university released “a comparison of Herbst’s compensation with that of similar institutions.”

The University also stressed that fact that while the UConn Foundation has been providing UConn with $175,000-a-year to help pay for Herbst’s salary, that amount will increase to $300,000 a year starting in 2015.

According to the CT Mirror,

“This is Herbst’s second pay increase since she became UConn’s leader. UConn’s spokesman said that in 2012, “Chairman McHugh, after consulting other board members,” signed an amended contract giving her a $30,000 salary increase and a $100,000 increase in the retention/deferred compensation bonus she will receive in 2016.

State law reads, “the board of trustees shall fix the compensation” of the president and similar officials. But, the UConn spokesman said, “There was no formal vote taken, because it was a single amendment to an existing contract.”

As the Hartford Courant noted, “Earlier this year, UConn officials said that cuts in state funding for the university system would require them to increase student tuition by 6.5 percent to help close a potential $42.6 million deficit.”

In fact, since 2000, the State of Connecticut has been consistently reducing public support

Over the past fifteen years, the cuts in state funding have had a significant impact on UConn, the Connecticut State Universities and Community Colleges.

As the state entered the 21st Century, Connecticut State Government provided UConn with an operating subsidy that accounted for about 48 percent of the University’s total costs.

Following Governor Malloy’s record cuts to Connecticut’s public institutions of higher education, state support for UConn has dropped to the point that the State accounts for only 28 percent of UConn’s total cost.

The reduction in support has transferred the burden onto the backs of Connecticut’s students and their families.  The total cost of attending UConn has risen 112% since 2000, and that was before the decision to raise tuition another 6.5% this year.

Older Entries