Gov. Cuomo Puts Full-tilt Casino in City on Table

Gov. Cuomo puts full-tilt casino in city on table

EXCLUSIVE: In wide-ranging interview, Andy reflects on successes in his first year, and the “eye-catching” moves he wants to make in 2012

BY Kenneth Lovett

Updated: Monday, December 26 2011, 2:00 AM

ALBANY — Looking back on a successful first year in office, Gov. Cuomo vowed to make “eye-catching” moves in 2012 — and for the first time said he is open to rolling the dice on a casino in New York City.

“Do I support casino gaming at a New York City location? . . . Yes,” the governor told the Daily News in a year-end chat.

Like Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, Cuomo said he doesn’t want to see a casino in a densely populated part of the city, but would be open to putting one at a place like Aqueduct Racetrack in Queens, which already has a virtual casino.

Cuomo expects to call on the Legislature in his Jan. 4 State of the State address to give the first of two needed votes to a state constitutional amendment to legalize casino gambling in the state.

He stressed he is not “preselecting” New York City or any other area for possible casinos.

“I’m not excluding any locations at this time,” he said, adding that establishing a casino in a part of the city “certainly can” make sense because the operation would capitalize on the massive population.

“New York City is a real location,” he said. “Albany is a real location. Buffalo is a real location.”

Cuomo wants the Legislature in 2012 to pass the amendment without specifying how many casinos would be authorized or where they would be located.

He would spend the year coming up with a casino plan, then finalize details in 2013 — the earliest the issue could go before the voters for a required public referendum.

He argued that the economic boost from casino gambling far outweighs the increase in crime and compulsive gambling and other social ills that critics say the industry fosters.

During the wide-ranging interview, Cuomo reflected proudly on his accomplishments in his freshman year as governor — legalization of gay marriage, the creation of the state’s first property tax cap, a new ethics reform law and an on-time budget that cut state spending.

And while he went back on a no-new-taxes pledge earlier this month by supporting a hike on the rich, he coupled it with a modest tax cut for the middle class.

The freshman Democrat spoke of a newfound spirit of bipartisanship in the Legislature, something he has repeatedly contrasted with the gridlock in Washington. His powerful performance this past year has fueled speculation of a 2016 White House campaign, but Cuomo insisted he never even thinks about running for President.

“Not at all,” he said. “I’ve been around too long. I’ve heard too much talk. I’ve seen the movie too many times.”

Of course, his father, former Gov. Mario Cuomo, was dubbed Hamlet on the Hudson for agonizing about a waging a presidential run — and keeping a plane waiting on the tarmac as he mulled over a last-minute entry into the 1992 New Hampshire primary.

Brushing off his clashes with Mayor Bloomberg, most recently over a compromise on a bill to approve street hails for livery cabs, Cuomo described the flareups as normal “stressors in the relationship” between a governor and New York City mayor.

“We get along well; we communicate well; we communicate often,” he said.

But Cuomo warned that Hizzoner may have trouble getting one of his major priorities done in Albany next year: pension reform.

While the governor has listed it is a priority, he said its fate will ultimately come down to whether the Legislature wants to buck the powerful labor unions in an election year.

“I don’t think the unions are ever going to agree to pension reform,” he said.

And with the state having reached multiyear contracts this year with the two largest unions of state government workers, Cuomo admitted he has very little leverage to get them on board with a pension reform plan.

In his upcoming State of the State address, Cuomo is expected to focus on the need for job creation and the importance of rebuilding the state’s roads and bridges and of reorganizing state agencies and public authorities.

Cuomo said years of budget cuts and neglect have left the agencies in far worse shape than he imagined before taking office.

“The economy is not going to come rebounding back in a way that you can buy your way out of this problem,” he said. “And by the way, you shouldn’t buy your way out of the problem — you’re going to have to manage your way out of the problem.”

That said, Cuomo said not to bet on him having a sophomore slump.

“There are going to be eye-catching things next year,” he vowed, playing his cards close to his vest.

klovett@nydailynews.com

PEF Statement on SAGE Commission Recommendations

Statement of PEF President Ken Brynien on SAGE Commission Recommendations

Albany – The New York State Public Employees Federation (PEF) supports the concept of making government more efficient and identifying cost savings. This is supposed to be the mission of the Spending and Government Efficiency Commission (SAGE).

As a preliminary report, many of the recommendations by the SAGE Commission are lacking details. We remain concerned that without specificity surrounding the recommendations there is the potential that if implemented without safeguards in place they could lead to layoffs, increased reliance on costly contracting out and privatization, and would weaken the civil service merit and fitness system, opening the door to increased patronage and cronyism. These will cost the taxpayers more money.

We understand the need for taxpayers to get the most from their tax dollars. One of the best ways to cut costs is to combine the state’s shadow government of public benefit corporations and state authorities into state agencies; if done properly this will make them more transparent and accountable to taxpayers. So far the SAGE Commission has only scratched the surface of the hundreds of off budget public authorities.

Additionally, we would also ask the commission to examine more closely the state’s use of contractors and costly consultants who perform work state employees could do better and for less. PEF has identified potential savings of more than $300 million annually by reducing the state’s reliance on costly consultants.

There is important work to be done here. To achieve real efficiencies, New York needs to bring in its professional workers and engage them in the process by listening to their ideas.

PEF is the state’s second-largest state-employee union representing 55,000 professional, scientific and technical (PS&T) employees and other public and private employees.

###
CLICK HERE TO READ THE SAGE REPORT:

Statement of CSEA President Danny Donohue in response to Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s Let NY Work agenda

President Danny Donohue

November 3, 2011

“The package of so-called public sector reforms put forward under the banner of the Let NY Work coalition — apparently at the urging of Gov. Andrew Cuomo — is another despicable broadside on working people. Their bile is a perversion of reality that misrepresents the facts about very complex issues facing our state.

Obviously, the Occupy Wall Street Movement has Gov. Cuomo and his corporate allies worried and with good reason:

Pressure is mounting because corporations evade paying their fair share of taxes through loopholes and political favoritism, while the superwealthy look forward to an indefensible $5 billion windfall at year’s end. All this as state and local governments continue to struggle with their finances because of state budget cuts demanded by Gov. Cuomo.

It’s always easier to change the subject and scapegoat rather than face up to the ugly truth. Gov. Cuomo and his front group are in the wrong place on these issues, as they talk about shared sacrifice and the common good. Clearly they mean for some, not all.”

Living Longer But Paying More

State wants to use actuarial tables that would cost retirees
By Rick Karlin

ALBANY — State employees on the cusp of retiring have some good news and some bad news. In the first category: They will live longer.

That’s according to the actuarial tables that offer statistical predictions of life span. According to the latest tables the state wants to use, a public employee who retires at age 55 will likely live to be 83. Earlier estimates had those retirees living only until age 78.

The bad news is that longer life span will likely translate into higher health insurance costs for those workers who “banked” a lot of unused sick time with the aim of using it to offset their retiree health insurance costs.

To understand the nexus between life expectancy and sick leave credits, one has to be familiar with the intricacies of state employee insurance plans. Currently, those who retire from state service can continue to keep their health insurance at the same rates paid by the currently employed.

For instance, a person covered under the popular Empire Plan would be charged $59.23 per month for individual coverage or $250.12 for a family, according to a recent bulletin from a major union, the Public Employees Federation.

That’s based on the employee paying 10 percent or 25 percent of the premium, respectively.

But many retirees actually pay less because they can bank unused sick days. Upon retirement they can apply the value of these sick days toward the cost of their premiums.

But starting with those who retire on or after Oct. 1, the state wants to update the actuarial tables to reflect the longer life spans. That means those sick day credits would have to be stretched over a longer period of time, thus raising the net price that retirees pay after their sick time credits are used.

A 55-year-old with 100 days of unused banked sick time, for example, would see their credit change from $92.16 to $74.11 per month. While that person would have to pay another $18.05 on a $250.12 family premium under the popular Empire Plan, others can conceivably continue to get fee coverage if they had enough sick days credits to offset the insurance cost. Employees can use up to 200 unused sick day credits.

The new tables were outlined in a PEF memo sent last month.

While there’s little disagreement that people are living longer, there is some confusion over whether the new tables would be automatically triggered by approval of the new five-year contract that PEF and another major union, the Civil Service Employees Association, have tentatively accepted pending ratification votes.

The PEF memo said that the new tables would go into effect if the contract is approved.

“Our position is it couldn’t be imposed (by the state),” PEF spokeswoman Darcy Wells said of the new higher-cost tables. “It’s a negotiated benefit.”

CSEA officials agree that it’s a contractual matter, but they say the new tables — which are addressed in the tentative contract — provide protections against an even costlier deal the governor’s office might impose.

“Civil Service has the ability to update that table and they haven’t done it for a number of years,” said CSEA spokesman Stephen Madarasz. He said the Cuomo administration earlier in the year planned to update the tables, which led to them becoming a bargaining point in contract negotiations.

Needs collide in pact offer

by Rick Karlan

ALBANY — Union leaders will have to bridge a generation gap in the coming weeks as they work to sell tentative contract agreements with Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s administration.

By the end of summer, members of both the Public Employees Federation and Civil Service Employees Association will have a chance to vote on the five-year deals, which are almost identical.

PEF’s leaders and the state announced their agreement Saturday.

[PEF President Kenneth Brynien speaks during an education rally, to protest against proposed cuts in state education funding, at the Capitol in Albany, NY on Tuesday, March 22, 2011. (Lori Van Buren / Times Union)]

Both unions will have to grapple with the competing needs of internal factions. At one end of the spectrum are veteran state employees, who are not used to concessions such as furloughs, three years without raises and higher health insurance premiums that will result in lower take-home pay for many. “There will be some workers who feel that way — why should they give something so someone else can keep their job?” observed Rebecca Givan, assistant professor of collective bargaining at Cornell University.

“I’ve got hard feelings about the contract,” said one veteran downstate employee who opposes the lack of raises. Like many employees, he spoke on condition of anonymity.

New York’s Triborough Amendment ensures that even without a contract, current working terms and conditions — including existing health insurance premium percentages — remain in place.

Insurance costs currently place 10 percent or 25 percent of the total cost of premiums for individuals or families, respectively. The contract deal aims to increase that to 16 and 31 percent.

On the other side of the generation gap are relatively younger workers, who tend to be lower on the seniority lists. Under the state workforce’s last-in-first-out rules, they would be the ones laid off if the contracts are rejected.

With that in mind, union leaders such as PEF President Ken Brynien and CSEA President Danny Donohue will likely focus on the concept of solidarity within their union ranks and the importance of protecting newer workers in what one of the worst economies in nearly a century.

“That’s the challenge for the union leaders when they are selling the deal; that it creates some solidarity,” Givan said.

“I think they’ll talk about the economic climate,” she said, referring to the poor job prospects that someone laid off from state government would face. The state’s unemployment rate was above 8 percent in May.

In exchange for the lack of pay hikes and higher health insurance costs, Cuomo is offering assurances against layoffs for each union that would occur if either deal doesn’t go through.

Saying the 2011-12 budget calls for $450 million in workforce savings, Cuomo has said he will lay off up to 9,800 employees as a last resort.

Still, the hard-times contract will rile longtime state workers who know that their retirement pensions are calculated on their highest-earning years. And these state veterans make up a sizable voting bloc.

According to the Civil Service Department’s annual Workforce Management Report issued last August, more than 32,000 of the 165,184 civil service workers on the payroll in January 2010 (or 19 percent) were expected to retire in the next five years.

The contract does offer some pluses to the state’s graying workforce — or at least it would avoid significant disruptions.

That’s because in addition to 9,800 people who could become jobless, thousands more would see demotions and pay cuts after being forced to “retreat” to lower-level jobs in order to remain employed.

“We still believe the vast majority will support this because they recognize the fact that these are very unsettled times,” said CSEA spokesman Steve Madarasz, who downplayed the idea of a conflict between younger and older workers.

Another plus: In contrast with an earlier proposal for another union, the PEF and CSEA deals don’t diminish a retiree’s ability to credit unused sick time against the cost of ongoing health care coverage.

This credit can greatly lower insurance costs during the golden years.

That was a point of contention when Cuomo’s negotiators wanted to limit these credits for the 1,060 law enforcement officers in the ALES unit of the Council 82 union.

Those union members handily voted down the contract and have since moved to leave Council 82 and start their own union, the Police Benevolent Association of NYS.

On Friday, Council 82 said it wouldn’t oppose the breakaway move for ALES officers, a group that includes forest rangers, plus Environmental Conservation, State Park and SUNY campus police.

“As soon as we are official, we intend to start negotiating,” said Daniel DeFedericis, the retired head of the state troopers union, who is starting the new PBA.

Ultimately, union officials hope to convince their members that they are bargaining in unusual times. One approach may be to remind members that the main opponent is a bad economy rather than the administration.

“We’re not fighting the employer. We’re fighting the economics,” said Mary Ellen Shea, a retired Massachusetts state labor mediator and arbitrator who is now a consultant, when asked what she would tell union members.

Lawmakers — even those who are stalwart union supporters — agree with that idea. Albany-area Sen. Neil Breslin, in a radio interview on “Capitol Pressroom,” called the deals “a trade-off.”

“I don’t think anybody is happy with the contracts,” said Breslin. “(But) it’s a very difficult economic time, and I’m delighted there are no layoffs and the people in my district will continue to have a job.”

PEF has reached a tentative contract agreement with the state

Albany – The New York State Public Employees Federation (PEF) has reached a tentative contract agreement with the state. As a result of the conceptual agreement, the governor has agreed to rescind the planned layoffs of nearly 1,000 PEF members.

“This was a difficult agreement to reach, but with our members’ jobs in peril and the state’s fiscal hardship we’ve stepped up and made the necessary sacrifices,” said PEF President Ken Brynien.

“The agreement will preserve our members jobs and careers while bringing long term fiscal stability to the state. We are confident this is the best agreement that could be negotiated in the current environment,” Brynien said.

The agreement provides the state with the required savings needed to preserve PEF’s share of the 9,800 jobs targeted if the $450 million in Labor Management Partnership savings were not achieved.

“This agreement reflects the financial reality of the times,” said Governor Andrew Cuomo. “I am pleased that we could avoid these layoffs, protect the workforce and the taxpayer,” Cuomo said.

“This agreement could not have been achieved without the hard work and dedication of PEF’s contract team made of up union members representing a variety of titles and agencies across the state,” said PEF Contract Chair Tom Comanzo.

PEF is the state’s second-largest, state-employee union, representing 56,000 professional, scientific and technical employees.

New York Unions Press Members to Accept Deal

New York labor leaders, spooked by public workers’ rejection of negotiated concessions in Connecticut, are beginning a carefully planned campaign to persuade more than 100,000 state employees to accept a wage freeze and other measures in order to avoid sweeping layoffs.

By Thomas Kaplan

Danny Donohue, president of the Civil Service Employees Association, the state’s largest public union, in Albany in February at a rally for Wisconsin workers

The state’s largest union of public workers, the Civil Service Employees Association, has sent contract negotiators across the state as part of an effort to persuade health care, maintenance and clerical workers that it would be better to stomach furloughs, benefit cuts and three years without a salary increase than to risk losing thousands of jobs as the state cuts costs.

The second-largest union, the Public Employees Federation, also plans to campaign for its members’ approval after agreeing Saturday to nearly identical concessions. Together, the two unions represent more than half of New York’s public work force.

The reaction of rank-and-file members is a test both for union leaders, who are trying to protect jobs in a political climate that is increasingly hostile to public employees, and for Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, who is trying to rein in spending without alienating labor, a traditional Democratic constituency. Mr. Cuomo won approval of a state budget that depends on $450 million in labor savings, and he has warned of as many as 9,800 layoffs if union members do not agree to concessions. He has also proposed limiting pension benefits for future employees.

“There’s a lot politically riding on it for the governor,” said Joshua B. Freeman, a labor historian at Queens College. “It’s a potential pattern-setter for other state employees, and possibly even New York City municipal contracts.”

Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat elected last year, said he was mindful of events both in Connecticut, where union members created a budget crisis last month by rejecting concessions agreed to by labor leaders and a Democratic governor, and in Albany, where a small union of law enforcement officers rejected in May a deal the governor had championed as “a model the other unions negotiating with the state can follow.”

“I’m confident, but it is crazy out there, and would I guarantee anything right now?” Mr. Cuomo said in an interview last week. “No.”

Union leaders are leaving nothing to chance. The Civil Service Employees Association will mail ballots to its 66,000 members on Friday, but only after the union’s president, Danny Donohue, sends a mailing urging them to agree to the concessions.

“These are not ordinary times, and we worked hard to balance shared sacrifice with fairness and respect,” Mr. Donohue wrote in the mailing, a copy of which was provided to The New York Times. He added of the contract, “Equally important, it provides job security and prevents massive layoffs.”

The proposed contract is unlikely to thrill many of the union’s members, who earn $40,000 a year on average. The contract, which Mr. Cuomo called “a tremendous deal for the state,” calls for a three-year freeze on base wages and 2 percent raises for the next two years. By contrast, the previous contract gave employees 3 percent raises for each of the first three years and a 4 percent raise in the final year.

The new contract would also require workers to take nine furlough days, and it would increase health insurance costs for employees. For example, state employees currently must pay 10 percent of their individual health insurance premiums; under the new contract, the contribution would rise to 12 percent for lower-paid workers and 16 percent for higher-paid ones.

The deal that Mr. Cuomo made with the Public Employees Federation is virtually identical. The union, with 56,000 members, reached the agreement only six days before hundreds of union members were scheduled to be laid off, and the union’s president, Kenneth Brynien, acknowledged as much in announcing it.

“We are confident this is the best agreement that could be negotiated in the current environment,” Mr. Brynien said.

As part of the deals, the state has agreed to exempt union members from broad-based layoffs for two years, and that provision has been a major selling point for Civil Service Employees Association members.

Abraham Benjamin, 53, a local association leader who is a treatment supervisor at Bronx Psychiatric Center, has spent many lunch breaks for the past few weeks explaining the terms of the contract deal to employees in New York City.

“Initially, they’re very, very disappointed,” he said.

But Mr. Benjamin, who has been a state worker for three decades, said his audiences generally came around.

“I won’t say I like it, but in the environment that we are in, I feel it’s a good deal,” he said. “I explain to them that they can hold out as much as they want, but we also have to be realistic.”

Michael Weissman, 55, of Amsterdam, northwest of Albany — a youth division aide for the Office of Children and Family Services who has worked for the state for more than two decades — said he agreed that the concessions were necessary.

“It’s not what we want,” Mr. Weissman said. “But when you’re in tough financial times, everybody’s got to give. If I’m making the same amount of money and I don’t get raises, but at least I have the job, that’s O.K.”

Some of the debate among union members is happening online. Facebook pages for Civil Service Employees Association offices around the state show a smattering of complaints about the contract deal, mostly centered on the lack of raises and higher health care costs, as well as the suggestion that the union should have taken a firmer stance against Mr. Cuomo. But when a woman posted a message last month on one of the Facebook pages, urging her fellow state employees to vote against the contract, a union staff member wrote back, “Would you rather face a layoff?”

Association members must mail back their ballots by Aug. 12, and the results are expected to be announced Aug. 15. The Public Employees Federation’s executive board is scheduled to discuss that union’s pact on Aug. 11, and only after that would it be sent to rank-and-file members for a vote.

The ratification process in New York is simpler than that in Connecticut, where collective bargaining rules require the approval of 14 of the 15 public employee unions, with the supporting unions representing 80 percent of the affected workers. The vote last month met neither threshold, though 57 percent of union members supported the contract.

In New York, the governor can negotiate contracts on a union-by-union basis and usually needs only a majority vote of each union’s membership to win ratification. And although the first contract Mr. Cuomo negotiated, with the Law Enforcement Officers Union Council 82, faced organized opposition, no such campaign has emerged within the larger unions.

A few weeks ago, one state employee started a Facebook page to persuade C.S.E.A. members to reject the contract. But as of Sunday, it had only six supporters.

“It’s not inconceivable that it could fail, even without organized opposition,” Mr. Freeman, the labor historian, said. “But the fact there hasn’t been that would seem to indicate some level of outrage has not been reached.”

NEW ROOSEVELT INITIATIVE CALLS ON GOV. CUOMO TO ADD REDISTRICTING REFORM TO HIS BUDGET PROPOSAL TO INCREASE PRESSURE ON SENATE REPUBLICANS TO PASS THE BILL

Advocates Cuomo use political capital to persuade a few Senate Republicans to vote for the bill while simultaneously adding the plan to his budget proposal before Thursday deadline to increase pressure on the GOP caucus; Urges Cuomo to line-item veto additional funding for LATFOR to force a resolution; Samuels calls on GOP Majority Leader Dean Skelos to immediately voice any legitimate objections to the bill, so they can be debated by the Rules Committee..

New York, NY – Bill Samuels, founder of the Albany reform organization New Roosevelt Initiative, today called on Governor Cuomo actively put political pressure on individual Senate Republicans to persuade them to live up to the Koch pledge and pass his redistricting reform bill during the current legislative session.

To create further pressure on Senate Republicans to pass the measure, Samuels urged Cuomo to immediately add the redistricting reform bill to his budget proposal, a tactic the Governor is currently using this procedure for his proposal to curb Medicaid costs. Cuomo has until Thursday, March 3rd to add amendments to his budget proposal and it would prevent lawmakers from changing the language of his reform proposal, in effect, forcing Senate Republicans to take an up or down vote on the measure.

At the same time Samuels said that Cuomo should signal that he would use the line-item veto to prevent further funding for the current redistricting task force LATFOR (Legislative Task Force on Demographic Research and Reapportionment), a move first suggested by NYPIRG. The move would force Senate Republicans to face a timely resolution to redistricting reform in time to affect the 2012 district maps.

“Governor Cuomo is living up to his campaign pledge by submitting his Redistricting Reform bill, but we have been at this juncture before and I’m highly skeptical it can be passed this session unless there is extraordinary pressure by the Governor.” Samuels said. “Cuomo must start risking his personal political capital to get redistricting reform passed. Redistricting reform is the first step towards regaining the voters trust in Albany and making it the best state legislature in the country.”

“While addressing the state’s economic and budgetary issues are important, it is equally important that we pass redistricting reform during the current legislative session. That is why he should take the unusual step of including the reform bill in his budget proposal, while declaring he will line-item veto funding for the current, but flawed, redistricting committee LATFOR,” Samuels added.

Samuels also put Chairman of the Senate Rules Committee and Majority Leader Dean Skelos on the spot for burying the bill. “He must immediately state any plausible objections to the bill, so they can be publicly debate. Anything less proves that he is not serious about redistricting reform and only wants to obstruct it,” Samuels.

Samuels said lawmakers who signed the Koch pledge and renege on that pledge are no different than former Democratic lawmakers Pedro Espada and Hiram Monserrate. “Those who signed the pledge with no intention of keeping their word to the voters need to know that there will be consequences come reelection time.

Samuels explained that without a firm resolution on redistricting by the end of the current session, the Independent Redistricting Committee (IRC) will not be able to have a thorough process and public debate on the matter, let alone have an impact on the 2012 redistricting maps.

“An Independent Redistricting Commission, appointed in a timely manner is the best course of action.” Samuels said. “We cannot wait for a resolution to redistricting via the Governor’s veto in January 2012 because history has shown time and time again that we cannot rely on the courts to fix badly gerrymandered districts.”
“The only way it will be solved is thru serious redistricting reform such as the proposal that Cuomo has put forth and the extraordinary measures needed to get it thru the legislature,” Samuels added.

However, if the Governor’s Redistricting Reform bill were passed by the end of March, it would allow for the following to occur:

• Would have enough time to be pre-cleared by the U.S. Department of Justice (up to a two-month process);??
• Just over a four month period to nominate and pick the eight redistricting commissioners; have commission develop a plan(s) for the Senate, Assembly and Congress;??
• Allow for public hearings that would be televised and webcast;
• Give commission time to post draft plans for comment;??
• Allow time before the end of the year for 2nd and 3rd back up plans to be considered should the initial plan fail to pass or is vetoed;

Bill Samuels’ idea: Cuomo can force the issue

by Jimmy Vielkind,

Bill Samuels, the plastics magnate and head of the New Roosevelt Initiative, has his own idea to speed independent redistricting: put it in the budget.

“A series of press releases has accomplished nothing,” Samuels, formerly a top financial backer of Senate Democrats, said. “The governor needs to use some political capital. He should force the crisis now.”

Samuels suggested Cuomo submit his plan — which he sent to the legislature last month — in a new round of budget amendments due this week. He also proposed Cuomo veto funding for LATFOR, the legislative task force charged currently with redistricting.

Cuomo’s mandate solution: review more, create new agency

by Rick Karlin

Gov. Andrew Cuomo has accepted the preliminary findings of his Mandate Relief Redesign Team and among other suggestions: More review and creation of a new agency to deal with the matter.

Specifically the findings state that they should “Conduct a full agency review and accounting of state and regulatory mandates that burden school districts and local governments.”

While some may have thought that was what the commission has been doing since January, the Administration stressed that this was a preliminary report.

Moreover, there have been rumblings that the Redesign Team wasn’t about to, at least at this time, suggest any explicitly earth shattering or major changes to the maze of laws and regulations that local governments from schools to counties, towns and cities, labor under.

Some observers and participants, for example, have noted that the team appeared to dance around labor-management rules such as the Triborough Amendment which mayors, school superintendents and county executives say gives public employee unions a huge advantage in contract negotiations.

The prelminary findings, though, do call for a Tier 6 retirement plan, as well as a freeze on new unfunded mandates and creating a new Office of Mandate Reform.

Creation of a new Office could amplify some of the criticism that Cuomo has already received regarding the myriad tasks forces, study commissions and teams he’s created — all in the name of streamlining and downsizing government. Or it could be a shrewd way to funnel ideas around a recalcitrant Legislature whom many have criticized as being beholden to public sector unions and other supporters of the status quo.

Here are the details:

Governor Andrew M. Cuomo today accepted a preliminary report on ways to curb the proliferation of unfunded and underfunded mandates.

The Mandate Relief Redesign Team, consisting of private and public sector individuals and formed in January via Executive Order, is reviewing unfunded and underfunded mandates imposed by New York state government on school districts, local governments, and other local taxing districts. Such mandates include legal requirements that a local district provide a program, project, or activity on behalf of the state.

“Decade after decade, mandates have been piled on local governments and school districts, straining budgets and increasing pressure on taxpayers,” Governor Cuomo said. “In these first two months of work, the Mandate Relief Redesign Team has discussed a framework to change this system. This is a good first step in helping cities, towns and villages across New York rein in costs and help taxpayers, and I look forward to additional findings throughout the year.”

The preliminary report presents critical initial tools that can be provided to municipalities and school districts to help them control costs. Equally important, it includes a framework to fundamentally alter the state-local relationship. Going forward, the Mandate Relief Redesign Team will continue to review recommendations proposed by team members, state agencies, local governments, school districts and the public.

The report details findings in three key areas. First, they reform and redesign the current system to stop the proliferation of unfunded mandates by:
· Prohibiting New Unfunded Mandates: Permanently fix the problem of unfunded mandates by advancing a state law and eventual constitutional amendment prohibiting any new state mandate (with very limited exceptions) on local governments or school districts unless the state fully funds the mandate or the local entity votes to comply with the mandate.
· Requiring Independent Cost Analysis of Mandates: Strengthen the currently ineffective fiscal impact statement process by requiring legislative fiscal committees to determine the need for and prepare such statements. This would involve codifying Executive Order 17′s fiscal impact statement methodology and local government consultation requirements and making the reports available to the public.
· Enforcing Limits on Unfunded Mandates: Using existing resources, establish an Office of Mandate Reform to act as a clearinghouse that will work with local governments and state agencies to address unfunded mandates.

Second, the report addresses cost-drivers to provide meaningful mandate relief by:
· Creating a Pension Tier 6: A new Tier will help municipalities and school districts address rapidly escalating pension costs.
· Avoiding the Wicks Requirement by Removing Barriers to Project Labor Agreements: In order to reduce the costs that localities and schools face due to Wicks, ease the burdens associated with project labor agreements (PLA) by eliminating the study requirement and developing regionally-negotiated PLA templates that together can reduce the costs of public works projects by 15 percent or more.

Third, the report addresses the current unsustainable burden of state mandates by:
· Giving Local Governments Greater Flexibility to Administer Existing Mandates: The State Administrative Procedure Act (“SAPA”) § 204-a should be streamlined and expanded to allow localities to propose alternatives to current regulations and to request waivers of regulations.
· Conducting a Comprehensive Review of All State Mandates: Conduct a full agency review and accounting of state and regulatory mandates that burden school districts and local governments.

The Governor is reviewing the findings and looks forward to working with the team on these issues.

The Mandate Relief Redesign Team held meetings on January 7, 19 and February 14. Between meetings, the Chair and staff met with every group represented on the team, as well as with legislative conferences. In total, the Chair and staff have held more than 50 separate meetings in the past two months. More than 500 suggestions from the public were received through the Mandate Relief Redesign Team Web site. In addition, the Chair and the Governor’s office reviewed more than 1,300 letters or emails and 150 resolutions from local governments. The Chair and staff have also met with more than a dozen state agencies to develop lists of recommended mandate relief proposals (included as Appendix B in the report).