Pam Gencarella: What’s All the Fuss About RhodeMap RI? If You Like Your Municipality, Keep It
Thursday, December 11, 2014
Like many of his policies, Governor Chafee’s answer to economic development, RhodeMap RI, is under a lot of pressure. The Plan that professes to be an economic development plan, clearly states in the Appendix that it is a social equity plan, not a plan that will create an inviting landscape for businesses, you know, the job creators.
The more they understand the Plan, the more they don’t like the Plan.
But many of its supporters are trying to marginalize the opposition as right wing conspiracy theorists. I would hardly call Senator Marc Cote (D) from Woonsocket a right winger. Yet Senator Cote has been outspoken in his opposition to RhodeMap RI.
GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLASTNot only did he sign and send a letter (along with Representatives Morgan and Giarrusso, Representative-elect Blake Filippi and Senator-elect Mark Gee) to the RI Division of Planning requesting postponement of the Plan’s adoption, but he also released a statement explaining that HUD mandates have wreaked havoc on the property tax base in Woonsocket, ultimately leading to high property taxes, a supplemental tax on top of that, and bare bones city services. And when they sought help from the RI General Assembly, the response was ‘we’re from the government and we can’t help’.
RIPEC
The RI Public Expenditure Council (RIPEC) has been calling for a comprehensive economic development plan for years. Most of us would hardly characterize RIPEC as a right wing organization. And yet, they have spoken out against adoption of RhodeMap RI, at least until it can be fully vetted by elected officials and the public. That is not unreasonable. As more and more elected officials find out what’s in the Plan, and more importantly, the eventuality resulting from HUD related mandates, they don’t like the plan.
Allan Fung
Cranston Mayor Allan Fung sent a letter to the Division of Planning highlighting his litany of concerns regarding RhodeMap RI, not the least of which is the social equity mandates.
“Are the committee members truly suggesting that government should never help a private sector company, particularly big businesses that could employ hundreds if not thousands of Rhode Islanders”? (The Plan) “asks that development projects ensure that there are ‘Community Benefits Agreements’”. “What business would consider relocating here if there are further social equity mandates that would be imposed on their potential project”? Remember, Cranston is listed as a Consortium member, part of the group that purportedly helped craft RhodeMap RI.
And then there has been the quick action on the part of some cities and towns. In the last week, Scituate, Foster, Portsmouth and Tiverton passed resolutions opposing the Plan’s adoption today and East Greenwich agreed to a signed letter opposing adoption until a proper vetting has occurred. West Greenwich had it on the agenda last night (however, this writing was submitted before that meeting). South Kingstown has it on their agenda and many other cities and towns are discussing the Plan now that they see what the Plan eventualities are.
We really don’t have to adopt it to see what’s in it...
But we do need more time to understand what’s in it and connect the dots to the eventual impact on local municipalities. Some say that its only a plan, not a mandate. But instinctively, do you believe that a comprehensive state planning guide will not become part and parcel of local comprehensive plans? Clearly, those who drafted the Plan expect the Plan to generate enormous costs, otherwise, why would they have suggested eliminating the property tax cap? Once adopted, how many cities and towns can afford to ‘just say no’ to HUD money when the state is pressuring them to build more and more affordable housing?
Every Rhode Islander wants a real economic development plan, but do we want a bad one, just for the sake of having a plan? Isn’t that the modus operandi of RI? Just put it through, see if it works. Gary Sasse spoke on talk radio and stated that there are some good business ideas in the plan, those cultivated from meetings with business people. But, the problem is that he suggests that we accept the entire theory of a social equity plan in order to leek out a few substantive economic goals.
If it’s an all or nothing deal, then yes, we need to throw the baby out with the bath water. We need our government to develop a real economic plan, one that incorporates the good business ideas generated by the RI Foundation’s efforts with leading business people and support those ideas by laying the foundation for an inviting economic landscape. Businesses and the Plan both call for a change in our tax structure. That can only be made by rethinking our spending priorities, not adding more to the pile.
Don’t Depend on Governor-elect Raimondo or Speaker Mattiello to oppose.
Many are hoping against hope that this is just a Chafee idea. But if you look at Raimondo’s platform, she ran on many of the issues in RhodeMap RI, more affordable housing through HUD, more green energy, and public/private partnerships (a euphemism for insider deals?). Gary Sasse said the same thing.
Speaker Mattiello was quoted as saying the report has “no binding effect in law”. We ask if anyone among Speaker Mattiello’s ‘experts’ read the HUD documents that accompanied the grant to fund RhodeMap RI - obligations and implicit promises to HUD once RhodeMap RI is adopted. Municipalities have good reason to oppose adoption of this Plan. And, so does Speaker Mattiello, at least until is has been properly vetted by all locally elected officials, by all legislators and by the public. There is no reason to believe that the plan will not lead to pressure on municipalities to incorporate the official state planning guide into municipal comprehensive plans. If the plan carries no water, why adopt it?
So when it’s 3:00 in the morning, you’re kids are safely tucked in bed, and you’re wondering why the local zoning is gone and where all your hard earned money’s gone, will you be able to pick up the phone and say we liked our municipality, we want to keep our municipality? Generally speaking, there’s no going back.
Pam Gencarella is a member of OSTPA, a taxpayer advocacy organization in Rhode Island.
Related Articles
- Pam Gencarella: Will Spring Bring Renewed Hope to RI?
- Pam Gencarella: Something’s Rotten in the State of Denmark, er, RI
- Pam Gencarella: Introducing The People’s Resolution
- Pam Gencarella: Another Bubble to Burst in RI?
- Pam Gencarella: Ethics is Good Business for Rhode Island
- Mama Heaven: Mother’s Day Pampering Specials
- Spring Pampering Deals + Events
- Don Roach: I Hate Politician Adspam
- Pam Gencarella: A Civics Lesson From the East Bay
- Pam Gencarella: A Race to the Top or Running in Circles?
- Pam Gencarella: Don’t Touch That Dial
- Pam Gencarella: Is the Pendulum Swinging Back Toward the Center?
- Pam Gencarella: Context Is What’s Needed - Part I
- Pam Gencarella: It’s Easy to Vote for Santa
- Pam Gencarella: Why You Should Care About a Constitutional Convention
- Pam Gencarella: RI Has Lost Cabin Pressure
- Pam Gencarella: Witness the Crowding Out of Public Services
- Pam Gencarella: Surprised, Bewildered, Shocked, Disappointed
