State Employees Held Hostage

At great cost to you and me, the taxpayers, the Shumlin administration is holding 1,500 state employees (a fifth of the workforce) hostage.  The state employees who worked in Waterbury are being denied a return to that work assignment because the Shumlin Administration wants to close the State Hospital.

Here's something you should know right now - the State office complex in Waterbury has been rehabbed and is ready to have employees move back in.  Yes, the administration needs to let the telephone people back in and the computer network people but the building itself is ready for occupancy.  You may have missed that only the cellar area was flooded and that 75% of the buildings had no water damage.

So why is the administration keeping people in cramped spaces in the Montpelier office complex and in expensive rental space in the Burlington area and elsewhere?  Why would they do something like that?  Simple, if they get most State employees back into those buildings then the public and many legislators will ask why not move the State Hospital back into its space and the governor and Jeb Spaulding can't have that - they want the hospital closed and are using the flood to do it.

I keep wondering why no one in the press is asking how much putting VSH (Vermont State Hospital) patients in the Brattleboro Retreat and other settings is costing.  A hint - a lot!  The administration is hoping to hide that cost in post-Irene recovery funding.  So far no one is interested in pursuing it so you and I will have to foot that bill also.

Keep in mind this is a lot of money being spent as recovery money that is not really realted to the flood or the recovery.  This money is being spent with the idea of getting you to spend even more - to build, contract out or otherwise replace the State Hospital.

Don't Let  Good Crisis Go To Waste

Every Governor for the past 40 years has made closing the State Hospital a goal.  None have done it because the legislature has not wanted to tackle it.  Now, Peter Shumlin has decided to use a real crisis to manufacture a supposed crisis response of replacing the hospital.  That only happens if the building is unusable.  If Shumlin and Spaulding let the state employees return then the hospital looks to the legislators like it could, or should, also reopen.

The legislature is feeling cash strapped and so doesn't really want to deal with the hospital issue.  Plus, they are hearing from their local hospitals that Vermont needs a secure, State-run facility.  In the past the response has been to just limp the existing hospital along.  The previous administrations have just funded it enough to pass accreditation inspections.

The truth is, running the State Hospital is a losing proposition for the State. They pay out more in sick time, workers comp claims and medical related expenses there than they do at any of the correctional facilities.  If you run a hospital or community mental health facility why would you want to take it over from the state?  None of them do and so the legislature and the Shumlin Administration will be saddled with continuing to run a State facility - the question is: will it be in a totally rehabbed Waterbury facility or a new building elsewhere.

It's time for the Shumlin Administration to come clean on its motives. It's time for the legislature to become adults and make a decision on the hospital and fund that direction.  And it's time for both of them to come out from behind the smoke screen of Tropical Storm Irene and be honest with Vermonters. (Wouldn't that be refreshing?!?)  But most of all it's time to stop holding 1,500 employees hostage and let them go back to doing work for Vermonters from their offices in Waterbury.

Vital Communities

The heart of Vermont is our communities. We live on a small scale here where being someone's neighbor really means something. We share our joy in good times and support each other during bad times.

We are fortunate to have the opportunity to live in a way that many people can only imagine. The scale in Vermont is small and personal. Even our biggest city, Burlington, is small by the standards of other states.

Sadly, I share the growing concern that our communities are in jeopardy. Increasingly, we read that boards are feuding, local politicians are resigning and seats on boards and commissions go unfilled. Some think the answer is in hiring professionals to do jobs that we have always elected our neighbors to do.

Selectboards across the state have contracted out the auditing of the town's books and now some have talked about hiring full-time treasurers rather than having an elective officer. There is talk about having county superintendents of schools. These are just a few of the initiatives that are trying to remove government a crucial step away from voters.

State requirements on communities continue to be one of the biggest problems. The Legislature has repeatedly added burdens on to local officials, through Act 60 and countless other measures, but have provided little training or support in carrying out these mandates. I think the League of Cities and Town's (VLCT) should share some of the responsibility for the decline in support for town officials. In the Legislature, I'll work to correct this and to see that local officials are asked to comment on any further proposals that will impact them.

Unfortunately, the Legislature relies too heavily on pressure groups, like VLCT, to hear how the actions it takes will impact local communities. Rather than hearing from individual communities, legislators often hear a one-size-fits-all recommendation that, in the end, fits very few communities properly. That needs to change.

As part of this, I will work to get funding for local road, bridge, and culvert maintenance restored to the local level where it rightfully belongs. The Legislature must stop the practice of underwriting the General Fund budget with highways fund money. Communities, and their local economy, run on good, well-maintained roads.

In Strengthening Local Economies I'll talk about encouraging local entrepreneurs and expanding job opportunities. Helping to grow local economies will have more than just economic benefits. Strong local economies will help us strengthen our communities.

As one example, with people traveling long distances to get to better paying jobs, many local fire departments and rescue squads suffer from manpower shortages between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. By creating better paying jobs closer to home, we can shorten commuting distances which helps the environment, strengthens families, aids vital volunteer emergency services and which would also help re-engage people in their communities.

How important is keeping your local community vital and active?  What role should the legislature and State government play in this? Leave a comment below.