Posts Tagged ‘economy’

Lake Champlain bridge opening festival this weekend

May 18th, 2012 by Brian Mann

The new Lake Champlain bridge span being lifted into place (Photo: Brian Mann)

This weekend marks the official grand opening of the Lake Champlain bridge from Crown Point to Addison, Vermont.  Nearly three years after the old bridge was condemned and closed to traffic, the new span will see two days of dances, parades, music, and a flotilla on lake.

The key-note speaker at the gathering will be Ted Zoli, the designer of the new bridge, who grew up in Glens Falls.   The bash will end Sunday night with a fireworks show.

The bridge will be closed for about an hour around 11 am on Saturday for one part of the celebration, which will mean traffic delays in the area.

According to the Addison County Independent newspaper, as many as 10,000 people are expected to attend the two-day festival.  I'll be there and will have more on this story Monday morning.

For a complete schedule of events, go here.

Fair or not, the next president will own the recovery

May 17th, 2012 by Brian Mann

One of the basic rules in American politics is that life just ain't fair.  Elected officials get credit for things they had nothing to do with.  They get blamed for stuff that lies outside their control.

Another basic rule is that timing is everything.  Which is one reason why the 2012 election will be definitive for both major political parties in the US, and for the way that American voters perceive them.

Consider Bill Clinton.  The Democrat is remembered as a steward of good times, a man who ushered the republic back toward solvency and prosperity.  Was he responsible for the dot-com bubble and the other upward trends that defined the 1990s?  Hardly.

The next POTUS — Barack Obama in his second term, or Mitt Romney in his first — will ride a similar wave.

All economic indicators suggest that, unlike Europe, the American economy is muddling its way back toward vitality.

Housing foreclosures are down, and new home construction is up.  We've had a couple of years of uninterrupted job growth.  Tax revenues at the state level are back to record 2007 levels.

There's also growing evidence that corporations have held off on hiring and expansion about as long as they can.  Profits are sky-high again and the stock market is soaring.

That energy is startling to trickle down to average Americans.  Consumer spending is up.  A poll by Fox News found that the number of Americans who rate the economy as "poor" dropped from 66% last December to 45% this month.

That's a big shift.

None of this is to suggest that America's long-term economic challenges will evaporate in 2013.  They won't.  The next president will make decisions that will shape our future for decades to come.

How many American kids are able to go to college?  Who will be able to afford health care?  What will our infrastructure look like? How will we bend the curve to cut deficits?

But I suspect that the next president's power to influence those decisions will also increase, as Obama or Romney rides the optimism of lower unemployment rates.

Obviously, it's possible that something will happen to derail next year's recovery, but I suspect that a lot of the "threats" are overblown.

If Europe falls into economic chaos, for example, it will hurt a lot of American businesses and banks.  But it will also cement the United States' role as the most stable big Western economy, a safe place to invest and buy currency.

It's also certain that during this campaign season there will be a lot of debate over who deserves credit for cuing up the recovery.

Did Barack Obama stave off an even deeper depression, and begin the hard work of rebuilding strong economic foundation?  Or could he have made different and better choices to speed job growth and heal the housing market, as Mitt Romney argues?

Was it smart to bail out Wall Street?  What about the car companies?  Whatever voters decide, here's my first big prediction of this election cycle:

Whoever wins in November, he will be remembered fondly as the president who sat in the Oval Office when America finally escaped the Great Recession.  And his party will be viewed for years to come as the party of prosperity.

Morning Read: 24 months to fix state education mandates?

May 17th, 2012 by Brian Mann

The Plattsburgh Press-Republican has a fascinating story in this morning's paper, pointing to the fact that schools in Clinton, Essex and Franklin counties used about $24.7 million dollars in cash reserves to pay for next year's budgets.

The problem is that those fund balances will be tapped out by the end of 2014 or, in the case of some schools, by 2015. The question, of course, is what happens then?  This from Ashleigh Livingston's article:

"If we continue to use $1.5 million in fund balance in 2013-14 and 2014-15, our unrestricted fund balance will be completely gone," said Business Administrator Timothy Whipple.

"The question will become, 'How do we deal with trying to find $1.5 million after the fund balance is all gone and you can only raise property taxes by 2 percent?' Basically, we are looking at three years until we will be facing a huge budget gap," he said.

The Press-Republican article makes an interesting point.  Schools are already being squeezed — schools in Clinton County alone will cut roughly 100 staff positions next year — but these fund balances may be disguising the magnitude of the problem.

Once they're tapped out, with the property tax cap in place, even bigger deficits could open up.

The bigger question, of course, is what New York state and local school boards will do in the meantime.  Mandate reform?  District mergers?

How do you think your district should plan for the next wave of austerity?

Did the property tax cap work in yesterday's school vote?

May 16th, 2012 by Brian Mann

The New York State School Board Association just issued a press release reporting that roughly 93% of the school districts in New York state stayed within the tax cap approved by the state legislature.

Of the 7% or so of schools that exceeded the cap, roughly 60% were approved by voters with a super majority. (Full press release below.)

So what do you think? Is this system working, imposing needed discipline on school districts and their boards of education?

Or does this vote reflect a financial squeeze on districts that will hurt education quality? A little of both? Comments welcome.

New York State voters approved 96.4 percent of school district budgets on Tuesday, May 15, according to an analysis by the New York State School Boards Association.

“Today’s results are a ringing endorsement by voters of their public schools and place an exclamation point on the fact that local school governance works,” said NYSSBA Executive Director Timothy G. Kremer.

Initial statewide results gathered by NYSSBA indicate voters have passed 651 of 675 school district budgets. The number of budgets defeated was 24.

This is the first year school districts have had to contend with a property tax cap. Six hundred twenty-three districts, or 92.8 percent, were at or below their maximum allowable tax levy increases under the cap, and required a simple majority to pass their budgets. Of those districts, 99.2 percent passed.

Forty-eight districts, or 7.2 percent, had budgets that exceeded the tax cap and required a 60 percent “supermajority” to pass. Of those districts, 60.4 percent passed their budgets.

Last year, taxpayers approved 93 percent of school district budgets. The average passage rate since 1969 is 84 percent. The average passage rate for the last five years leading up to this year’s vote is 94 percent.

“The voting public has once again shown its strong support for education. Voters recognized that school leaders did everything they could to comply with the spirit and intent of the property tax levy cap,” said Kremer. “They were responsive to their communities.”

“But keeping within the tax cap required sacrifices,” he said, adding that 99 percent of districts needed to use reserve funds to make ends meet. A majority of districts also cut teaching and non-teaching positions as well as programs and services.

The average statewide tax levy increase of 2.3 percent for 2012-13 is more than a full percentage point below the average of 3.4 percent in 2011-12.

The average proposed spending increase for the 2012-13 school year is 1.5 percent, compared to 1.3 percent in 2011-12, 1.4 percent in 2010-11, 2.3 percent in 2009-10, 5.3 percent in 2008-09, and 6.1 percent in 2007-08.

Kremer cautioned that with dwindling reserve funds, districts are going to need significant mandate relief from the state. While linking state aid to personal income growth sounds reasonable, he said, “we have to recognize that the cost of doing business in New York is simply higher than other states and that has repercussions for school districts. Moreover, outdated state laws such as the Triborough Amendment make it difficult for school districts to get long-term concessions.”

In school districts where the budget failed to pass, a second vote may be held on June 19. School boards may forgo a second vote and adopt a contingency budget. Under state law, a contingency budget requires zero percent growth in the district’s tax levy.

On Tuesday, voters also filled vacancies on their local school boards and voted on separate propositions to fund such needs as school construction or bus purchases.

“Congratulations to all of the newly elected school board members,” said Kremer. “Serving on a school board is one of the most significant and honorable ways to contribute in a local community.”

-30-

About NYSSBA: The New York State School Boards Association represents more than 650 school boards and more than 5,000 school board members in New York. NYSSBA provides advocacy, training, and information to school boards in support of their mission to govern the state's public schools.

One scientist's vision for Trudeau Institute's future

May 14th, 2012 by Brian Mann

Dr. Stephen Smiley (Source: Trudeau Institute)

Last week, NCPR and the Adirondack Daily Enterprise reported on the internal debate over the future of Trudeau Institute, the  immunology laboratory in Saranac Lake.

Among the comments to the In Box was the following essay, written by Dr. Stephen Smiley, who joined Trudeau's faculty in 2000 and has served as the Institute's director of corporate relations.

I'm reposting Dr. Smiley's perspectives, because I think they warrant wider attention.

I have been a scientist at the Trudeau Institute for 12 years. I love the Institute and I love the community it resides within. The following words reflect my personal opinion, not the official positions of Trudeau management.

To my knowledge, the Trudeau Institute has never sustained itself on NIH grants alone. One can argue about whether it might be more successful obtaining NIH grants if it was located elsewhere but that does not change the fact that NIH grants alone are unlikely to suffice. Institutes like ours do not exist on NIH funds alone.

Our other funds historically came from the Institute's endowment. When Bob North was director, he built that endowment to nearly $40M. At that level, one can expect ~$2M per year (presuming a 5% return) in extra income. Those extra funds are essential for covering the cost of operating expenses that NIH grants do not cover. With the Board's approval, the Institute's subsequent directors used more than $2M per year of the endowment year after year. They built programs and built buildings that improved the science and helped to make Trudeau the world-renowned institution it is today. In the process, they also eroded the endowment and created substantial new expenses, such as loan/bond repayments.

The original plan was to rebuild the endowment and pay off loans/bonds with philanthropy, but that never occurred. Then, in recent years, the Institute experienced increased competition for NIH funding, an ailing economy, the loss of its director and several (funded) investigators partly as a result of the relocation debate, and a continued failure to raise the necessary amounts of philanthropic funding. These circumstances all contributed to the current crisis.

What is needed is a plan to pay off our debt and rebuild the endowment – quickly. Then, the scientists can return to their work, return to bringing in grant funds to cover most expenses, and know that the $2M revenue from the endowment is there to cover the shortfall. I believe the "translational problem" can be addressed by partnering with nearby institutes with clinical facilities (e.g. Univ of Vermont, SUNY Upstate) who value our stellar reputation and scientific strength in basic infectious disease research. In fact, Trudeau will announce new grant awards over the next few weeks that demonstrate our ability to perform translational studies by partnering with others. However, I think it highly unlikely that partnering will suffice to overcome our revenue shortfall – most businesses are struggling in the current economy and I don't think any partner will commit to providing Trudeau with the extra $2M per year in operating funds that we need.

So I urge the community to help us rebuild the endowment. I am a scientist. I don't know how to raise an endowment. Our Board doesn't seem to know how to either. If there are people in the community who care and truly have the capacity to help, then I urge you to get involved now. How? I'm not sure. We may need a grass roots effort to figure out how. Or maybe there are a few key "champions" in our community who can come to the rescue philanthropically, or take the lead on a vigorous fundraising campaign.

Why should you care? First of all, Trudeau Institute has brought $138M in revenue to Saranac Lake over the past 10 years. Those funds come mostly from NIH grants. A very large percentage of the dollars we obtain from NIH are spent paying the wages and benefits of the 100+ people employed by Trudeau who live and work in this community. On average, we infuse the local economy with more than $6M per year. Our employees spend much of that money locally – they eat in the local restaurants, shop at the local stores, pay local taxes, contribute philanthropically to local efforts, etc.

Second, the community should be proud of this jewel of an institute and use it as a means to sustain and build our regional economy. As our mayor is trying to do, we should use it as an example of the kind of future this region can look forward to. This is a wonderful place to live, work, and raise a family. In a modern economy, rural locations like Saranac Lake should have less trouble competing, not more. We have a good infrastructure – we can communicate with anyone instantly by internet and we can get supplies delivered overnight. It is far easier to work here now than in the days when Frank Trudeau originally set the Institute here. I applaud Mayor Rabideau's efforts and I believe wholeheartedly that, with a strong sustaining endowment, Trudeau can stabilize and help to anchor the growth of a high tech economy in this region.

But I think Trudeau's future is currently dependent on the good will of this community. Trudeau needs substantial philanthropic assistance now. It needs to rebuild its endowment very quickly. I hope my contribution to this blog will help to turn the conversation away from a rehash of who is to blame for what. Certainly with hindsight we can identify past mistakes by well intentioned individuals, including myself. But what we need now is a discussion of how a community that cares about Trudeau Institute can help to ensure it survival for another 127 years.

Five questions for Trudeau's leadership

May 11th, 2012 by Brian Mann

The last couple of weeks, I've been poring over internal documents leaked by former employees at Trudeau Institute, including more memos and studies provided this week to NCPR and the Adirondack Daily Enterprise.

They provide new detail and clarity on the turmoil and lingering uncertainty at the biomedical research laboratory, which employs about 100 people in Saranac Lake.

It appears that for the last half decade, the lab's leadership has been painfully divided, with some board members and staff secretly pursuing a plan to relocate some or all of the institute without buy-in from other board members.

When the relocation plan was vetoed by the full board in January 2011, the organization entered into a period of unprecedented disruption, losing key administrators and faculty.

Trudeau's national reputation has clearly suffered.  Eighteen months after the decision was made to stay, the institute still lacks a permanent director, and the community has no clear understanding of what the new plan is for moving forward.

Trudeau is a private institution.  But it is also a vital part of the North Country's economy, culture and history, and it relies for the lion's share of its funding on taxpayer dollars.

Saranac Lake has staked a significant part of its future on emerging as a biomedical research cluster, with Trudeau at its heart.  It appears that state and Federal officials are willing to help by investing significant funds in that vision.

So as the public discussion moves forward — and it appears that the timeline for solving some of Trudeau's "structural" problems will need to be fairly swift — here are the questions Trudeau's leadership needs to answer.

1.  In simple terms, what is the plan?  Has the board accepted that Trudeau can no longer serve the mission of conducting fundamental research into the human immune system, as it has done for half a century?  If so, what's next?

2.  Whatever the plan is, how much money do you need?  Trudeau executives hoped to garner roughly $88 million in subsidies, grants and philanthropic donations to relocate to Florida.  What kind of public support is needed to sustain your vision in Saranac Lake?

3.  Is the current board of trustees up to the task of guiding this institution, or does there need to be a substantial change?  A survey conducted of Trudeau staff and faculty in April 2011 revealed a lot of fear, anxiety and distrust.  Is it time for a shake-up at the top?

4.  Is there a way to better engage and communicate with the community?  Trudeau Institute relies on public support for its operations, but the organization often operates invisibly.  The result has been deep distrust between some local leaders and Trudeau executives, and a remarkable level of detachment and apathy among the public.  Do you think that needs to be fixed and if so how?

5.  Exactly what is the situation now?  How much money is left in Trudeau's endowment?  What are the most pressing, short-term needs, financial and otherwise, that will keep Trudeau afloat while bigger questions are answered?  And why has it taken so long to hire a permanent new director?

Trudeau chairman Benjamin Brewster declined to be interviewed on tape for our reporting. And he didn't return phone calls after the most recent Trudeau board meeting last Friday.

But in the absence of a permanent director at the lab, someone needs to step forward soon to speak bluntly about the institute's next steps.

Why rehash Trudeau Institute's travails now?

May 10th, 2012 by Brian Mann

Today, NCPR and the Adirondack Daily Enterprise launch a two-day investigative report on the behind-the-scenes debate over the future of Trudeau Institute, the bio-research and immunology laboratory in Saranac Lake.

We've known since the autumn of 2010 that there was a "strategic planning" effort that included the possibility of moving the facility out of state.  So why we revisit the controversy now?

Sources have been saying off the record to reporters for months that the situation at Trudeau remains fragile, with deep divisions over the future of the institute, which still employs roughly 100 people.

Documents leaked recently by a former staffer gave new insight into the policy differences that sparked those rifts, and the leadership decisions that shaped events behind the scenes.

Memos and other documents indicated that some staff and board members engaged in a concerted effort to keep the effort to move the laboratory to Florida secret for months and even years.

Even after executives traveled to Florida and submitted a formal application for more than $88 million in incentives from officials in Port St. Lucie Florida, it appears that some board members were still kept in the dark.

Those documents also suggest that troubling questions remain about Trudeau's future.  At stake are dozens of high paying jobs an a facility that anchors Saranac Lake's fledgling "biotech cluster."

But Trudeau is also an essential part of the village's culture.  Founder E.L. Trudeau served as Saranac Lake's first mayor in the 1800s.

Tomorrow, Chris Knight takes the story forward, looking at the options being considered for Trudeau as the lab works to recover from months of turmoil, budget cuts and internal divisions.

Morning Read: Glens Falls makes Forbes list, marking jobs growth

May 7th, 2012 by Brian Mann

WNYT reports that Glens Falls has made Forbes magazine's list of the best mid-sized cities for jobs growth, noting that "Glens Falls ranks 12th overall, citing the city's more than five percent employment growth over the past year."

Government in US continues historic contraction

May 4th, 2012 by Brian Mann

UPDATE:  This from the New York Times.

FOR the first time in 40 years, the government sector of the American economy has shrunk during the first three years of a presidential administration.

The latest job numbers out today show only a modest uptick in private sector employment, but they also give another indicator of the on-going, historic contraction in government work.

From April of last year to April of this year, the Bureau of Labor Statistics found that government at all levels shed another 215,000 jobs.

That continues a sort of stealth austerity movement that began in earnest as the Obama administration's stimulus program — which provided massive subsidies to state and local agencies — began to phase out.

We've seen it reflected here in the North Country, as school districts, counties, and state agencies have implemented hiring freezes, left empty positions unfilled, and laid off hundreds of workers.

The trend has slowed in recent months, which suggests that the public sector may be stabilizing.  This could reflect the fact that most state income tax revenues have finally recovered to levels approaching record highs in 2008.

But property tax revenues — which fund school districts — continue to lag and that may be reflected in continuing job cuts among teachers in the US.    Layoffs among K-12 teachers took the largest hit within the public sector over the last year.

In most parts of the country, the downsizing of government may have slowed the recovery, but it doesn't appear to have derailed it entirely.  Yet in some pockets, the trend may be more damaging.

While most states saw employment expand significantly in the last year, Wisconsin lost a net total of 23,900 jobs and the vast majority of them — 17,800 — were cut from government agencies.

That's not exactly priming the pump.

One question going forward is whether the national debate over stimulus vs. austerity might not be a little too simplistic.  Perhaps most of the country is recovering, albeit too slowly, without a new wave of government hiring or spending.

But there might be some parts of the US — Florida, Nevada, North Carolina, Wisconsin — where some economic caffeine is still needed.

There are also many pockets within states that are lagging badly, from inner city neighborhoods, to rural small towns — and those areas have been stung particularly badly by government layoffs.

What do you think?  Is it a good thing overall that our government is getting smaller?  Should there be another stimulus?  How about a targeted stimulus plan that identifies parts of the country that need a boost?  As always, comments welcome.

Morning Read: Laurentian Aerospace dissolves, accidentally

May 2nd, 2012 by Brian Mann

Yikes.  The big Laurentian Aerospace project, widely seen as the Next Big Thing for Northeastern New York, has been snagged for years as it seeks to lock down private financing.  (New York state has already offered up a generous incentive package.)

The project's backers hope to use part of the old Plattsburgh Airforce base as a site to refurbish and clean jetliners.

Now the Plattsburgh Press-Republican is reporting that "Laurentian Aerospace Corporation was dissolved for non-payment of franchise taxes in March…"

Company officials tell reporter Dan Heath that the project is still viable and the dissolution was the result of "an oversight."

"This was a matter that should have been attended to and, unfortunately, was not," [Laurentian chief financial officer Andrew Edwards] said.

This project has been percolating for six years or so, with several public false starts, so a misstep like this certainly stings.  What do you think?  Is Laurentian still ready to lift off?  Is this one of those projects that will see the light of day once the economy improves a bit more?

Comments welcome.