Fiscal notes out on bills of concern to GLBT community

The Fiscal Review Committee has been busy releasing the fiscal notes on some important bills to the GLBT community this session.

The adoption ban bill has a fiscal note of just over $2.8 Million for the State and $2.16 Million for the federal government. This figure is down from last year's $4.5 Million for the state, though the federal impact is roughly the same.

The good news is that the hate crimes bill that would add gender identity as a sentencing enhancement factor has a fiscal impact described as "Not Significant." During meetings with legislators who were sympathetic to the bill, we heard that there probably would be a significant fiscal note which would prevent its advancement. At least that obstacle is out of the way.

Both bills will have a difficult road to passage. The fiscal note on the adoption ban bill is still significant, especially considering the state's budget climate. Most important, though, is the fact that the estimate was determined based on the percentage of adoptive parents and children that would be affected. Lengthening the time a child is in the State's custody should give every lawmaker pause. Passing the hate crimes bill will be difficult because of lack of awareness of the dangers transgender persons face and because of ideological opposition. But the absence of a discernible cost should pave the way for a few more allies to give their support.

DCS making progress--Let's not slow them down with foster care and adoption bans

Gail Kerr devotes today's column to the progress that the Tennessee Department of Children's Services. She summarizes the findings of a recent report:

Among the things Tennesseans should be most proud of:

• Kids are no longer shuffled between dozens of foster families.

• The caseload of social workers has gone from 40 kids on average to 20. When the mess started in the late 1990s, caseworkers sometimes had 60 kids under their care.

• There are now 7,500 kids in state custody, from a high of 11,000 in 2004.

• The state has placed 90 percent of children in foster care with families instead of group homes or institutions. It's kept 85 percent of siblings together.

We're already hearing rumblings, though nothing definite, of renewed legislative efforts to prevent gays and lesbians or unmarried couples from becoming foster and adoptive parents. Obviously, we would oppose those efforts regardless of whether the Department were making progress. But at a time when the Department is doing such a good job and when the State budget can't bear added expense, I think a good neutral argument can made for scuttling restrictive legislation. Let's continue to focus on getting more children into loving homes.

Everybody's ready to control spending, not saying much about social issues

The Tennessean gave some op-ed space for what January holds when the 106th General Assembly of Tennessee convenes. House Republican leader Jason Mumpower is sending a clear signal that his party is prepared to assume leadership and control spending, but he is noticeably quiet on social issues. Hmmm.

We must live within our means and get spending under control. Increasing taxes on hard-working Tennesseans is not the answer. We need to cut wasteful spending, slow the growth of a ballooning government, and balance this budget just as any Tennessee family does their checkbook.

House Democratic leader Gary Odom is more specific on the budget while maintaining Mumpower's reticence on the culture war:

The most ominous challenge we face this year is the greatest revenue shortfall in our state's recent history. The state faces a budget crisis that could lead to a $600 million shortfall in projected revenue by the end of this fiscal year. This is on top of more than $500 million in anticipated revenue that was cut earlier this year. The budget shortfall will require the experience and knowledge of members of both parties working together to ensure that these challenges are addressed in a responsible manner.

Shaka Mitchel of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research would agree with Mumpower and Odom, but offers this warning just to be sure:

Similarly, squandering your political capital on abortion and illegal immigration resolutions that aren't really state issues and have no chance of becoming law would be an irresponsible use of the powers entrusted to you by voters.

All politicians would do well to remember that while the goal of campaigning is getting elected, the purpose of elected office itself is being a responsible steward of powers put in your care.

Finally, the changeover in Tennessee is an indication voters just want to be left alone. It has been said that most bad government results from too much government. Republicans at the national level found that to be true when they strayed from their principles and quickly became the minority party. Republicans at the state level should not forget that lesson.

The Tennessean offers basically the same advice urging restraint on social issues:

It would be a mistake to use newfound power to flex muscles over social issues like abortion and guns. A few lawmakers may be chomping at the bit to aggressively push such issues to the fore. The public will be better served if the legislature keeps sensible priorities and shows the best possible performance in managing the budget and working in ways all Tennesseans deserve.

Amen to that. I'm not holding by breath on that one, though.

Legal action against the City of Memphis is almost certain

The funding cuts approved by the City Council on Tuesday are likely to move the battle into court. From the Daily News:

Noticeably absent from this week’s discussion, however, was a focus on the ramifications of the unprecedented political move to reduce the city’s funding of the city schools system.

Those specifics include complex legal scenarios as well as the long-understood presumption of state and county officials that the city of Memphis has a legal obligation to fund the city school system.

Going into Tuesday’s vote, council members had been told a fund reduction of any amount could trigger a variety of unpleasant scenarios. City officials have been told that state funding to the city school system could be in jeopardy if the city cuts its school funding.

A 2005 opinion from former Tennessee Attorney General Paul Summers states that the city has a legal obligation to fund the city schools system.

It is the council’s disagreement over that perceived obligation that soon will be put to the test in court.

Given the proven inability of the MCS Board and Administration to manage its resources, educate children, and provide for the safety of children in schools, these cuts may force management decisions that may finally improve the school system.

The Commerical Appeal is already reporting that MCS is freezing hiring in response to the budget cuts. The administration has issued a statement saying that "the superintendent wants to review how the district can better manage its resources."

Another look at the State of Metro

Being a day late on a blog is like being late a few weeks in the rest of the world, but I wanted to take some time to review Mayor Karl Dean's State of Metro address. There has been some strong criticism in the commentary.

It's important to look at what the Mayor did and didn't say about the budget issues that Metro faces. He summarizes a whole news cycle in saying, "It's no secret that we have some financial challenges as we move ahead." Dean knows that his audience reads the paper and he's not going to rehash all the details of the problem. The task is to put together a budget that "reflects our city's priorities," and he believes he has done so.

The substantive question is not whether Dean has fairly given notice about the budget issue. The question is whether his solution is merely "smart fiscal management." I found in Dean's speech a three-fold approach--fiscal management, a change in the "business cycle," and economic development.

The Mayor didn't unpack the first two. But fiscal management would include the cuts we've heard about and tough expense control. It includes a variety of practices such as making the community enhancement grant process competitive and accountable. As for the change in the business cycle, it is too early to know how long the recession or pre-recession will last and when things will turn around. There is no doubt that the average American is hurting. Growth is likely to be weak through the end of year, but Wachovia analysts are saying the odds of recession are now about 45% as opposed to the 90% they predicted in April. So while he has no control over the business cycle, Dean's comments aren't out of place since the economy will turn around, hopefully sooner than we expect.

Economic development in Dean's view involves several pieces. The investment in schools and attention to the dropout rate are part of the solution: "It's simple math--more kids graduating would have a huge economic impact on our city." Dean mentions partnering with the Chamber to "recruit new companies to our city" and working with "small business owners and entrepreneurs." He also devotes a couple of paragraphs to what some call the creative class, describing them as "full of intellectual capital." I think if he were to be faulted, it would not be on the approach, but on the lack of specifics. Specifics are clear with respect to the dropout rate, but they are not as clear in terms of attracting new business and nurturing a climate conducive to creative types, at least not in the text of the speech.

The Mayor gives a nod to the critics of big government by noting that his budget includes "no new property taxes," a position which draws fire as a mistake in the Nashville Scene piece cited above. But how could any official--even the gutsiest--propose an increase in property taxes when foreclosures are rising around the area? The likelihood of avoiding recession may be higher now and that will eventually work in the city's favor, but it is not yet an experienced reality for Metro residents. Until it is, Dean has no good options for increased revenue.

"Good"--there's that word. "Ladies and gentlemen, as we approach the mid-point of 2008, the state of Metro is good." The budget situation is not good and the dropout rate is not good. What does he mean? Unlike some spectators, I took "good" as a fairly mild description. It certainly contrasts with the President's description of the state of the union as "strong" or "has never been stronger." I think it was an attempt to avoid exaggeration. He lists a number of features of the city that are good. He may also ironically be borrowing a page from Bob Clement via Jim Collins when he closes by saying, "The destination our city arrives at will be great." He acknowledges that the "path we take will not be easy." Good becomes a great deal more understandable in that context.

Bad time to be a government employee in Nashville

Whether you work for Metro or for the State, chances are that someone has been evaluating how essential your job is. 2000 buyouts are being discussed for State government and 200 layoffs for Metro are in the works.

Let's say that most of these employees are downtown, just for the sake of argument. And let's say that all of them eat lunch for about $5 per person every day (or spend $5 downtown on something just about every day), that's an almost $3 Million impact on downtown in one year.

Of course, not all of the employees whose jobs are being cut work downtown. And not all of them spend $5 on lunch, but some spend more and some buy other things. And many of the Metro employees who are being laid off will land in other Metro jobs...or at least that's the hope.

I'm not saying the State or Metro had good alternatives, but there will be an impact beyond those employees and their families. I should note that SEIU's Mark Naccarato thinks Metro could approach the matter differently. He accuses Mayor Dean of "robbing Peter to pay Paul." Not surprising considering that SEIU endorsed Bob Clement in the runoff. By way of disclaimer, I should add that TEP-PAC endorsed Dean in the runoff.

Group alleges state and local government waste

The City Paper reports on the Tennessee Center for Policy Research's "pork report" that includes about $260 Million in government waste at the state and local level. The report comes on the heels of an announcement by Governor Bredesen that he may have to find as much as $500 Million in additional cuts to the state's budget.

You can read the entire report here at their site. TCPR is providing a valuable service in keeping a close watch on government spending. At a time when there is inadequate funding for social services, we have to subject the budget to this level of scrutiny. But that doesn't mean the report is without some troubling quirks.

Interestingly, the report attacks funding of the arts, in particular plays and films that deal with sexual themes. This sex-baiting is unfortunate. Even if a few productions or films lacked merit, the report focuses on the ones with sexual themes. They don't mention the ones that apparently (if they liked any of them) possessed artistic merit. The effect is to cast doubt on all state funding on the arts, which is counterproductive to our state's economic development. The North Carolina Arts Council notes that in "2006 arts industry wages alone infused more than $3.9 billion into North Carolina’s economy, according to research by Regional Technology Strategies (RTS)."

It might be helpful if TCPR suggested a review of arts funding criteria rather simply use sex to whip taxpayers into a frenzy about government spending.

Phil cutting half a bil

Andy Sher reports that Governor Bredesen may have to cut an additional $500 Million from the proposed budget. Revenue shortfalls are the culprit. The cuts may affect raises for state employees and some funding of higher education.

Adoption bill delayed

SB3910 was not heard yet again in the Senate Judiciary committee. It's not clear what Sen. Paul Stanley's (R-Germantown) strategy is, but the new delay could be attributable to the combination of the high fiscal note for the bill, the state budget crunch, and now the prospect of losing some funding for DCS case workers. Read about that last element here .

Budget issues and the new revenue numbers

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/apr/14/major-budget-issues-pending/

The Commercial Appeal provides a good overview of the major legislation pending in the Legislature and discusses the chances for some legislation in light of lower March revenue. There is no mention of the adoption bill with its $4.5 Million fiscal note. It's a shame, too, considering that the two sponsors are from the Memphis area.

State budget compared to a turnip

http://www.dnj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080413/OPINION01/804130304/1014/OPINION

That's what the Murfreesboro Daily News Journal says. They include a little advice for the Legislature: "At this point, they'd better think about dramatic cuts or tapping into the rainy day fund that Bredesen forced them to build up last year."

TN's budget woes worse than expected

http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/news.php?viewStory=59453

Tennessee experienced a major shortfall in revenues in March. This is terrible news. It will affect thousands of families across Tennessee who desperately need state programs to get by in our steadily worsening economy. It means that state employees probably won't even get the less than cost-of-living adjustments to their wages.

In light of the deepening budget crisis, it is baffling that some in the Legislature continue to push an adoption ban with a $4.5+ Million fiscal note. Here it is. Read it and hope it sinks into the minds of the members of the Senate Judiciary committee: http://www.legislature.state.tn.us/bills/currentga/Fiscal/HB3713.pdf

Dean's first budget

http://www.nashvillecitypaper.com/news.php?viewStory=59287

No time for an analysis now. If numbers put you to sleep, take a look at the presentation WITH PICTURES, no less, in this pdf: http://www.nashville.gov/finance/docs/omb/fy09-budget/The-Budget-FY-2009-03-25_TL-Final.pdf .