The dynamics of rent control and public debate pit dry lessons by people with no incentive to promote them against heart rending stories from activists, leading to bad policies that hurt everybody but a lucky few… and the activists.
When the RI Senate Finance chairman complains to the municipality for which he’s a contracted lawyer that it wants more work than his contract allowed, it raises the question of whether he can work on a budget that gives his client millions of dollars.
Grave concerns for families in and around Providence Rhode Island https://t.co/eJuhDCcocn
— Susan Wynne (@scwynne) February 2, 2018
I didn’t plan to take up the former student’s assault of a Portsmouth High School teacher again, but something missing from the Providence Journal coverage of the released police report really should be part of the public discussion. Specifically, reporter Katie Mulvaney leaves out the following, from the report (which I saw in full earlier but now can’t find):
[The suspect] was banging on the doors and she opened the door to redirect him to the main office.
We still don’t have sufficient details to offer a fair opinion of blame. If the teacher recognized the former student, for example, it might be difficult to fault her for letting her guard down.
That said, what we know from the police report is that the teacher made it possible for her assailant to enter the building, and the school resource officer trailed behind the incident until it was over. Those are very important details to keep in mind as people proclaim their opinions on what should be done following this incident.
Adding new personnel and security measures would come at a cost, not only in the money that might go to more useful purposes, but also in the environment under which students live, affecting their sense of community and expectations of the world. Meanwhile, no security system will be immune to human error.
Progressive Mayor continues to mislead citizens about Providence Finances and municipal markets about Providence… https://t.co/2yKxvhDRy0
— michael riley (@ri1929shrugs) January 31, 2018
When it comes to national rankings, those that show Rhode Island badly on the wrong side abound. Ted Nesi highlights another one, on WPRI:
Rhode Island has some of the most restrictive regulations for land development in the country, which is likely raising the cost of housing in the state, according to a recent study.
The study by Vanessa Brown Calder, a researcher at the libertarian-leaning Cato Institute think tank, ranked Rhode Island as the 3rd most restrictive state for zoning regulation and the 8th most restrictive for land-use regulation.
“These constraints on land development within cities and suburbs aim to achieve various safety, environmental, and aesthetic goals,” Calder wrote. “But the regulations have also tended to reduce the supply of housing, including multifamily and low-income housing. With reduced supply, many U.S. cities suffer from housing affordability problems.”
Progressives tend to look at housing affordability as a welfare issue, because they generally like the idea that government can tell people what they can, can’t, and must do with their property. The solution, for them, is to use government’s power to take people’s money in order to transfer it to those whom them zoning regulations lock out of housing. Naturally, this has the advantage of requiring everybody to go to government for benefits and permissions, as well as creating that money-power funnel I mentioned yesterday.
But immobilizing people in this way is not healthy, whether by making it difficult for them to find new homes or layering government forms on them whenever they do move. Beyond simply the principle of freedom is its practical value. Allowing people to move from place to place and adapt their homes (whether by price or by function) creates opportunities for them that benefit society as a whole, especially when it comes to the economy.
Yesterday’s Providence Journal “Political Scene” reminded readers about the windfall that Brown University recently paid for a house owned by Democrat Governor Gina Raimondo’s chief of staff, Brett Smiley:
In July 2017, the university purchased a two-and-a-half story, federal-style Colonial house at 37 George St. — assessed by the city at $843,600 — from Gov. Gina Raimondo’s chief-of-staff Brett Smiley and his husband, James DeRentis.
The university paid them $1.1 million, according to city records.
As I detailed in July, the price that Brown paid for the house may not be the scandal (although it’s conspicuous that Brown has plenty of reasons to want to be on the good side of Raimondo’s upper echelon). The property assessment is the oddity. Smiley’s assessment, made while he worked in the administration of Democrat Mayor Jorge Elorza, was actually 6% below what he’d paid two years earlier, even though his neighborhood generally increased in value by 20% during that period, saving him something like $4,400 per year.
Don’t forget that Smiley ran for mayor as a progressive, which is very telling of progressive thinking. They create a big-government funnel of money and power and then position themselves right at the tip.
This is just how it’s going to work until Rhode Islanders stop falling for the rhetoric and insist that government go back to working for us, not connected insiders who like to talk about supporting the oppressed.
Obviously, it’s still too early to assert correlation, but given how crazy I think parts of Providence’s “Community Safety Act” are, leading me to call it the “Gangland Security Act,” I wanted to note Dan McGowan’s WPRI coverage of a related controversy:
Providence Public Safety Commissioner Steven Pare said Thursday he sees “absolutely no correlation” between several recent shootings and the new police reform ordinance that took effect Jan. 1.
Pare was responding to a post on the Providence police union’s Facebook page that claimed violence “seems to have escalated” since the Providence Community-Police Relations Act (PCPRA) became law at the beginning of the year.
Unfortunately, it takes a while for data to accumulate sufficiently to assert a trend, but it’s worth keeping an eye on the possibility. And of course, having a string of progressive mayors would seem likely to open several streams of causation for an increase in crime, so the Gangland Security Act may not necessarily be the greatest contributor.
I’ve made some changes in the way I gather my daily news, so that might account for this impression, but in general, it has seemed as if more crime stories have been coming out of Providence lately. I’ve certainly started seeing posts here and there around the Internet with people asking if it’s safe to go into Rhode Island’s capital. For now, they’ve seemed to be tongue in cheek, but impressions affect people’s behavior.
As the number of crime stories climbs and people begin talking about what seems to be an increase, with the police union chiming in with an explanation, actual data may come to matter less than the talk around the state.
Everyone supports school repairs but questions are A. How do we pay and B. How do we allocate? What do we say to towns who properly maintained their buildings while other towns spent money elsewhere and mismanaged?
— Brian C. Newberry (@BrianCNewberry) January 17, 2018
Crumbling schools show that the government’s priority has been other spending (mainly on unionized employees), and more school choice could change the equation in students’ (and taxpayers’) favor.
Better something that is less harmful than more harmful. But to some, innovative new products that reduce health risks – should be banned. In the tobacco and nicotine industry, the politically-correct anti-tobacco movement is advocating for the suppression of individual rights and elimination of less harmful choices, via restrictions and outright bans on products that could improve public health.
— michael riley (@ri1929shrugs) January 9, 2018
Those of us here in the corner of Rhode Island that’s like a beachhead into Massachusetts are watching the south end of Fall River reverse its seemingly inevitable decline and revive. A Herald News editorial spots a lesson:
If this rapid movement teaches us anything, it’s that the free market is stubborn. It goes where it wants to go, not where it is told to go.
For decades, Fall River has been trying to “revitalize” downtown. Results have been mixed, but we certainly haven’t seen the rapid movement downtown that we’re seeing in the South End, despite repeated promises from mayor after mayor and a snow drift of studies paid for by the taxpayer.
We’ve seen this in Tiverton, with the town’s would-be planners longing for an active downtown in the north end of town while blocking any kind of development elsewhere. And we see it in the entire economic development philosophy of Rhode Island. Rather than announcing that the state is changing its control-your-life ways and letting the economy flourish where there is opportunity, officials announce that there is taxpayer money on offer for anybody who is willing to play ball with insiders.
On the local level, one can understand (even while disagreeing) why folks who live in a relatively small town would work to preserve the scenery, even if their only benefit is driving by it from time to time. Rhode Island goes well beyond that sort of preservation, however, to the point of insisting that only a future that meets with the central planners’ approval is worth having. The end result is more likely to be that they don’t get what they want (because it’s fantasy), while those who know how to game the system thrive.
Audit: Providence's budget surplus was less than Mayor Elorza predicted https://t.co/HPupRweMEg via @wpri12 say it aint so….man is in fantasy land and has long record of misleading taxpayers @wpro @projo
— michael riley (@ri1929shrugs) January 3, 2018
Here’s a doozy of an example of government waste:
Workers in the East Side Access tunnel, which will connect Grand Central Terminal in Manhattan with the Long Island Rail Road. The project’s costs have ballooned to nearly $3.5 billion for each new mile of track. …
The budget showed that 900 workers were being paid to dig caverns for the platforms as part of a 3.5-mile tunnel connecting the historic station to the Long Island Rail Road. But the accountant could only identify about 700 jobs that needed to be done, according to three project supervisors. Officials could not find any reason for the other 200 people to be there.
Sadly, one suspects that this is just an extreme version of a typical activity, and that’s before one points out the reality of jobs that are happily claimed on the books, but that could easily be discarded, such as the proverbial three union workers on every project whose apparent job is to watch the one who’s actually doing something.
Marc Monroe Dion articulates a truth of government, particularly municipal government:
“Oops!” Government says. “That money you gave us before? We spent that. Now, we need more money.”
“More money?” you say, talking around a mouthful of that macaroni and cheese that comes in the blue box. “I don’t have any more money.”
“Oh yeah?” Government says. “Well, we’re going to lay off all the cops AND all the firefighters, so when your house catches fire, there won’t be anyone to shoot the looters.”
Well, that scares the hell out of you, so you say maybe a little tax or fee increase would be fine, and the next thing you know you’re paying $1 for every rain drop that falls on your property, and you’re buying the macaroni and cheese knock-off that doesn’t even come in a blue box.
My one quibble is that, to my experience in Tiverton, the threats start with the schools. Dion’s writing from Fall River, so that might be a Massachusetts vs. Rhode Island thing given differences in school funding. Or maybe it’s a city vs. suburb thing. Safety is less of a day-to-day issue for suburbanites, and suburban parents might be more conscious of comparisons between school districts and between public schools and private schools.
Quibbles and speculation aside, though, it is discouraging how quickly government can push people past questions about where all the money went and on to fears about what services might be eliminated.
— J Scott Moody (@JScottMoody) December 19, 2017
Pawtucket Mayor Donald Grebien is looking for any way to keep the PawSox in his city, to which end he has proposed a “plan B,” if the skeptically scrutinized original proposal doesn’t make it through the General Assembly:
Let Pawtucket get all the state income and sales taxes now generated at McCoy Stadium and let the city finance the entire public portion of the deal, Grebien said at a news conference in City Hall chambers. He told reporters he hadn’t yet shared that message Tuesday with House Speaker Nicholas Mattiello or Senate President Dominick Ruggerio, but he has talked with them on prior occasions about such an option.
Here’s the inescapable problem with any public financing deal: Nobody believes that it won’t end up on the backs of statewide taxpayers if things go wrong. Nobody believes that the General Assembly and governor will sit back and watch as Pawtucket whittles away education spending and tightens screws on labor unions because it can’t raise the money to pay for its end of the deal.
Call that cynicism, if you want, but it seems like a pretty straightforward application of the lessons of recent history. The Rhode Island establishment’s progressive approach to government leaves no room for municipalities to really make their own beds. If circumstances and policies lead them to thrive, the state will find ways to spread the wealth; if they choose poorly and falter, the state will step in.
The only acceptable barrier that remains, therefore, is between government and the private sector. It isn’t a sure thing that politicians won’t step in to save some iconic private-sector brand that blows it, but at least taxpayers have a fighting chance to say, “no.”
The activists are going town by town pushing fruitless plastic bag bans, and in Tiverton the debate raises more disturbing beliefs:
Hilton apparently believes that government’s providing educational services creates an excellent opportunity to manipulate children into conflict with their parents to advance a cause whenever a handful of elected officials agree with activists that the cause is righteous. While one would have to research how much class time must be devoted to an issue in order to turn children into a government youth corps, Tiverton parents might rightly wonder whether the school district’s academic results illustrate available slack in the school day. Just 28% of Tiverton high school students are proficient in math and fewer than half in reading. Perhaps indoctrination can wait until those results improve.
On the other hand, perhaps the school department could seize on the issue to provide practical lessons in math, science, and critical thinking.
The town administrator is warning of big spending increases next year, and this is what elected officials are spending their time on?
It’s almost difficult to believe that Patrick Anderson didn’t have a typo or something in his Providence Journal article on Lehigh Cement’s non-resolution over a tax problem with the City of Providence. The city overcharged the company $500,000 over four years. As any ordinary individual or entity might do when dealing with municipal government, Lehigh approached the tax assessor’s office and got the run-around for a while as the office changed hands.
Finally going to court, the company has been told it will not get its money back for two reasons that are outrageously contradictory. First:
… a Superior Court judge ruled against Lehigh and, on appeal, the state high court agreed, writing that while talking with the city about compensation, Lehigh had allowed the statute of limitations to expire.
If you’re wondering, according to Anderson the statute of limitations is three months. That abbreviated period gives especial bite to the second reason the business couldn’t get its money back. Even if it had beat the statute of limitations:
The court agreed with Providence’s defense that Lehigh needed to challenge its bill through the city appeal system instead of going directly to court.
It seems to me that the same government official who should have urged the company to start the appeals process was the one dragging his heals while stealing a half-million dollars from the company.
Perhaps filing an appeal stops the clock on the statute of limitations, but just to be safe, Providence taxpayers should regularly review every bill in fine detail and, when there appears to be a problem, immediately file an appeal as well as a complaint with court. Or better yet, just stay away from Providence altogether if at all possible.
Government activities shouldn’t be measured versus utter failure, but against the alternatives.
Failed 70's Era Economics of @Pawsox, Coupled With Poor Oversight & Loss of @gammtheatre & @MHRI Are Real Issues. Add Fire Department Woes. Who Can't Get Out It's Own Way? @Pawtucket @RISenate @RIHouseofReps @PFDLocal1261 @TheTimesofPawt @DonGrebien @CityofPawtucket @KobeEnglish https://t.co/kPx1uhi5gg
— The Coalition (@Coalition_Radio) December 7, 2017
Not to overuse the word, but let’s just say that I’m cynical about the newly proclaimed interest in development around the proposed PawSox stadium in Pawtucket:
Pawtucket leaders Wednesday used the interest in developing Tidewater and inquiries from an unnamed hotel developer to build near a new stadium in support of their push for a state-backed financing deal for the proposed $83-million downtown ballpark.
But cynicism aside, Rhode Islanders should take Mayor Donald Grebien’s explanation of the economics as a warning sign about government officials’ understanding:
“The Ballpark at Slater Mill is the catalyst that Pawtucket, the Blackstone Valley and Rhode Island need to continue to move forward,” said Mayor Donald R. Grebien. “Pawtucket is a business-friendly city and investors and developers are already expressing support for the ballpark project. However, the private sector cannot wait forever. They will look elsewhere to invest. That is why it is so critical that the General Assembly act prudently and expeditiously to enact the enabling legislation and move our great state forward.”
Anybody who’s ever negotiated the price of a car should know that you never buy under time pressure. In this case, Grebien’s attempt at pressure undermines his larger argument.
If the stadium really generates economic value then the private sector really will wait or come back. On the other hand, if these two particular prospects (one anonymous) are critical to the venture, then taxpayers should take that as a warning. After all, the whole deal relies on ancillary development to pay the debt. If the “private sector” isn’t clamoring for spots, the deal is too risky.