COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS n re: 2001-2002 Appropriations Hearings Presentation by Members
* * * *
Stenographic report of hearing held in Majority Caucus Room, Main Capitol Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Wednesday February 14, 2001 10:00 a.m.
ON. JOHN E. BARLEY, CHAIRMAN on. Gene DiGirolamo, Secretary on. Patrick E. Fleagle, Subcommittee on Education on. Jim Lynch, Subcommittee on Capitol Budget on. John J. Taylor, Subcommitte/Health and Human Services on. Dwight Evans, Democratic Chairman
MEMBERS OF APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
Hon. William F. Adolph Hon. Steven R. Nickol Hon. Matthew E. Baker Hon. Jane C. Orie Hon. Stephen Barrar Hon. William R. Robinson Hon. Lita I. Cohen Hon. Samuel E. Rohrer Hon. Craig A. Dally Hon. Stanley E. Saylor Hon. Teresa E. Forcier Hon. Curt Schroder Hon. Dan Frankel Hon. Edward G. Staback Hon. Babette Josephs Hon. Jerry A. Stern Hon. John A. Lawless Hon. Stephen H. Stetler Hon. Kathy M. Manderino Hon. Jere L. Strittmatter Hon. David J. Mayernik Hon. Leo J. Trich, Jr. Hon. Phyllis Mundy Hon. Peter J. Zug Hon. John Myers lso Present: Reported by: Dorothy M. Malone, RPR ichael Rosenstein, Executive Director ary Soderberg, Democratic Executive Director
DorotkM M- M«lone Registered Professional Reporter 135 O- Lanai* Street }—lummelftown, Pennrijlvania 17036 NAME PAGE Opening remarks 4
Rep. Frank Tulli 7
Rep. Connie Williams 9
Rep. Bill Adolph 12
Rep. Gene DiGirolamo 14
Rep. Sara Steelan 18
Rep. Carole Rubley 24
Rep. John Pippy 28
Rep. Tom Tigue 32
Rep. Curt Schroder 35
Rep. Daryl Metcalfe 38
Rep. Ron Marsico 43
Rep. Pat Browne 46
Rep. Bob Bastian 51
Rep. Greg Vitali 54
Rep. Richard Grucela 57
Rep. John Maher 61
Rep. Steve Maitland 65
Rep. Steve Samuelson 69
Rep. Ellen Bard 73
Rep. John Yudichak 78
Rep. Jennifer Mann 82
Rep. Harold James 86
Rep. Michael Diven 91 NAME PAGE Rfcip. Larry Sather 98
Reipi. Tom Michlovic 103
Rep. Katharine Watson 107
Rep. Paul Costa 111
Rep. Steve Capelli 114
Rep. Phyllis Mundy 118
Rep. Paul Clymer 122
Rep. Michael Sturla 125
Rep. Kelly Lewis 129
Rep. Mark Cohen 133
Rep. James Roebuck 137
Rep. Jess Stairs 143
Prepared testimony of Rep. Jane Clare Orie 147
Prepared Testimony of Rep. Timothy J. Solobay 151
Prepared Testimony of Rep. Jim Wansacz 156
Prepared Testimony of Rep. Leanna Washington 159
Prepared Testimony of Rep. John Pallone 162 Prepared Testimony of Rep. Jewel Williams 165
Prepared Testimony of Rep. W. Curtis Thomas 168 CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Welcome to the opening hearing of the Appropriations Committee hearings for
the budget cycle 2001-2002. Today we have a very busy
schedule. We have a lot of members that are coming
before the committee to express their opinion, their
views, their priorities for the legislative districts
they represent. I am also certain that many of the
members that will be giving testimony today will have
opinions that they will like to share on the overall
budget as well.
The opening session this morning as well
as this afternoon is intended for the members and General
Assembly to come before the committee and express once
again their priorities. I think it is a great opportunity
not only for the members but it provides the Appropriations
Committee with the opportunity to hear what some of
the priorities are and gives us the input that we need
as we are building this budget and looking forward once
again to a smooth process.
Before we begin and recognize our first
presentere, I would like to recognize my counterpart,
the Democrat Chairman, Representative Dwight Evans,
and then I would ask all members of the committee, if
they would, to just briefly introduce themselves for
the viewers that are watching our program here today. Chairman Evans.
REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. Mr. Chairman, as you just indicated, I look forward to this opportunity of working jointly with you as we go through this process over the next three weeks to hear not just the members, but the cabinet officers, about the direction of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania. I would like to stress this is not our money. This is the people's money, and it is clear to me that this is our opportunity to voice our opinion in terms of what our constituents would like to see to as the future in terms of the Commonwealth of Pennsyl vania. This is a year to move in that obviously we have to look at the investments that we are making and where we will generate more jobs and help the education system of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Again, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with you and I appreciate the opportunity that you have given, not just to me, but all of the members on both sides of the aisle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: You are welcome. We can begin with introductions.
REPRESENTATIVE FRANKEL: Representative
Dan Frankel, Allegheny County.
REPRESENTATIVE MYERS: Representative j
a f
/! * - John Myers, Philadelphia County.
REPRESENTATIVE STABACK: Representative
Ed Staback, Lackawanna, Wayne.
REPRESENTATIVE MAYERNIK: Represetative
Dave Mayernik, Allegheny County. I am coming as a freshman on the committee here to learn about the appropriations process.
REPRESENTATIVE FLEAGLE: Representative
Pat Fleagle from Franklin County.
REPRESENTATIVE BAKER: Representative
Matt Baker from Tioga and Bradford Counties.
REPRESENTATIVE ZUG: Peter Zug, Lebanon and Dauphin Counties.
REPRESENTATIVE LYNCH: Jim Lynch, Warren,
Forest and McKean Counties.
REPRESENTATIVE DIGIROLAMO: Gene DiGirolamo,
Bucks County.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRODER: Representative
Curt Schroder, Chester County.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: And I have Michael
Rosenstein to my left who is my Executive Director and
Mary Soderberg to the right of Chairman Evans who is
the Executive Director for Chairman Evans. So, we would
like to welcome all the members that are here today.
And we will begin with our first presenter. Before we do that however, I would like to indicate that I have testimony that is being presented for the record by Representative Jane Orie, who is not able to be here today. So, I would like for the court reporter to note that we will be presenting some testimony there for the record. The first presenter is Representative
Frank Chick Tulli from Dauphin County, a veteran at this. So we welcome, you, Chick, and I would be very strict with my five minute clock because we have about
40 members and we are allowing the members to have five minutes. So, not to steal any of your time, you may begin.
REPRESENTATIVE TULLI: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank you and the committee for allowing the members to express their opinions to the Appropriations
Committee. And I want to commend this entire committee and staff for the hard work you do in preparing information for the budget. I know the next four weeks are going to be a very difficult time consuming process for you and I want to commend and congratulate you for that.
My testimony is going to be very brief because I am not even going to put a number on it. In the budget every year we have, in recent years, we have put an amount in DEP's budget for cleaning up of acid mine drainage. And we are in the process of slowly cleaning up the streams and rivers and waterways of Pennsylvania with that money. And what I would like to see this legislature do is take a lead and put an end date to acid mine drainage in Pennsylvania.
Future mining and present mining is safeguarded by law that they will not create any more acid mine drainage.
What we are doing now is cleaning up a process that is already in existence. This committee can come out with a recommendation that will increase the governor's budget for acid mine drainage clean up and put an end date to any water pollution in Pennsylvania. We have it within our power, as a General Assembly, to do that.
And what I am asking you to do is take a look at that part of the budget and see if we ought to have a ten year end date, a 15 year end date to have no more acid mine drainage in Pennsylvania. It is a problem that is within our reach to solve and I ask you to take a close look at that and I would be glad to work with you in the future on it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you, Representative
Tulli. We appreciate those comments and we will certainly take them under advisement.
Our next presenter is Representative
Connie Williams from Montgomery County. Good morning.
Welcome. And we are allowing five minutes for each 7 member to present testimony. So you may begin.
REPRESENTATIVE WILLIAMS: Thank you, Chairman
Barley. Good morning, Chairman Barley, Chairman Evans and committee members.
The 2001-2002 budget includes some very good things, but if I were governor, I would find there are a num ber of things that I would change, like finding a better way to fund education; adding funding for programs to mitigate noise along our highways and increasing funding for the arts.
But, since I am not the governor I will speak to you instead about protecting Pennsylvania's most valuable treasure--our children.
Yesterday, the House Children and Youth
Committee took a monumental step forward when they voted out of committee House Bill 519, which would expand crim inal and child abuse background checks for day care pro viders.
Parents should have peace of mind in knowing that when they drop their child off at daycare, their child will be safe. By providing extra fuding for background checks we will increase the ability of the
State Police to uncover potentially dangerous workers and ensure that children are not exposed to a dangerous situation.
According to Department of Public Welfare analysis, the state must allocate $300,000 to conduct an estimated 213,030 clearances per year. Is this needed?
Yes. A study in Michigan showed that the state had paid $11 million in child-care dollars to 6,220 criminals, whose crimes included 318 crimes against children.
In this context, $300,000 to protect
Pennsylvania's children seems to be a sound investment.
It is in the best interest of all Pennsylvanians to invest in quality care in the Commonwealth.
I have sponsored legislation and will offer a budget amendment to further protect Pennsylvania's children by ensuring they are not ingesting lead while they attend day care. The program, which would be a funded mandate, is estimated to cost $2.5 million.
According to several child-care studies, a young child in full-time day care will spend 12,000 hours in care outside their home by their fifth birthday.
That's more time than that child will spend in school, from kindergarten through grade 12.
Young children are the most vulnerable to lead poisoning because they put so much in their mouths.
Presently, Pennsylvania does not require lead hazard inspections of these facilities, many in old buildings. I learned more about the issue after I heard from a family whose child had a high level of poisoning in his system and the parents traced the ex posure to a day-care facility in my district.
We can do something to protect children by requiring this testing.
Finally, I would like to expand upon the governor's initiative to increase funding for early childhood education. As the proposed budget was presented, the $48 million early childhood edcuation package allocates the largest amount of funds to computers in preschools and community centers and for the sixth straight year, fails to provide state funding for Head Start.
Other states have put millions into pre- kindergarten and quality child-care, but not Pennsylvania.
Further, if you break down the $48 million in the early childhood education package, 70 percent of this is federal funds.
By preparing children early in life, we prevent numerous problems later in life and ensure that every child is ready to start learning when they reach kindergarten.
Early protection and prevention will not only save taxpayers money in the long run, it will protect young lives and provde the healthy start children need in life. I appreciate the opportunity to talk to you this morning and look forward to attending the upcoming presentations by the Department of Education,
DPW and our institutes of higher learning. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Williams. We appreciate your testimony and your comments.
We now move to the next presenter which is Representative Adolph. Welcome. Mr. Adolph.
REPRESENTATIVE ADOLPH: Good morning.
I want to thank Chairman Barley and Chairman Evans for this opportunity.
The reason I am here is on two aspects.
One is I was shocked and really personally saddened when I was looking at the Governor's Budget and I saw where there is no funding in there for epilepsy. We fought hard over the last eight years to get funding for epilepsy and I actually, in December, wrote the governor and the chairmen of the Appropriations Committee a letter to request a little increase for this foundation.
These foundations are in southeast Pennsylvania, central
Pennsylvania and western Pennsylvania. This is not a pet project for a legislator. This helps all the citizens of Pennsylvania. And the governor, I guess he didn't read my letter because my increase went down to zero total appropriations.
So, I am prepared to do an amendment to the budget for the increase that was requested and also to restore funding for the Epilepsy Foundations of Pennsylvania.
The other appropriation has to do with community colleges. Community colleges, Delaware County
Community College, which is located in my legislative district enrolls 25,000 students. It's a pretty big college. Historically speaking the students that attend community colleges throughout our state are the ones that parents probably cannot afford an Ivy League education.
These are the kids that are normally working sometimes full-time jobs as they go to community colleges. And they have been struggling and the state reimbursement has been decreasing. I am sure community colleges will have other advocates other than myself. But I am sure they are going to be prepared with the budget amendments to increase the state funding.
I am not going to bore you with all the figures, but these are not small, little colleges. Philadelphia
Community College, Delaware County Community College,
Harrisburg Community College; these are big colleges and usually the first part of higher ed for many of our students and they also retrain a lot of our workers.
Thank you for this opportunity and I have my prepared remarks for the record. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Adolph. Again, we appreciate your comments and your testimony. The next person that is scheduled to be a presenter is Representative Gene DiGirolamo from Bucks County and Ben Salem area to be exact. Welcome and good morning and you now have the floor.
REPRESENTATIVE DIGIROLAMO: Good morning and I want to wish everybody a Happy Valentine's Day,
February 14th. Chairman Barley, Chairman Evans and the members of the committee, I truly apppreciate the opportunity to talk to you today about the pressing alcohol and drug abuse and addiction problem that we have in the State of Pennsylvania.
It is a problem that affects one in every four families in Pennsylvania.
And dare I say it? Who among us here today has not been affected by maybe a loved one, a friend, a neighbor, a co-worker or a constituent with an alcohol or drug problem?
Alcohol and drug addiction is the #3 leading disease killer in America.
And yet there are waiting lists for treatment around the State of Pennsylvania.
The third leading disease killer in America—
yet today we are rationing the treatment in most of
our counties.
Alcohol and drug abuse and addiction drives over 70 percent of the crime in the State of
Pennsylvania--and yet today, even as we meet here in
Harrisburg, people in need of treatment will be turned away at the door.
Alcohol and drug abuse and addiction
is responsible for over $4 billion a year in health
care costs--yet we withhold and limit treatment for addictions.
How did we get into this difficulty?
Well, in my mind, there are three main factors.
1. Changes in Medicaid Eligibility
Many people with alcohol and drug addictions lost Medicaid eligibility during welfare reform.
2. Managed Care
Although all group health plans in Pennsylvania must provide coverage for alcohol and drug addiction
treatment (Act 106 of 1989), many people can't access
the coverage already paid for and required under law.
3. Heroin/Cocaine Trends;
There has been a widespread increase in the availability of pure heroin and cocaine around the state. Now even many of our more rural counties are seeing dramatic increases in heroin and cocaine related overdoses and death among our young people.
In summary, our county drug and alcohol system is completely overwhelmed. They have been forced to devise systems to make too few dollars stretch across a 12-month period.
Often funding for treatment is doled out one month at a time--first come, first served and then all admissions stop.
And your constituents and mine get turned away from needed treatment until the next month and the next too little allocation.
Because of funding difficulties, many people are provided a level of treatment that goes against the findings of the state's own assessment tool.
Once again, I am here to ask for your help. There are two short term and two long term steps that I believe we must take.
Short Term Goals
1. Increase the budget of the Bureau of Drug and Alcohol Programs and the Department of Health by $10 million in new dollars earmarked to address the treatment needs for those on waiting lists. 2. Increase and expand financial support for the Health Care Unit in the Attorney General's Office, which daily wrestles to ensure that people can access their addiction treatment and other health care benefits.
Long Term Goals;
1. Collect county-by-county data on waiting lists and undertreatment.
2. Develop a long term plan to increase our state financial commitment and progressively address the waiting list problem.
We must no longer tolerate waiting lists for untreated addiction.
Every time we turn a person away from treatment, it is ourselves that we hurt.
And what is the waiting list?
The waiting list is:
The untreated alcoholic that we, or a member of our family, are going to encounter on our way home tonight.
It is the teenage boy who overdoses: on heroin up in his bedroom right before the family eats their evening meal.
It is the baby born with the lifetime disability because of the mother's addiction.
It is the violence in our home and on our streets
It is the midnight trip to the police station,
to the emergency room.
It is the face of crime, the face of child
abuse and the face of battered women.
It is the children lost to the streets and parents pacing the floor at dawn waiting for the phone
to ring
It is the dstroyer of families and it shatters
the hearts of little children.
Friends—waiting lists for treatment
of alcohol and drug problems are time bombs ticking
in all of our backyards and all of our districts.
We can no longer tolerate them. We must no longer tolerate them. If we don't at least give
them hope, what else do we have?
Thank you for your time.and I appreciate it.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you, Representative
DiGirolamo.
At this time we move to our next presenter which is Representative Sara Steelman from Indiana County.
Good morning and welcome to the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE STEELMAN: Good morning.
Chairman Barley, Chairman Evans, members of the Appropriations Committee. As you know, my legislative district includes
the largest of the State System of Higher Education
universities, Indiana University of Pennsylvania. I'm very proud of the students, faculty, administrators
and staff of IUP, and I strongly support the State System's
efforts to attract adequate funding for the 14 state
universities, which serve a vital role in offering an
affordable college opportunity for many Pennsylvanians.
Today, however, I did not come before
you primarily to ask that you consider funding for the
State System. The administrators of the State System will be meeting with you later in the hearing process,
and they can speak more than adequately for themselves,
I believe.
Today I am here to ask you to consider
a different but complementary educational community;
Pennsylvania's community colleges, which will not be
directly represented before the Appropriations Committee
in the hearing process.
In my 10 years in the House and my eight
years on the Education Committee, I have become more
and more convinced that Pennsylvania's community college
system represents an educational and economic development
resource we are not utilizing as well as we can and
should. Every economic projection I've seen in the last several years has indicated that our national economy has shifted from one in which the highest percentage of jobs require no more than a high school education to one in which jobs requiring post-secondary education are increasingly numerous. The percentage of jobs that require a four-year college degree or graduate education is not, however, increasing dramatically. The increase is in jobs that require a two-year degree or certification, jobs that community colleges excel in preparing students for.
In recent years, we have tried to encourage
Pennsylvania's movement into high-technology industry, particularly bio-medical technology and telecommunications.
Creating strong economic growth in those sectors depends not just on our ability to educate Ph.D.s and M.D.s, but also on our ability to educate technicians, medical assistants, repairmen, and a host of other support personnel.
To do that, the best agency is frequently a community college.
We should also note that many of the states that have surpassed us in economic growth, particularly in high-tech, high-wage sectors, have made their community colleges, and the workforce development they can provide, a key part of their economic development efforts.
I'm not here to recommend drastic changes Z± in the way we fund our community colleges or encourage their expansion into new service areas, even though the experience of other states suggests that such aggressive efforts might pay impressive dividends. Rather, I am here to commend Governor Ridge for his primary budget initiative for the community colleges and ask the committee to consider three additions that would add relatively little cost and add significantly to the colleges1 ability to prepare their students either for a career or for continued education, for those who decide to pursue a bachelor's or graduate degree, as well as asking you to support one measure that would cost nothing at all; a novelty.
In his budget, the governor proposed adding $9.2 million to the fund for reimbursing community colleges for full-time equivalent students, or FTEs.
This would be sufficient to increase the FTE reimbursement rate from this year's $1400 to $1500. This increase was the first priority of the Pennsylvania Commission for Community Colleges, and it would obviously be much appreciated.
Currently, however, the Commonwealth's funding formula actually disadvantages colleges that are participating most actively in workforce development.
Noncredit workforce development courses, usually custom-tailore 1 to fit the needs of specific employers, are reimbursed at only 70 percent of the per-FTE reimbursement rate.
The colleges are asking that these courses which provide
the most direct support to businesses throughout the
Commonwealth, be reimbursed at 100 percent of the FTE
rate. Last year, 15,662 full-time students were enrolled
in noncredit workforce development courses. Fully
funding these reimbursements would cost us only an additional
$3.5 million, less than the governor proposes we spend
on black fly research.
The community colleges are also asking
that they be reimbursed for all credits taught. An
FTE is defined as a load of 12 credits, but the colleges
are reimbursed the same amount for a student who is
taking up to 18 credits, up to 24 credits for that matter,
as one who is taking 12 credits. Clearly, however,
the college is investing more in the student who is
carrying more than a 12-credit load. Last year, the
average full-time community college student took 13.42
credits. Reimbursing the colleges for all credits taught would cost us an additional $3.3 million.
Teaching technical courses requires technical
equipment, as well as educated and experienced teachers.
Last year, we appropriated $5 million for equipment
for the community colleges. The governor has not recommended renewing that appropriation, but the colleges are requesting a line item of $10 million for capital improvements to permit them to continue offering technology-intensive courses that serve both students and businesses in Pennsylvania.
Finally, althugh the governor's proposal creates a much desired increase in the FTE reimbursement rate, that creates a problem for several colleges, due to a nasty little formula called the variable state share ceiling (VSSC). The VSSC, which limits state funding to a fixed percentage of a college's reimbursable operating cost base regardless of the number of FTEs claimed, has had the unintended consequence of financially penalizing smaller, newer, rapidly growing colleges with relatively low budgets. Cambria County Area Community
College has suffered the most in past years, but Northwest and Westmoreland have also been affected. With the proposed increase in reimbursement, not only Cambria
Area and Westmoreland but also Butler and Montgomery colleges would find their reimbursement capped by the
VSSC.
Fortunately, eliminating the VSSC would cost nothing at all. The reimbursement fund for a given year typically contains more dollars than are actually driven out to the colleges under the existing formulas.
Historically, this "excess" funding has been distributed to the colleges as nonmandated capital. This is, however, unfair to the colleges that have been capped by the
VSSC, and the Commission for Community Colleges, as we 1 leas the House Subcommittee on Higher Education and the Community College/PDE Working Group, recommends its abolition.
Eliminating the VSSC will require a change in the School Code which is not the job of the Appropriations
Committee, but the support of members of the committee would be very helpful in the process.
Again, I appreciate the chance to appear before the committee as an advocate for Pennsylvania's community colleges and would be happy to answer any questions to the best of my ability.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Steelman. We appreciate your testimony.
The next presenter will be Representative
Rubley from Chester County. A gentle reminder that we do have a five-minute allotment for each member making their presentation and I would appreciate that they would adhere to that. Representative Rubley, welcome.
REPRESENTATIVE RUBLEY: Good morning,
Chairman Barley and Evans and members of the House
Appropriations Committee, I wish to thank you for this opportunity to offer comments on the proposed budget for the 2001-2002 fiscal year. Although I would like to comment on many aspects of the proposed budget, in the interest of time, I will confine my remarks to the following topics:
Charter Schools
In my district, the Phoenixville Area
School District has one major charter school operating, with another one proposed. The costs to the Phoenixville
School District and surrounding districts are extensive.
Having two or three children leave a grade or a classroom does not reduce the overall costs to the school district, yet the loss of that money for those students leaves a deficit which affects the entire district. I believe this budget should include additional transitional funding to school districts affected by the loss of money to charter schools to enable them to offset such losses.
School districts in my area receive a very small proportion of State funding, resulting in the community having to provide the majority of the money. One of my school districts depends entirely on the real estate tax for the local share of school funding because of the effect of the Philadelphia Wage
Tax. Therefore, an enormous burden is placed on the homeowners, especially those on fixed and limited incomes. Some school districts are hurt by the current funding formula which averages out the costs of education for kindergarten through 12th grade. Many districts cannot afford a full-day kindergarten program yet must pass on equivalent funds to the charter school which does. I recommend having the State establish an incentive grant program to allow school districts to establish a full-day kindergarten program for at-risk children at the very least.
County Health Departments
The current allotment under Act 315, the Local Health Administration Law, was set over 16 years ago under an amendment to Act 315 at $1.50 per capita resident. During this time, the health-related and environmental responsibilities of local Health Departments as dictated by State Agencies have increased dramatically.
The costs of administering the broad array of these programs have increased over the last 16 years, with the county and city Health Departments assuming these increases locally. There is an urgent need to increase the State per capita resident share going to the county and city Health Departments, and I strongly recommend this as a component of this budget. I would be happy to supply members of this Committee with an overview of the wide array of responsibilities undertaken by the local Health Departments. I urge you to provide additional funding to raise the per capita resident contribution.
Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCMR)
This department's budget, as proposed by the governor, includes an allocation of $199,200 to fund phase I of a two-year program. This involves initially hiring two hydrogeologists and one administrative officer to establish a technical assistance program to assist regional and local governments by providing technical assistance and water data and data analysis, along with needed geologic information. These people will be invaluable resources, helping communities and planners to undertake sound land use and water resource planning based on actual scientific data. I strongly recommend that this funding be retained in the final budget.
Community Colleges
1 am very pleased to see the increase in the Community College reimbursement rate by $100 per equivalent full-time student. In addition, to help these colleges maintain their excellent educational programs. I recommend an increase in the workforce training funding from 70 percent to 100 percent. This is especially critical in times of a slowing economy. Also, there is a need for the State to provide full reimbursement on a credit hour basis instead of the current system, which does not reimburse for credits taken above 12 hours a semester, as well as there being a need to increase capital expenditures for computers and technology,
Thank you for allowing me to present some of my concerns with the proposed budget. By and large, I believe that Governor Ridge's budget has many positive elements which I support, and I ask for your consideration of these issues about which I have spoken.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you, Representative
Rubely, and we appreciate your comments and your concerns.
I do not see Representative Tigue. Representa tive Pippy is here so we will allow Representative Pippy and then if Representative Tigue arrives, we'll allow him in the slot that Representative Pippy had. Welcome.
Good morning, Representative Pippy from Allegheny County who will be making a presentation before the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE PIPPY: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman, members of the committee I appreciate the opportunity to be here before you today. And to both
Chairman Evans and Barley as well, I appreciate you bringing the committee and allowing us the opportunity to speak to you. I think the local input does a lot for our budget and also lets our constituents to get
a better feel for what we're doing. Representative
Rubely just spoke and covered a lot of important topics.
What I am going to do right now is just
talk about one issue that has been in the papers for many years. It is the High Speed Maglev project in
Pittsburgh. We are now one of two finalists in Pennsyl
vania. This is an issue that is very important.
If you look at the global marketplace
you will hear buzz words such as high tech, seamless
integration, precision manufacturing and many others.
And we look at the airways now, these airways are becoming
what the yesteryear superhighways were. So communities
that have airports now will get the benefits that communities
that had rivers and highways had in the past and will
be linking our world.
I bring that up today, because as a member
of the Transportation Committee, I know firsthand the
importance that infrastructure has to make each family—creating
family sustaining jobs. Insuring that the products
and the goods and the people who work there can get
to and from. Every year we have invested hundreds of millions of dollars on transportation projects and in
every one of those projects you will always hear about
the economic development and benefits from that project. Today we have a new opportunity, really a great opportunity to capture a transportation project in our region that will not only help economic development for all of western Pennsylvania and the Commonwealth as a whole, but also in itself this one project is economic development because the infrastructure and the industry that would come off of the spin-off would be tremendous for all the people.
As I mentioned, Pittsburgh is a finalist in the nationwide competition to build a High Speed
Mag Lev project in the United States. Our competitor is Baltimore, very close to Washington, D.C. Obviously there is a big interest out there as well, access to the nation's capitol. So we are going to have to work even harder to try to bring it back home.
Supporting Maglev would be supporting steelworkers who make the steel, the electrical workers, the contractors, the family, all those who will be involved as well as providing tourism to our region and helping us recapture what we had had as being the world's leader in steel. I used to work for US Steel prior to coming here and remember the great history and traditions, but now we have the opportunity to recapture that and provide the good jobs in the high precision, high tech manufacturing area. We look at High Speed Maglev and we think about not only the speed at which we can travel and ease and the factor that we can really set the stage for a potential national transit system. But we also look at what it does for us as a region. It reminds us of all the great things Pennsylvania has helped build and create. And let's us step into a new century taking the lead.
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania; Pittsburgh
Region, southwestern Pennsylvania, we have all waited to receive the benefits of having a new international airport. We are on the brink of achieving that dream.
And I would ask that the Committee as this time goes along continues to remember the importance of this project and support it. We all know that this will require significant state funding and to support the federal monies up to a billion dollars that we may receive.
So, I appreciate the opportunity in front of you today. I appreciate the support you have given us in the past. I created a resolution last year that was unanimously adopted supporting the High Speed Maglev contest. Hopefully we can bring that into fruition.
So, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you very much for your time. Good luck on the budget.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you, Representative
Pippy. We appreciate your concerns and your comments as well.
We now recognize Representative Tigue from Lackja wanna County for purposes of making a presentation to the committee. Welcome and good morning.
REPRESENTATIVE TIGUE: Good morning,
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to present some of my recommendations today. You must be very efficient because
I was scheduled to be on later and I received a call hurry up and get here. You are ahead of time. So
I commend you for that.
First, let me say two things about the governor's proposal that I do support and I commend the governor. First of all is for increasing the dependent allowance to $8500 which will allow a family of four to earn $30,000 without paying any state income tax.
I really support that. In fact, unlike the president's proposal, this proposal gives it to those who need it the most. So I commend the governor for that.
I also commend the governor for increasing special education funding ten percent. We have talked about that in the past and I think it is a step, a giant step, in the right direction.
But this morning I would like to focus on two or three issues. One is the state support for the construction and renovation for school buildings.
And the second, I would like to talk about incentives to encourage school districts to provide or extend,
I should say, extend the school year beyond 180 days.
And one thing, it is not in my written testimony, I will talk about briefly, is I think we need a program to protect our recreational activities by allowing money or funding a formula so we can protect dams, earthern dams. We are having a problem statewide where the Game
Commission and the Department of Conservation and Natural
Resources and those entities tti&t have old earthen dams are having a problem now replacing them or at least refurbishing them or rebuilding them.
First of all, let me talk about the formula to reimburse school districts. And this is something
I have talked about here in front of this committee in the past. The formula has not changed since 1987;
1987, more than a decade ago. So, I think it is imperative that we finally increase this funding on a per pupil basis. Every cost associated with construction, I am sure you all know, has increased over this period of time. This lack of adequate funding has had an adverse effect on every kind of district. Whether it is poor or wealthy. Whether it is urban or rural. Whether it is a growing enrollment or stable enrollment. Growth districts need new school buildings in every district.
Every district over the past decade has need to renovate or construct buildings because of the aging and maintenance.
School districts have been forced to pay a greater share of the construction cost and they have done this, obviously, by increasing property taxes.
We all talk about the effect on property taxes. Well this is surely one thing that we can look at. Unfortunately, it is not going to help those districts who wins the major construction projects in the past decade.
I also would add that when we get, and hopefully we will change the formula, update it, we should add aid ratio as part of the formula to insure that poor districts are able to build adequate facilities for their children as well as more wealthy districts.
The second issue I talked about - encourage schools to extend the school year. 1 think we should create a program, and we should put it in this year's budget, to provide funding incentives to school districts who would be brave enough to undertake a program which would provide educational opportunities which would benefit every student in the district. I am sure there are school districts out there who have looked at extending the school year beyond 180 days, and for perhaps financial reasons and I'm sure other reasons, they have been a little reluctant to adopt it. So I think that's a new program perhaps that we should look at.
And as I mentioned, the third issue was dams. There is a situation where the Game Commission has applied to DEP to breach a number of dams. And the reason is they can't afford maintenance. Some of these dams are on their property, DCNR,with the state parks. It is a situation which we haven't looked at.
It is an infrastructure. We have talked about roads and bridges, but now we have to start looking at these—most of them are earthen dams which are very old, on public property for the recreation as well as the safety of our constituents.
And again, thank you. If you have any questions, I would be happy to answer them.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Tigue. We appreciate your comments.
REPRESENTATIVE TIGUE: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: The next presenter is Representative Schroder, a member of our committee.
So we will now welcome Representative Schroder from
Chester County.
REPRESENTATIVE SCHRODER: Good morning
Chairman Barley, Chairman Evans and members of the committee. I am testifying today because Pennsylvania's trauma centers are in critical condition.
Trauma centers are vital to the quality of health care in Pennsylvania. They provide the immediate availability and dedication of physician specialists, nurses and resuscitation life-support equipment 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
To ensure these life-saving services continue to exist and to serve our communities, trauma centers need financial help.
Like much of the health care industry, the state's 27 accredited trauma centers are facing growing financial pressures due to declining government reimbursements, inordinately higher levels of uncompensated care, and the impact of managed care decisions.
For example, the federal Balanced Budget
Act of 1997 is reducing Medicare payments for hospital inpatient care by more than $2.5 billion in Pennsylvania.
In 1999, trauma centers incurred 46 percent of all uncompensated care costs among hospitals. Growing managed care enrollment has left many trauma centers forced to choose between risking patients' health by transferring them to non-trauma units at the recommenda tion of the managed care company or taking on the liabil ity for the cost of care without knowing how they will be reimbursed.
Finally, trauma centers face significant costs associated with accreditation that non-trauma center hospitals do not.
Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of House Bill 362, which I introduced along with Representative
Ron Buxton, I am proposing $18 million in funding for an annual trauma center grant program. This sum represents approximately half of the annual cost of compliance with accreditation requirements for Pennsylvania's trauma centers. The funding could be accomplished through the state's Auto CAT fund to the extent that the fund's surcharge revenues and investments exceed claim payments.
This year, that amount is estimated at $18.6 million.
Please note that I am referring to the Auto CAT fund, not the troubled medical malpractice CAT fund that has been in the news recently. Recent projections regarding the Auto CAT Fund show that its unpaid liability will be fully funded by March 2004.
Funding for trama care is a good fit with the mission of the Auto CAT fund because motor vehicle accidents,, along with falls, are one of the leading causes of trauma death for people between the ages of
5 and 74.
I would also like to emphasize that by redirecting existing funds to this program, it will have no impact on the general fund budget.
Pennsylvania is fortunate to have one of the most comprehensively developed and highly regarded trauma systems in the nation. An investment in trauma care would preserve this high quality of care and save the lives of countless Pennsylvanians.
Chairman Barley, Chairman Evans and members of the committee, thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Schroder.
We now recognize Representative Daryl
Metcalfe from Butler County for purposes of making his presentation for the committee this morning. Representative
Metcalfe, welcome. We are pleased to have you here today.
REPRESENTATIVE METCALFE: Good morning.
I am not here today to ask for a budget that increases
state spending, to appease a special interest group, to promote a particular project or expand a new big government program. I am here to ask that you consider all the hardworking men and women of our state, the
taxpayers of Pennsylvania, who will pay for the budget.
Let's broadcast a new Milleniium message to our constituents. A message that will show them we will be good stewards of their tax dollars calling
for limited, efficient government starting with a 10
percent reduction in spending.
Taking into consideration the proposed budget and calculating the increased spending that has
occurred since 1990, our state government will have
increased spending by 67 percent. From 1994 till 1999,
Pennsylvania General Fund Spending outpaced the rate
of inflation by 88 percent. The increased level of
spending promoted with each successive budget is only
sustained through excessive and oppressive taxation
on the taxpayers of Pennsylvania.
According to information provided regarding
this year's proposed budget, three and a half percent
of the general fund is spent to pay our debt service.
That three and a half percent translates into approximately
$727 million. Government debt is not the same as a debt each of us as individuals may accrue. As individuals we are personally responsible for the payment of our debts. When elected officials run a government by continually
carrying a debt, we are burdening not only the taxpayers of today, we are also placing a burden on our children
in the future. The result is taxation without representa
tion since they are not able to vote.
I believe that our children have a right to inherit a government that is debt free. The extravagant spending habits of our state government have had a direct impact on stifling the growth of business and the creation of jobs here in Pennsylvania. From December 1994 till
December 1999 our job growth rate was less than half the national average. We rank 47th among the 50 states in job creation in 1999. Then between December 1999 and December 2000, Pennsylvania's job growth rate dropped to less than half of what it was in 1999. Less than half of what it was when we were 47th in the nation for creating jobs. The result, as evidenced by the census, is captured by the new found term brain drain.
Our 21 to 29-year olds are fleeing the state in search of jobs that are being created elsewhere.
While our spending has increased, our population growth has plateaued. When compared to the rest of the nation, our population growth lags well behind the national average. Pennyslvania1s population growth from 1990 to 2000 was only 3.4 percent compared to an 11.4 percent population growth in the United States.
The population growth in the nation was more than three times that of our Commonwealth.
One of the results of our population stagnation is that we will lose two more congressional seats. Yet again reducing our voice in D.C. There is a direct correlation between per capita tax burdens and growth of population and jobs. If we truly want to see jobs created in Pennsylvania, if we truly desire to end the brain drain, if our hope is for our children to remain and prosper here, we must reduce spending and truly cut taxes.
As I have met with business owners, the job creators, they unanimously agree on what is necessary to create more jobs. We would see more jobs created if tax rates were significantly reduced.
I have heard that a definition of insanity is that you do the same thing over and over expecting a different result. Let's bring sanity back into government.
It is time for us to do something different in state government so that we will attain a different result. Let's start this year by reducing our budget by ten percent rather than increasing it by four percent.
The approximately three billion dollars in savings realized from the ten percent reduction in spending that I propose in this testimony should be used to pay down the debt and cut taxes. With this reduction we would be able to eliminate the death tax and the job crushing Capital
Stock and Franchise tax this year. The remainder of the savings could be used to pay down the debt, and in conjunction with my property tax elimination bill, eliminate property taxes in Pennsylvania.
My property tax elimination bill, House
Bill 418 would also require that budget surpluses beyond the 15 percent dedicated to the Rainy Day Fund be used to automatically reduce personal income tax rates so the working men and women of our state would receive their surplus tax dollars back.
I ask that you reduce spending this year by ten percent so that we will be able to truly reduce the tax burden or our working men and women. I ask that you ignore the special interest groups in this budget and pay attention to the group who is paying our government's bills, the taxpayers. I ask that you send us a budget that will tell Harrisburg to spend less so that Pennsyl vania's families can save more of what they have earned.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Chairman Barley,
Chairman Evans and for the committee's attention.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you, Representative
Metcalfe. We appreciate your testimony very much today as well.
Representative Pat Browne. I do not see him, but I see Representative Ron Marsico from Dauphin
County. So we will at this time allow Representative
Marsico to begin making his presentation to the committee.
Welcome and good morning. REPRESENTATIVE MARSICO: Good morning
Mr. Chairman, Chairman Evans, members of the committee.
I don't think I have to tell you that aggressive driving is on the rise. We see it every day as we commute back and forth between Harrisburg and our respective districts. My district office is just a few miles away, as you know, but believe me,
I see plenty of people tailgating and speeding even in that short drive.
The only time people even think of slowing down is when they spot that state police car off to the side of the road. Unfortunately, those cars are few and far between.
It is time to take our highways back from these aggressive drivers, and the only way to do that is to increase the number of officers patrolling those highways.
I am here today to urge an increase in funding for our state police force that will help get more officers out on the roads and most importantly, get more drivers safely to their destinations.
This initiative has received bi-partisan support in the House and the Senate. It has received editorial support in newspapers across Pennsylvania.
My office has even received letters from people throughout Pennsylvania supporting and praising the idea.
Governor Ridge has recognized the need for more highway patrols in his budget by dedicating
50 million dollars to technology upgrades and other initiatives to free up more officers from paperwork.
While I applaud this effort, I believe more needs to be done.
The size of Pennsylvania's state police force has not changed since 1972, when it was set at
3,940 officers. Since that time, at least 42 mandates from the state and federal governments have pulled the equivalent of 160 officers from patrol. The number of registered vehicles in the state has climbed by nearly
20 percent. And total vehicle miles traveled in the state has jumped by more than 45 percent in the last
20 years alone.
The Pennsylvania State Police patrol over 72,000 miles of highways--more than 65 percent of the roads in the Commonwealth.
They serve 1241 municipalities in the state on a full-time basis, and they work part-time in an additional 548 municipalities.
Their duties extend far beyond simply patrolling highways. Criminal and drug law enforcement, crime prevention, emergency assistance, liquor control enforcement and other specialty functions leave few officers available for highway patrols. In fact, 2001 employment data for the state police shows that fewer
than half of its sworn officers--just 1,996 officers are assigned to respond to calls for service.
Our state police officers are doing an exceptional job with the resources that they have, but there is no question that the safety of Pennsylvania drivers is suffering because those resources are being
stretched too thin.
Some of you may be aware of the Capital
Beltway Advisory Committee, a local initiative I launched with PennDOT last year to improve safety on the beltway
system.
We have heard over and over and over again from commuters who say an increased state police presence is the ONLY WAY we can get drivers to slow down and stop tailgating.
In response, PennDOT designated the beltway as a safety corridor, allowing state police in Harrisburg to obtain federal grants for additional patrols on the beltway.
Those additional patrols are producing
impressive results. In all of 1999, Troop H issued
3,221 citations. In just the first three quarters of 2000, that number is up to 3,906--an increase of more than 21 percent.
By far the best result of the campaign is that, after five traffic deaths last February, the beltway remained fatality-free until early last month.
Increased patrols have played a major role in making the beltway safer, but the federal grants will soon run out.
More state funding is needed so that beltway drivers--and drivers across Pennsylvania can enjoy safer highways for years to come. This is a public safety issue that needs to be seriously addressed. Now is the time. Lives are at risk. It is a matter of life and death.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you, Representative
Marsico.
We now welcome Representative Browne,
Pat Browne from Lehigh Valley. You're on.
REPRESENTATIVE BROWN: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. Chairman Barley, Chairman Evans and members of the House Appropriations Committee, good morning and thank you for allowing me this opportunity to provide testimony to you today on issues which I hope you will consider during your deliberations on the 2001-2002 General Fund Budget.
Members of the committee, if we look through the eyes of many of Pennsylvania's young children, how much hope do we see for the future of the Commonwealth?
Would we see a future of opportunities and growth?
The answer is not a simple one.
Many children in my urban and legislative district, similar to children living in a variety of settings throughout the Commonwealth, are unfortunately exposed to numerous risk factors that are a threat to their future promise. Poverty, single parent households, low formal educational level of parents, poor nutrition, abuses and neglect jeopardizes a child's normal cognitive, intellectual and emotional development. The physical and psychological impact on children that are abused and neglected is significant, leading them to suffer from depression, stress and conduct disorders, brain damage, developmental delays and learning disorders.
These circumstances leave these youngsters at-risk in regards to their ability to maintain a normal progression through reading, writing and other educational areas when they enter primary schooling. Falling behind in these early years increases the likelihood for low performance, failure and paves the way toward school dropout. Given these facts, it is clear to me that if we in state government do not support policies to allow for intervention into these children's lives in the early stages to target and address these risk factors, to prevent abuse and neglect, to promote normal development and learning, then we are putting at risk not only the value of our other efforts but the very future of our Commonwealth.
For these reasons, I am pleased that the Ridge Administration has made a significant commitment to early childhood initiatives in this year's budget request. His commitment will allow us to close the readiness gap for many of our at-risk children. It shows a recognition that quality home visiting programs, such as those supported by the Ounce of Prevention Initiative, sponsored by Representative Phyllis Mundy and myself, will make the early years of many of our Commonwealth's youngest citizens, ones of growth and learning, not one of neglect and despair.
However, in regards to the Governor's worthy request, I do have two concerns, First, the commonwealth is tremendously behind other states of our size in this area with states like New York, Texas,
Ohio, Calfironia committing billions of dollars to these initiatives. Therefore, it is important that we at least maintain or increase the Governor's request in our budget considerations. Second, any commitment we make in this area must be an investment for the future.
The benefits of early childhood programming are not realized over the timetable of our fiscal cycle and, therefore, our appropriation to them must reflect that.
In this regard, I'm asking for this committee's consideration in reclassifying the Governor's original request of federal and state funds for these programs into a separate line item or line items either the Department of Health or the Department of Education's budget request. This will not only reinforce the Commonwealth's commitment but give the General Assembly more long-term and lasting authority over state government's stake in this area.
Mr. Chairman, by realizing the long term value of early childhood initiatives in Pennsylvania, we are further creating a vision of a place which is proactive and future focused; that demonstrates to our at risk children's families that the community is there for them to provide nurturing and support through their challenges, not just a reaction or a remediation when it is too late.
With such a vision alive and growing in my district and the rest of the Commonwealth's communities, we will soon be able to look through the eyes of every Pennsylvania child and see hope.
Mr. Chairman, as with our at-risk youth, many of our citizens with mental and physical disabilities
require quality, community based programs for them to
sustain and enjoy independent, active lives. Unfortunately,
even though there are many organizations that faithfully
commit themselves to this effort, I believe a crisis
is growing in the service network estabished to serve
them. This crisis is rooted in the human resource needs
of these organizations.
Currently as many members are aware,
direct care workers serving our citizens with disabilities
receive compensation that is below what is reasonable
for their time and talents. As a result, most of our
nonprofit organizations serving these citizens endure
a more than 40 percent annual turnover rate in their
direct care worker staff levels. Such a turnover rate
is dangerous to the stability of these organizations
and the services they provide our most vulnerable citizens.
In this regard, I join many other members
of this assembly in asking this committee to provide
an additional appropriation of $25 million in this year's
budget to assist in increasing the salary scales of
our direct care workers. Your endorsement will help
ensure that many fellow Pennsylvania citizens are given the support and care that they require and deserve.
Thank you for your time and attention today.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Browne. We appreciate your testimony as well
today. I now recognize Representative Bastian, Bob
Bastian from Somerset County. Good morning and you have
the floor.
REPRESENTATIVE BASTIAN: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. Chairman Barley, Chairman Evans and the members
of the Appropriations Committee. They are passing out
just a brief synopsis of what I want to say this morning
and really there is four things I want to mention.
Number one is the Allegheny Community
College. This is a great success story in Somerset
County, It has been in existence now for about 12 years.
At the time a community college was desired for Somerset
County, nobody stepped forward except for Allegheny
Community College out of Cumberland, Maryland. And
this is where a lot of the problems exist because of
a Maryland based institution,providing state money to
Bedford and Somerset Counties where they have a branch
campus.
Last year the appropriations was $425,000.
Two seventy-five of that was direct tuition help and 150 was to program enhancements. All of that money stays in Somerset and Bedford County. None goes to
Maryland.
This past year we had a 28 percent increase in attendance at the Somerset Campus alone up to almost
500 students and we feel we need more money than we did last year. We would like to have about a $100,000 appropriation this fiscal year. The Governor has canceled that from last year and we have to fight for each year and I think it is a grand expenditure of state monies.
It is a great success program for Somerset County.
Secondly, I am going to echo what Repre sentative Marsico said about the Pennsylvania State
Police. I have many complaints in my county. We are a very rural county. And I can tell you that going from the northeast corner of Somerset County to the southwest corner is about an hour and a half and when you're traveling fairly fast and I think we need to have more of a presence in our rural communities.
And we probably need to increase that complement of state police in Somerset County as well as the state alone.
Thirdly, the Pennsylvania State University being a rural county and being mostly a dairy cow county, the Extension Service has done a great job in Somerset County over the years in providing expertise and continuing education programs to the agricultural community, and they are looking for a five to six percent increase in their budget.
I must add, however, I think there are some morality standards that have come in question at
Penn State University. I think this has to be brought to a halt and I think everybody is aware of what the problems are. I can tell you back when I was a veterinarian in Somerset County, I usually drove too fast and I would get a ticket occasionally. When it cost me 25 bucks
I paid it and went on. But when those tickets cost me $125, it became a financial issue plus the threat of losing my license. I think Penn State has to look at the same situation where they are not going to have morality standards that we think are decent and right on campus, then I think maybe there has to be a morality check with them and I think we have to talk to them and say, hey, maybe funding is going to be decreased or funding is going to be held until the administration does something about this.
Finally, on the second page is a small request from Natalie Harter, who is the Executive Officer for Continental 1. This is a small request of $25,000 for expenses. 219, which goes through Pennsylvania from New York State is a road we need to finish, but more than that it is a road we need to finish from Buffalo,
New York to Miami, Florida. And there is a lot of activ
ity in this respect. It goes through nine states from
New York to Florida and she is requesting a modest stipend
of $25,000 to help with some of tns expenses.
With that, I thank you very much for
the opportunity to speak to you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Bastian. We appreciate your comments.
I think you said Penn State should have a reality check
on their morality. Thank you.
I now recognize Representative Vitali.
REPRESENTATIVE VITALI: Good morning,
Chairman Barley, Chairman Evans and members of the
Appropriations Committee. Thank you for giving me this
opportunity to briefly testify before you today.
For the past six years, we have heard
a lot about how Pennsylvania is growing, and about how
we are on the "edge of greatness."
But compared to other states, Pennsylvania
remains in relative decline. We are 47th in job creation
and 48th in population growth. In this critical age
group, 15 to 44, Pennsylvania is actually losing popula
tion—a fact that the Governor himself referred to in his budget address.
In addition, Pennsylvania is one of the nation's most polluted states--first in acid rain, first in trash implorts and second in sulfur dioxide emissions-
-and we rank 5th in our rate of suburban sprawl.
A recent report by PennFuture, which
I am making available to the committe members, shows that this state's tax policy, job creation success, environmental health and population growth are all inextricablf linked.
It also shows that our current tax policy does not reflect that fact.
If we do not shift our focus in recognition of this link, Pennsylvania will continue to be impacted only marginally during the nation's good times and impacted mightily during its bad times.
That is NOT the path to greatness.
As we enter a new budget process, I ask this committee to think about some of the new approaches to tax policy contained in this report.
Let's change our tax strategy to reward those who are creating our jobs and improving our environment and to penalize those who are polluting our environment and interfering with our growth.
Some examples of bold new approaches suggested by this report include giving a state credit toward an employers' share of the federal payroll tax, and providing a state sales tax exemption on cars that get high gas mileage. Conversely, we need to institute higher fees for landfill operators, trash importers and those who are releasing toxic pollutants into our air, land and waterways. Make the polluters pay, not the taxpayers.
The old argument was that a fight for tougher environmental laws is a fight against job growth and economic develpment. This report shows that is clearly not the case.
The highly trained people who are driving the new economy are also highly choosy about where they live and work--and they can afford to be. They are looking for a quality environment and a high quality of life, something that Pennsylvania must work to improve
These people are telling us that year after year. When are we going to start to listen.
The link between environmental health and economic health is here in black and white. The old argument about the environment, jobs and the economy are dead. New ideas are needed, new strategies must be implemented.
Simply put, Pennsylvania needs to stop taxing the good things and start taxing the bad things.
i We need to reward thosei who will move us forward and penalize those who are holding us back.
It's aniftovative and bold strategy that will take courage, but without it, the brain drain that the Governor talked about will persist, and Pennsylvania will mark time while everyone else passes us by.
I urge the committee members to take a good look at this report, and see what it has to say about Pennsylvania's possible future.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Vitali,for your testimony.
Representative Maher is the next presenter.
I don't see him. Representative Grucela is here and so we welcome him to the microphone for purposes of making his presentation. Good morning.
REPRESENTATIVE GRUCELA: Good morning,
Chairman Barley, Chairman Evans, members of the Appropriations
Committee. I thank you for this opportunity this morning to submit testimony before your committee.
Basically, I would like to talk about two areas that I believe the budget does not addresss, perhaps, adequately. And it is probably going to sound repetitive, especially from me, but when I used to teach school I used to tell my students that repetition is the key to learning. The two areas I would like to talk about are the property tax and prescription drugs. Directly linked I believe to property tax reform in Pennsylvania, is something I really think it is high time we need to do, is to look at the way we are going to finance public education in this commonwealth. But I believe
Farmland Preservation is a key to that. And I would submit a bill and have submitted a bill in the past to float a bond issue in the State of Pennsylvania by a referendum from the people similar to what was done in the 1980s where we would have a $200 million bond that if the people would approve it by referendum as they did in the 1980s, then we would be able to preserve and continue to preserve more farmland in the State of Pennsylvania.
I know recent reports show that we are number one, and I think we should be proud of that, we are the number one state in farmland preservation.
But I don't think that means that we should stop.
I don't believe the Baltimore Ravens will not try to
seek another Super Bowl just because they won. So I
think that we should be proud that we are number one and that we should continue to try to be number one. I think also linked to that, and I know
the great State of Pennsylvania is very diverse, and
I have talked to other members where development is
not a problem, but it is a problem in my district and
in my school district in particular. I think we need
to enact some sort of educational impact fee to help
school districts have an added source of revenue.
I know there are areas in Pennsylvania that would seek
growth and I told those members I respect their position.
I only tell them that when that growth comes, as I have
seen in my own school district, every new home is a
loss to the school district.
So 1 believe we ought to have some sort
of educational impact fee along those lines.
The second area, Mr. Chairman, would
be in the area of prescription drugs. I know we have
taken some measures most recently to try to enhance. the
prescription drug program in the State of Pennsylvania.
However, I believe we can do better. I live in a very
small town, Martins Creek, Pennsylvania, which is probably
typical of the small rural towns in the State of Pennsyl
vania. In that town, many of my seniors, there is a
high percentage of senior citizens in Martins Creek,
and not only that municipality of my district, but whether I am in gangor, Roseto, Portland, Tatamy, Stuckertown, Palmer, the townships, the senior citizens tell me that $500 deductible needs to be done away. And I believe we should completely eliminate the deductible. Whether it be $500 or whether it be $40 a month, which is $480.
Now even though $20 means a lot to a senior citizen, I know what it meant to my mother. My mother would have shot me if I would have said to her you're only going to have a $20 savings. Because $20 was a lot to my mother when she was alive as a senior citizen.
So, I would respectfully submit that we should raise those income elegibility for the prescription drug program and make Pennsylvania, again, we have one of the better prescription drug programs, I understand, in the United States. Well, let's make that number one like we did with farmland preservation.
And I would also believe that we should require the best Medicaid price when we are looking at the cost or prescription drugs. These are two areas,
I believe, Mr. Chairman, that I think seriously need to be addressed by the General Assembly in this session.
I thank you very much for your time this morning.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you for your comments as well. We now recognize Representative John
Maher from Allegheny County. Welcome and good morning.
REPRESENTATIVE MAHER: Good morning.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am pleased to be with you again today.
The budget as basically presented by the Governor contains an awful lot of good news. There are some points of view though that I wish to offer that will focus on the contrast. With respect to revenues,
I think it is quite clear that the tragedy of a loss of a loved one should not be accompanied with bad news that the Pennsylvania tax man is knocking on the door.
We can eliminate death taxes. We can eliminate them in much the same fashion as Uncle Sam does for most families by simply mirroring that exemption. Eliminate the death tax for most Pennsylvania families at a cost which is manageable.
In terms of the expenditure side, new initiatives are always exciting, always a lot of fun, great for headlines. However, perhaps because I am a CPA, I'm a bit of a fiscal conservative and I think we need to insure that we have accomplished our mission with the initiatives that we have already embraced as our duties as a matter of public policy.
And from a big picture perspective I am going to offer just a couple of examples. First, direct care workers. Mental Health/Mental Retardation community, there is some good news in the budget, but
I am not sure it is enough good news. That system is being bent to the point of stress that I am very concerned that it will in fact collapse. We cannot expect that the passion of individuals is going to be enough to outweigh the defactor ceiling of burger flipping wages that exist today. And the progress that we see in the budget I endorse. I would like to see that expanded.
Public transit—it is not surprising that the PURTA tax is decreasing. Companies with deregulation-- we all knew that would happen. But what we haven't done yet is found a way to assist our public transportation agencies address the riddle that we presented them.
We are expecting them to continue to accomplish more but to do so with less.
With clean water, when water drains it doesn't respect municipal boundaries. And our solutions to improving our water cannot expect to be handled on a municipal level. The expansion—the state has done a lot of good work in promoting regional solutions and
I think we need to continue that.
On a smaller scale, I would like to highlight a couple of specific cases. The Children's Institute of Pittsburgh is an organization which has for many years accomplished much good work for children who need various sorts of rehabilitation. And the legislature,
I am proud to say, went a long way last year in helping them catch up with the inflation. And we got about two-thirds of the way there and I would like to see us complete that journey this year.
With the Pittsburgh and Philadelphia
Film Offices, these organizations have a dramatic return on investment in terms of economic development. Over the yeans they have relied upon ad hoc funding where a little bit from this pot or a little bit from that pot, but it is not reliable. I would encourage us to consider us establishing a non-preferred appropriation for the Pittsburgh and Philadelphia Film Offices recognizing that their benefit is very much a regional benefit in both ends of our state.
Switching gears for a moment, I think are opportunities where we can use our existing funding better by matching its use better with the incentives that we intend to provide. The classic case of this in my mind, you have heard me speak of before, is special education. Currently our funding stream discourages districts who do a great job, punishes them in fact, and rewards those that do a terrible job. And that it is exactly the opposite the way it ought to be, and
I think with the same amount of funding, but by addressing our distributionformula, w e can accomplish a lot of good work and change the overall attitude toward special education.
Looking beyond our current revenues, our current expenditures, I also observe when the going gets tough, and I embrace this point of view, is where
is the money coming from? We can't just keep writing checks. I am very conservative. However, I also recognize
that within the budget that is drafted there are many
fund balances that are expected to be maintained. And
some of those are increasing levels. My suggestion is either let's trim those fund balances back and make
those funds available for programs that need further
funding or let's send the money back home to the folks
that sent it in.
In addition, the capital budget, one
line,our phone book of a budget that has about three quarters of a billion dollars of expenditure. I'd like
to see us make sure that we have some pretty clear specificity
about what we are expecting there.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee,
I thank you for your time. I wish you good luck with
your efforts. I have been very proud to have been associated as a member of this body with the very business-like approach that you have led in each year that I've been here. So that Pennsylvaniia can be proud to have a budget which is accomplished early and the value of an early budget is that it improves the opportunity for our departments to actually know what their mission is in the year ahead and accomplish that mission. And
I salute you for your good work over the years and look forward to working with you in this year. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you, Representative
Maher.
I now recognize Representative Maitland for purposes of making his presentation to the committee.
Welcome and good morning.
REPRESENTATIVE MAITLAND: Good morning,
Mr. Chairman, committee members, ladies and gentlemen.
Thank you for giving me a few minutes to address the committee on some priorities that I would like to see this committee address in the upcoming state fiscal year budget.
First, I noticed with some distress that the Governor had totally eliminated funding for the
Tourette's Syndrome Association of Pennsylvania. There was a $100,000 appropriation last year and PATSA is headquartered in Gettysburg, and some of the key staff people are constituents of mine. They have been doing outstanding work matching the public dollars with private dollars and resources in the State Department of Health.
So I would like not only to see this committee restore that $100,000 appropriation, but also increase it to
$200,000 if that would be possible.
When you have the Department of Health before you, I would like you to address with them the possibility of making the State Department of Health the universal supplier of vaccines, in this Commonwealth to anyone that distributes vaccines; state health centers, physicians' offices, private businesses, long term care facilities. I think that we should use the bulk purchasing power of the Commonwealth to get the best deal for preventative medications like vaccines for the citizens of the Commonwealth.
And that is something if left to itself, the private sector would not do.
When it comes to allocating funds from the Tobacco Settlement, I do not want to see Tobacco
Settlement dollars go into advertising; TV, radio , billboards. We don't need that. We need community health dollars. That is where the emphasis should be there.
While we are on health, again, when you have the Department of Public Welfare before you, let's talk about Medicaid a little bit. Dental care is unavailable for the Medicaid clientele. The reason for that is that reimbursements are too low and the paperwork requirements are too high. If you get one dentist in my community that agrees to accept a Medicaid patient, they accept them all. And that is a losing proposition for the dentist and that needs to be addressed.
The Governor recently proposed a $100 million appropriation to the Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, 80 million of which is to go to improvements to the State Museum. I am the caucus representative to that board, and I can tell you from experience that the State Museum needs a major capital investment of that nature. There is no insulation in the walls. The humidty and temperature controls are poor, and when you are preserving the heritage of Pennsylvania through artifacts, those requirements are necessary to do the job adequately. So, I am not going to speak to whether $80 million is appropriate or not, but I can tell you that a major capital infusion into the
State Museum is needed.
For rural Pennsylvania I would like to see an elimination of the state sales tax; actually an extension of the agricultural exemption of the state sales tax to equines; horses, ponies, mules, donkeys, their equipment, their feed and their services. A couple of years ago we extended that exemption to commercial race horse farms. I would like to see that exemption extended further to cover equines intoto.
Last year I was championing the increase in the state SSI supplement to personal care homes.
In this fiscal year budget the Governor has proposed a two dollar a day increase in that state supplement.
Last year we were working toward a $15 a day increase.
So I would like to see this committee, at the very least, maintain the two dollars a day that the Governor has proposed, and if possible, increase that. Because personal care homes that take SSI clientele lose money to inflation on those clients every day. If we don't increase their reimbursement to the point where they can stay in business, then where are those clients going to go? They are either going to go into more expensive nursing homes or they are going to go out in a community where they are not properly cared for.
Lastly, finally, I know this committee, when someone sits here and proposes a lot a new spending, would like obviously some ideas on where spending can be cut. And one of the things in the Governor's proposed budget was $48 million in early childhood education initiatives. And one aspect of that that I feel is un- necessary and wasteful is putting computers in classrooms for pre-kindergarten through third grade kids. These kids need to be learning how to read, not playing with a computer. I have a four-year old and a three-year old at home. They play with my computer and I can tell you that with what they can do with it, it would be a major waste of the taxpayers' money to put a lot of money into computers for these classrooms. They can point, click and color pictures, but I think a good old sheet of paper and a box of crayons can do that just as well.
With that, ladies and gentlemen, and
Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the time you have allotted me. I look forward to developing these proposals with you further as the process goes forward. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Maitland. We appreciate your comments.
I now recognize Representative Samuelson for purposes of making his presentation to the committee.
REPRESENTATIVE SAMUELSON: Thank you,
Mr. Chairman. I am here today to state my enthusiastic support for the $10 million Brain Gain initiative contained in this proposed budget. We are losing many Pennsylvania graduates to other states--and turning that Brain Drain into a Brain Gain is perhaps the biggest challenge facing the Commonwealth. To me, fighting that brain drain through this budget initiative can only work in tandem with our continuing focus on education and economic development initiatives.
Let me start with the numbers. The 2000
Census figures came out in December. And while Pennsylvania has grown every 10 years since the Census began in 1790, you know and I know that in recent decades that growth has been miniscule--0.5 percent in 1980 and less than a quarter of a percent in 1990.
The new Census data includes both good news and bad news for Pennsylvania.
The good news is that for the first time in 30 years, we had significant growth in Pennsylvania—about
400,000 new residents for a growth rate of 3.4 percent
The bad news is that with the United
States as a whole growing by 13.2 percent, our growth rate of 3.4 percent ranked 48th among the states. All of our neighbors except West Virginia grew at higher rates than Pennsylvania.
I think the Brain Drain initiative in this budget is right on target because we have all seen statistics about the number of Pennsylvania graduates who are educated here and then move on to seek jobs and economic opportunities elsewhere. I can see this first hand among my classmates at Liberty High School in Bethlehem. A couple of years ago we had our 20th class reunion, and as many classes do, we ask people to send information about their lives.
Well, 127 classmates took time to respond and of those who did, 41 were writing from out-of-state addresses.
That is one in three--a third of my high school class.
As I read through this reunion book that we put together, there are many success stories that are happening here in Pennsylvania, but many others who have moved away. I do realize that some people move away for love or for the U.S. Army or for both.
But I can also read about classmates who found job opporunities in Tennessee with Philips
Magnavox, in California with Oracle, on Wall Street, in Maryland with a firm named Millenium Inorganic Chemicals and in New York City in the field of publishing. One classmate started his own business in South Carolina.
Another classmate drew a map and this illustration unintentionally drives home the point about the Brain Drain. On the map you can see how he got his bachelor's degree at Penn State University, his master's at Lehigh University, and his first job here in Pennsylvania in Allentown with AT&T. But then he moved on to other opportunities; to Texas with SEMATECH, then down to Florida back with AT&T and then over to
Texas again with Advanced Micro Devices.
As I was rereading this class reunion
book, my nine-year old daughter asked me what I was
doing and I explained to her about the brain drain and aboutour efforts to keep graduates here in Pennsylvania.
She responded, well, you can't make them stay and she's
right. We have to create opportunities here in Pennsylvania
to make our citizens want to say.
This budget has a strong focus on basic
education and reading programs. That's wise because
an educated workforce is perhaps our best economic development
tool as we seek to attract and retain companies. I
believe we should pass a smaller class size initiative
to take these efforts even further.
The budget also has a strong focus on
economic development with tax cuts including year two
of the 10-year phase out of the Capital Stock and Franchise
Tax, an increase in the job creation tax credit program,
and continued support for Small Business Development
Centers.
The New Brain Gain initiative will help
to energize and focus our efforts to keep our graduates
here in Pennsylvania. This includes grants for local
and regional Brain Gain initiatives. One model I think of in this area is a Youth Entrepreneurship Day I attended at Lehigh University where Lehigh Valley High School students were developing their entrepreneurial skills and also interacting with Lehigh Valley business leaders.
Also included in the Brain Gain initiative
is a plan to offer 5,000 internships linking Pennsylvania students with Pennsylvania companies. This on-the-job experience will help students to see the opportunities that are available here in Pennsylvania and will lead many of these students to stay here after graduation.
In closing, let's continue our efforts in the area of edcuation and economic development, and let's realize that all of these efforts can work together to end the Brain Drain. Our efforts will help Pennsylvania propsper for many years to come. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Samuel son.
We now recognize Representative Bard for purposes of making her presentation. Representative
Bard, welcome to the forum here today.
REPRESENTATIVE BARD: Thank you very much, Chairman Barley, Minority Chairman Evans, Committee
Members.
I appreciate the opportunity to be here.
And I would like to take this opportunity to once again to focus on education subsidies and tax relief for senior citizens. In addition this year, I would like also to spotlight the need for pharmaceutical assistance for older Pennsylvanians.
I am grateful to Governor Ridge for recog nizing the one percent minimum per pupil guarantee incorpor ated into the School Code during the budget process last year. This guarantee reverses the trend that caused
Abington School district, which I represent, to see per pupil subsidies go from $640 per pupil in 1991-92 down to $579 per pupil in 1999-2000 budget. This happened at a time when the General Assembly was giving major, major increases to public education funding for the basic education subsidy. The decline of 61 dollars per student occurred during some of these very generous times, but occurred because of the fact that the student popu lation in the district was growing and thus the need for the per pupil rate.
The proposed budget, having recognized the one percent per pupil guarantee, will take Abington's subsidy back to $597 per pupil. That is $43 per student less than in 1991-92. These figures, by the way, are not corrected for inflation. That is a nominal $43 less. So I am here to request today on behalf of the Montgomery County House Delegation, and you will see a signed memorandum attached at the end of this testimony, I am here to request that the Committee endorse the concept that the basic education subsidy be guaranteed an alternative rate equal to the greater of either (1 the 1991-92 per pupil subsidy multiplied by the current average daily membership of the school district, or
(2 two percent over the 2000-2001 per pupil subsidy.
Now, as you know in the proposed budget, the two percent guarantee is for the total subsidy for the district.
So this would just extend that to a two percent guarantee per student.
We ask for this consideration knowing that this will yield much less, for example, than Abington would have received had it retained the same percentage of the basic education line item subsidy that it got in 1991-92. Had that percentage remained the same,
Abington would need an increase of $2.9 million for its own purposes, for that one district.
These basic education funding gaps are passed along as tax increases to the local taxpayers.
And that leads to my second topic today--the need for property tax relief for older Pennsylvanians.
Whenever I go door-to-door, I meet so many older Pennsylvanians who worry that they are being chased out of their homes by high property taxes and ever escalating school property taxes. The Property
Tax and Rent Rebate Program remains the perfect vehicle to address the situation because it targets relief to where it is most needed.
A review of Property Tax and Rent Rebate applications handled by my district office gives the picture. Imagine a household income level at $4044 with property taxes of $2072. That is 51 percent of total income.
Unfortunately, this example is not atypical.
One quarter of the 99 claimants we processed for 1999 paid 25 percent or more of their total household income in local property taxes. Six paid over 40 percent of their income in local property taxes. The maximum rebate of $500 was received by 56 of the 99 claimants.
There is much talk about the need for property tax relief. It is my contention that for most of us we really don't care whether we pay out of the right or the left-hand pocket. But the claimants that
I described above are truly the ones who need property tax relief. And we can provide that relief by expanding the maximum Property Tax Rebate from the current $500.
That maximum has not been increased since the 1981 tax year. Raising the cap is something that
we could do this year, and it is something that would
significantly help many, if not most, of those who are
truly suffering as a result of high property taxes.
Finally, on a related note, I would like
to mention my support for the Governor's proposal to
expand the budget for home care services. There is
a long waiting list for this care and supplying home
care is much more cost effective than nursing home care.
Additionally, I would like to voice support for pharmaceutical
assistance under House Bill 1.
So thank you very much for allowing me
to make this presentation today. These issues affect i all of us indirectly, but these are issues that disproportion-.
ately affect the oldest and youngest of our citizens.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Bard. We appreciate your comments.
REPRESENTATIVE LAWLESS: Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Yes, Representative
Lawless.
REPRESENTATIVE LAWLESS: Mr. Chairman,
I would just like to question the legitimacy of Representative's
Bard's testimony seeing it says the entire Montgomery
County Delegation has endorsed this. If you look at the last page. I am a member of that and my signature,
although my name appears, my signature is not on there.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you and we will make a note of that. That is in the record.
REPRESENTATIVE BARD: If I may just say,
I changed from the written testimony. I specifically
said Montgomery County House Delegation. I didn't say
entire. So, I just wanted to clarify that. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you for comments.
REPRESENTATIVE LAWLESS: With all due
respect the testimony that was handed out says the entire
Montgomery County Delegation.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: That will be noted
in the permanent record.
We now recognize Representative Yudichak.
REPRESENTATIVE YUDICHAK: Thank you,
Mr. Chairman, and good morning to the members of the
committee. Thank you for giving me the opportunity
to share with you my thoughts on the 2001-2002 Budget.
I would like to briefly touch on three
subjects that are of great concern to the residents
I represent in Nbttheasjtern Pennsylvania.
First, while I believe the budget makes
appropriate investments in areas such as schools, expanded tax cuts for working families, new initiatives in health
research, and continued funding for our public libraries,
it misses the mark on the single most important issue
to Pennsylvania taxpayers—Property Tax Relief.
I was disappointed to discover that last year's recognition of the need for property tax relief,
the $100 Homeowners' Century Tax Rebate, failed to make
the cut this year in the form of any continued or substantial
property tax relief for Pennsylvania homeowners.
The property tax relief--the one tax
in Pennsylvania that my constituents complain about
the most and, while it is a local tax, there is no denying
that Pennsylvania's broken school funding system is
one of the reasons, one of the main reasons, this tax
continues to rise.
Since we are part of the problem, the
governor and General Assembly cannot continue in good
conscience to turn our backs and pretend rising property
taxes are merely a local concern and a local issue.
They are not.
The Commonwealth has a clear, and I believe
a constitutional responsibility to be an equal partner
in funding our public schools and in helping them address
the issue of property tax relief.
Second, receipts from the national tobacco settlement have already begun to fill state coffers and spur the imagination of the legislature with thoughts of new public health initiatives.
Here in the house, Republicans and QiemojCX3t.s have joined together and voted overwhelmingly on two occasions to use some of this funding to finally give our seniors, who still can't get prescription assistance through PACE, to help the need by expanding the PACENET
Program.
We also have voted to help out many Pennsyl- vanian's low-income working adults who don't have prescriptior coverage but face crippling prescription bills.
So far, these efforts to help some of our most vulnerable citizens in the Commonwealth have been rebuffed. This is the year we must change that by bringing the governor and the Senate on board with the House in joining with us to make sure that Pennsylvanians, who need medication to stay healthy, get those drugs and not have to use the money they need for food, heat and other necessities of life to pay for those prescription drug costs.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, Pennsylvania needs to turn more attention and resources to a program I believe can help Pennsylvania's more than 2500 municipalities, provide first rate municipal services at a lower cost to taxpayers. Something that I am sure you agree.
Across Pennsylvania, municipalities are trying to save their taxpayers money by combining departments and services. Generally, the state has been supportive of this effort—at least vocally. Financially, their support, the Commonwealth's support of this program, has been much less impressive.
The previous two budgets have appropriated
$900,000 for Pennsylvania's Shared Municipal Services program.
This is a pittance compared to what the state could be and should be doing.
This year, I will be introducing legislation to substantially expand the program. My legislation would provide an annual appropriation of up to $10 million for this program, which would allow hundreds of municipalities across Pennsylvania to undertake much bigger projects involving shared equipment, services and administrative functions.
The program would even help fund shared services among our volunteer fire services and ambulance companies.
While these kinds of shared efforts save taxpayer dollars in the long run and make local government efficient, the high start-up costs can engender public opposition and make local leaders skiddish about embarking on these efforts.
By helping local governments meet these
start-up costs, Pennsylvania could make the transition much easier and allow many more Pennsylvania residents
to receive improved local services while saving local
tax dollars.
I sincerely hope this concept finds support during the upcoming budget negotiations.
And again, I would like to thank you
for your time and attention of the members and Chairman
Evans and Chairman Barley. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much
for your presentation. We appreciate your remarks.
I now recognize Representative Mann for purposes of presenting her testimony to the committee.
Good morning and welcome. I am sure you bring greetings
from Lehigh Valley.
REPRESENTATIVE MANN: Absolutely. Good morning, Chairman Barley, Chairman Evans, members of
the committee. I thank you for the opportunity to be before you this morning.
I really look upon the budget process
as our opportunity to fulfill government's obligation
to the people and to ensure equal opportunity is available for every Pennsylvanian.
With that in mind, I would like to talk about three things todary--creating good paying jobs, while growing Pennsylvania's economy; creating a well-trained workforce to fill those jobs; and recognizing the contributions of menaad women who have made our country and our state what it is today.
Reports of a slowing economy have really polarized much of the nation. And as I see it, we have two choices--we either sit back and ride the economic trends or take a proactive approach and create a new and more business-friendly climate in Pennsylvania.
During a news conference this week, I introduced legislation that would create a single sales factor in Pennsylvania. This is an idea that has bipartisn support and I will offer this as an amendment to the budget.
As a former small business owner, I know that a business must grow to survive. It must seek markets both near and far. In doing so, a business often makes sales outside the state in which it is based; it is referred to, obviously then, as a multi-state business.
The taxation of a multi-state business is more complicated than that of a business located solely within the state, because the income must be apportioned to each state in which it does business.
Historically, income of multi-state businesses has been apportioned on the basis of a three-factor formula—sales, property and payroll. In recent budgets, we've changed the weighting on those factors, so that sales accounts for 60 percent and the remaining 40 percent is equally divided between property and payroll.
This change has benefitted businesses, which are physically located in our state through their investment in property and payroll. But, as long as we continue to apportion part of the multi-state businesses' income based on property and payroll, we penalize Pennsylvania- based businesses with higher tax bills if they expand their business activity and investment in our state.
The solution to growing Pennsylvania's businesses, as well as enticing out-of-state businesses, to headquarter in Pennsylvania is obvious--we must base corporate taxes purely on sales.
As business grows, so doees the economy and we will see more job creation.
The next step is providing an educated
and available workforce. And this means that every child has the opportunity to obtain a quality education, no matter what their socio-economic background or the stability, or lack of stability, of the local tax base.
I am not advocating simply throwing more money at public education, but instead looking at specific issues, such as class size and providing proper resources, including basic things such as textbooks, computers and adequate classroom space.
At the same time, I believe we must hold school administrators, teachers, parents and students accountable for striving to provide and obtain the best education from those available resources.
We need to look at unfunded mandates, like special education funding and how we fund charter schools.
Children will shape the future of Pennsylvania.
It is up to us not only to make economic advances now, but to protect our investment through education.
One final area I would like to mention is veteran's benefits. I plan to amend the budget to correct a wrong.
We've already taken steps to exempt Social
Security benefits and railroad retirement income from counting against income eligibility limits for certain state programs, but we've not taken any action for another group of retirees on limited income.
My legislation would exempt veterans' disability benefits from counting against income eligibility limits for PACE and PACENET, the Property Tax/Rent Rebate
Program and reduced vehicle registration for retired people.
These men and women have honorably served their country and are currently receiving veterans1 disability benefits. They are also one of the populations most in need, and are certainly deserving of these state programs. It is important that veterans1 disability benefits do not exclude anyone from important state programs.
I hope that members of this committee, and certainly all of us in the legislature, will work to fulfill government's obligation to the people to ensure equal opportunity for every Pennsylvanian. Again, thank you members of the committee. Thank you, Chairman.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Mann. We appreciate your comments.
We are now, for those that are following the printed schedule, we are going deviate a bit. Representative
Stairs is unable to be here this morning. He asked to come over later this afternoon. I asked Representative
James to come in this morning, and he has agreed and we will now have testimony from Representative James.
REPRESENTATIVE JAMES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you members of the committee. I appreciate being able to come early.
I am here today to request that the Appropri ations Committee consider the issue of racial profiling and place money in next year's budget so that this problem can be addressed in this Commonwealth.
There is a compelling need to take concrete steps to improve human and race relations. I think last year's election revealed a wide gap between how minorities and whites perceive where this society stands in the struggle for equal justice and fair treatment of all individuals. I believe that one step that can be taken by Pennsylvania's: leaders is addressing the problem or racial profiling.
We don't need to continue talking about this issue without taking some action. And over the last few years, America has learned a lot about the discriminatory practice of police officers stopping individuals for "driving while black or brown." And much of the media's focus has been on New Jersey where official records have documented the existence of that practice for years.
But those documents also reveal that the New Jersey government leaders failed to pay attention to the evidence of racial profiling and the devastating impact it had on the minority communities and the criminal justice system. Now. it has cost the state at least
$13 million in a settled lawsuit.
So many states have enacted significant laws to combat racial profiling. Connecticut, Kansas,
Missouri, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Tennessee and
Washington, in the last two years have all passed legislation that address the problem which requires police officers to police themselves through data collection.
Public hearings have been held throughout
Pennsylvania so that public policy makers can learn more about this problem of racial profiling and how to put an end to this insidious form of discrimination.
Witnesses have come forward to tell tragic stories of being humiliated and subjected to economic losses as a result of racial profiling. Recently, the ACLU and
NAACP issued a report documenting the continued practice of discriminatory law enforcement in Philadelphia.
So now it is time for Pennsylvanians to come together to address this issue. We do not need a lot more hearings to examine the problem. At past hearings, Attorney General Mike Fisher, even said that if he had $600,000 in his budget, he could implement the data collection procedures. I don't believe you need that much, but I think that at least that he would do it if he had it, and I changed my bill. So I did change the bill to accommodate what he is suggesting doing in the six areas throughout the Commonwealth.
So there is no more reason for the delay
in taking action to address this problem. The need for equal treatment under the law is compelling. The
time to rebuild trust in our courts and justice system
is now.
So during this legislative session, when we come back in March, I will be reintroducing those bills dealing with racial profiling.
I now call on the House Appropriations
Committee, Governor Tom Ridge and all my colleagues
in the General Assembly to join me in this effort to
fight discrimination. I sincerely believe that it is
in the best interest of all Pennsylvanians for us to come together and address how we can end racial profiling.
Another way is to increase the funding
to the State Supreme Court for its effort to examine discrimination through its Committee on Racial and Gender
Bias in the Justice System. This committee doesn't have adequate funding to create a solution for the problem.
The committee would need at least a million dollars, but often times when these agencies deal or when any kind of agency deals with sensitive subjects such as this one, they never have enough money to accomplish what is needed. So that is why I am requesting that
the committee receive an adequate appropriation. So, whenever institutions deal with fighting racism, they always seem to be just a band-aid approach to a cancerous
issue. And I hope this committee does not continue
this band-aid approach because of inadequate funding
to deal with the problem.
So putting an end to all of these discriminator;r practices will begin to heal the racial rift in this
society. Combating racial profiling can bring us all
closer together as Pennsylvanians. We can, and should, move this state forward with honor and dignity and bring
about more justice in our justice system for thousands
of people who live and work and travel in this state.
There is one other aspect of racial bias
that I would like to mention and it concerns racism
among Pennsylvania's state correctional institutions,
regarding both inmates and officers. There is a significant problem with correction officers and inmates belonging
to hate groups. If this problem is not addressed, there will be further disturbances and uprisings within our
system. And the change you just made about the visiting
system, that needs to be changed. I mean, they are
just starting to cut out visitation. I mean, you are just asking for trouble.
So one suggestion would be to develop a tip-line, if you will, an 800 toll-free number maintained by the inspector or attorney general, to gather information about possible problems of racism or other abuse of authority with the Deartment of Corrections. So I just hope that we would take heed of those comments and submit those remarks for the record.
Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to say it and this is a problem that we need to take head on. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative James.
I now recognize Representative Diven for purposes of making a presentation to the committee as well. Good morning and welcome.
REPRESENTATIVE DIVEN: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen of the Appropria tions Committee for giving me the honor to speak before
you today.
The purpose of my testimony today is
to direct the focus of the committee towards the critical
need here in our Commonwealth for an urban renewal agenda
here in Harrisburg. It is important to note that during
the past eight years our Comnmonwealth has taken great initiatives towards improving the competiveness of Pennsylvania
in today's global market economy.
In my opinion, the primary reason PA
has not seen the return on these investments we have made is because we have not been able to view our state's
economy as the complex organism it is. Instead of viewing
the dynamics of our state's economy as one that under
stands and appreciates the need for balance between
urban and rural concerns, we have viewed each of these
areas in its own vacuum without regards for the interdependence
that both have respectively. It is as clear today as
it was in early America, that urban areas provide economic
opportunities for rural farming interests. While urban
centers gain from the rural farming interests the demand
for goods and services produced in the city. The co-depend
ency is timeless. In order to survive and prosper here
in the Commonwealth, we need to understand and appreciate
this when setting the course our state takes towards
the future.
As an urban legislator, I feel it is
important to note that the problems we are now experiencing
on a statewide level can be reduced by thinking in a more holistic manner when dealing with our state's health.
As a freshman legislator, I hope that members of the
committee will understand that due to the time constraints upon me in my testimony, and also I was told Mr. Barley
would be in attendance with a stop watch and buzzer
in hand for those rookie legislators who dared to exceed
the allotted time for giving testimony, that my efforts
to encapsulate the interdependence of urban and rural
agenda's, my testimony may be oversimplifying the problems
we face. So, understanding this let me start to address
the need to create an urban agenda.
As a life long resident of the City of
Pittsburgh, and more importantly as a former member
of Pittsburgh City Council, I have seen dramatic changes my city has faced in just a relatively short time span
of my life. At one point the City of Pittsburgh served
as home for 75 percent of the population for Allegheny
County. Today the converse is true. Only 25 percent
of Allegheny County's residents live inside the City
of Pittsburgh proper. Additionally, Pittsburgh's once
thriving industrial base has receded, and for the most
part, has been replaced by either service related or
high tech related industries. With improvements in
transportation, and the affordability of automobiles,
once thriving neighborhoods in the city centers have
now been left for dead, allowing them to decay or die
a slow death while once lush green pasture lands have
given way to housing developments and shopping malls. In the span of five years between 1992 and '97, Pennsylvania lost over 545,000 acres of land due to overdevelopment despite our stagnant population growth.
This fact illustrates the need we, as members of the General Assembly, need to provide working tools to urban areas to level the playing field for redevelopment that will in turn prevent suburban sprawl.
We have seen some great success stories in Pittsburgh of which the General Assembly has provided the spark that set the flame for over four billion dollars' worth
of development that Pittsburgh has seen over the past
few years. Initiatives like Brownfield legislation
have allowed us to reclaim our river fronts from dormant
industrial wastelands to now having mixed use sites
that are fast developing into the shinning jewels Pittsburgh
has to offer the world. Other initiatives like Tax
Increment Financing have provided municipalities the
opportunity to renew themselves. I could go on and
list numerous ways in which the General Assembly has
played a role in reinvesting in our cities and thereby
curbing suburban sprawl, but my democratic pride will
not let me give Mr. Barley the satisfaction of using
his buzzer on me.
(Laughter.)
So in closing, let me leave you with a quote from former New Jersey governor, now the head
of the EPA, Christie Todd Whitman, who said "sprawl
eats up our open space. It creates traffic jams that
boggle the mind and pollutes the air. Sprawl can make
one feel downright claustrophobic about our future."
So with that let me just say that I will
be introducing legislation in the very near future to
help cultivate an urban agenda and I hope that members
(of the Appropriations Committee will help and understand
the importance that an urban agenda has not only on
urban centers like Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, but
the rest of the state in keeping and preserving some
of the green spaces that we are fortunate enough to
have in our great Commonwealth.
So thank you for your time and I appreciate
the opportunity to testify in front of you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you, Representative
Diven, and in keeping time you have 12 seconds left.
(Laughter*^
REPRESENTATIVE DIVEN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Now the final presenter
before we take a lunch break is Representative Evans.
He was scheduled to be the final presenter of the day,
but I realize that he resides in Erie, and we actually
gained a little time this morning and I told him maybe if we allow him to come in, maybe he'll have a little
extra time to travel back to Erie and be with his family
this evening. So Representative Evans, we welcome you
and you have the floor.
REPRESENTATIVE EVANS: Thank you very much and good afternoon, Chairman Barley, Chairman Evans and members of the committee. I appreciate the oppor tunity to testify before you here this afternoon.
I am here today to voice my support for the Governor's proposed budget increase for education and for the new investment in keeping Pennsylvania's best and brightest young people right here in the Common wealth.
First, by dedicating nearly half of the
2001-2002 General Fund Budget to education we give our school districts and post secondary schools the tools they need to grow and better meet the changing needs of their students. This level of funding for education reflects the fact that nothing is more important to the future success of the Commonwealth than providing our children with the skills they will need to thrive as young adults, parents and community leaders.
I am especially pleased that all six of the school districts in my legislative district, the Fifth District, will see basic education funding increases of at least two percent and special education funding increases ranging from five percent to more than 12 percent.
In addition to maintaining and improving the quality of our edcuational system, we must also work to keep our young people living and working in
Pennsylvania. The proposed $10 million investment in the Govornor's State Invent The Future Campaign, I believe is a major step in that direction. Erie and Crawford counties have been especially hard hit by the so-called
Brain Drain. Too many of our young people are getting a quality education in Pennsylvania only to take their skills with them to other states in search of a job.
Now that Pennsylvania's job climate has improved substan tially, we need to keep our young people here to provide a qualified, well-trained workforce to our employers.
Our students have the training and education and our employers have the jobs. Now it is time to take a more active role in matching the two.
The Governor's proposal takes a three-pronged approach. By investing in a campaign to market the state's good points to its young people, creating an internship corps to facilitate as many as 5,000 internship opportunities for Pennsylvania students at Pennsylvania companies, and funding regional initiatives to keep young people in Pennsylvania.
Increasing education funding and working to keep young people in the state are strong initiatives that put Pennsylvania children and Pennsylvania families first. I look forward to supporting them both when the House votes on the budget later this year.
Thank you very much and thank you for allowing me to testify before the committee this afternoon.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Well, thank you, Representative
Evans for your testimony. And that does conclude the testimony that we had scheduled prior to our lunch break.
We will take a recess for lunch and we will reconvene with additional testimony at 1:00 p.m. We now stand in recess.
(The hearing was recessed at 12:10 p.m.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: I would like to call the hearing back to order. I ask the members if they would find their places. We have Representative Sather as the first presenter for the afternoon and I see here that he is present. So, we will welcome Representative
Sather and he now has the microphone for purposes of his presentation.
REPRESENTATIVE SATHER: Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and committee members. I am delighted
to be here with you today. As members of the Appropriations
Committee I know you have a busy schedule and I will
get right to the point and be on with the day's activities.
I appreciate very much the opportunity
to be here today and give brief remarks to you on some
of the areas that I think are of concern.
I am pleased with many of the items in
the Governor's proposed budget and the accomplishments
that have been made thus far with the cooperative effort
of the General Assembly and the Administration.
I support the proposed tax reductions
for our taxpayers and the continued commitment to the
business community. We need to continue to show we
are positive in our effort to provide real tax relief
efforts to the people of this Commonwealth.
I think it is noteworthy in some of the
projects, and I want to be more specific. In 1982 several
grant funds were combined as the Human Services Develop ment Fund (HSDF) to be distributed to the counties to meet local social service needs. In 1994, legislation
was passed known as the Human Services Development Fund
Act to statutorily establish the Human Services Develop ment Fund to be administered by counties through the
Department of Public Welfare. This flexible funding source is used
to fill gaps in services that are not covered by traditional
categorical funding under Social Service Programs.
It is the most important, most important, funding source
used to assure the highest level of coordination among
community-based services to promote efficient utilization
of both private and public services.
Most counties, most counties, have experienced
alarming increased demand for basic services provided
through HSDF. Funding for HSDF is vital for programs
from the very young to those who are elderly, and I know
firsthand, how much it has meant and how much of an
asset it has been for my district and I can assure you
that others feel the same way. As an example, funds have been used in my area to assist the Big Brother
Big Sister Program and have been used to assist in provid
ing much needed information to teen parenting programs.
I am pleased to see a two percent COLA
in the present budget. I would ask consideration be
given to increasing that amount, however, to four percent.
I applaud and I support the continued
commitment to Mental Health/Mental Retardation Programs which are vital in providing a quality of life for many of
our citizens and vital also ts> the caregivers who courageous
ly service these very much and very important needs. I also commend the continued support of our seniors and the programs that assist in giving them the opportunity to be a more important part of their community and this great Commonwealth.
The continued commitment to invest in our children with increased funding for quality public education has been a personal priority and I am pleased we continue to make it a priority of this state.
Unfortunately, many of our Commonwealth's public schools lack the financial resources to provide their students with the advanced science curriculum needed for the workplaces and high technology industries of this century.
A solution to this matter is a partnership between public and private institutions of higher education and in partnership with the public schools and school districts.
A "Science In Motion" Program is in place at Juniata College in Pennsylvania, and with the assistance of a state grant last year, the program had been expanded across Pennsylvania to eight additional higher educational institutions. The program, in my mind, will whet the appetite of our middle school and high school students and will encourage even more Pennsylvanians to study science atEenasyJLvania!,js undergraduate and graduate programs.
Keeping in sync with the Governor's Vision for Pennsylvania, I plan to offer an amendment to provide
$500,000 in financial support for a basic education-higher education science partnership and would encourage and would solicit the appreciation and favorable support of members of this body.
And last but not least, a continued commitment to our volunteer fire and emergency services departments is a great concern. From one who has worn the hat of a fire chief, an active member of a volunteer fire company,
I believe the grant program initiated last year was a vital financial tool for these groups. I would urge consideration be given to continuing this program at the same level or at a higher level of funding, if necessary, or possible.
Thank you. Thank you very much for this time to present my testimony and this opportunity to share my comments and concerns with this appropriations committee. Have a good day.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Sather. We appreciate your presentation today.
We now recognize Representative Michlovic for purposes of his presentation. REPRESENTATIVE MICHLOVIC: Good afternoon,
Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee and thank you for affording me the opportunity to present comments on this year's budget appropriation. In general, I am pleased with the overall spending initiatives in
Governor Ridge's proposed $20.7 billion 2001-2002 State
Budget.
The Governor's proposed education spending, including the four percent increase in basic education and particularly the 10 percent increase in funding for special education and a $13 million increase in state support for local libraries is long overdue and appreciated. The special education spending plan guarantees school districts a minimum increase of at least five percent. My school district's special education costs, like most of yours, are directly tied to high residential property taxes. This investment will ease the burden on property taxpayers and on school superintendents who are forced to cut programs, take from basic education subsidies or raise taxes to cover the special education mandates. However, the distribution formula for these funds continues to compound the problems by failing to reimburse those schools with disproportionately large
"special ed" populations while giving other districts more than they need to educate their smaller populations. I am also pleased with the Governor's proposal to spend $48 million for the Early Childhood
Initiative, a plan aimed at developing and expanding programs that help children from poorer economic areas grow, learn and stay healthy.
The Early Childhood Initiative was born out of Western Pennsylvania with a great model in my legislative district in Braddock and another near by in Wilkinsburg. These children coming from some of the most impoverished communities in Western Pennsylvania, after completing the Early Childhood Care Programs, are just as prepared to achieve academic success as their counterparts from wealthier districts. In fact, local school districts confirm that every dollar spent in this program saves hundreds of dollars in future special education and tutorial costs.
I applaud the Governor for the additional
$100 million for the expansion of mental health and mental retardation services to clear waiting lists and the additional $35 million to improve direct care workers' salaries. Unfortunately, the language used in the budget is vague referring to direct care workers "recruitment and retention initiatives." We should specify that it is to be used for salary and benefit improvement for direct care workers and not to be used for anything else. And even though it is a significant start, it is less than a third of what is necessary to get these workers above Federal poverty standards.
I've told what I am happy about. Let me tell you several areas where we need to do better.
First, although the Governor proposes a healthy four percent increase for basic education subsidies, there is not continuing assistance for the empowerment districts like Duquesne in my district, which desparately needs the extra help. Second, the petty increase of $64,000 for the Community Family Support Centers is troubling and contradictory to the family support values espoused by the Administration. I encourage you and the Conference
Committee to correct this deficiency by increasing the funding for this program to at least $4.5 million.
The family support centers in our area have been extremely successful with early childhood intervention and helping parents attain self-sufficiency.
Funding for centers still has not reached 1995 levels.
Another major deficiency in the Governor's funding proposal is the failure to include increases for mass transportation. The declining base of the
Public Utility Realty Tax Act (PURTA) caused by electric deregulation, has resulted in huge revenue losses for mass transportation, municipalities and school districts. When the state enacted electric deregulation, assurances were made in the law that PURTA revenue losses
incurred by these entities would be reconciled. But
there has been no movement by the Ridge administration
nor we in the legislature to address this problem, which
is beginning to take its toll on mass transit and muncipalites
and the like. We've already seen transit fare increases
in Pittsburgh and the worst part, nobody seems to care.
Last but certainly not least is the glaring
omission of the Maglev project. Pittsburgh's project
is one of the two finalists in the running for $950 million
in Federal Transportation funds. We need $3.5 million
to be eligible to draw down seven million in Federal
Transportation funds just to move to the next step.
This oversight puts us at risk of losing the big economic
development lever of manufacturing these systems.
Without state money to leverage the funds
to advance this project, the Federal Government may
be less inclined to invest almost a billion dollars
on a pilot project that can create an ind.us.try that
is estimated in the trillions. I say that because the
federal selection criteria require "nonfederal financial
support, and the project ability to partnership." Removing
state support at a time when Pennsylvania is a finalist
sends the wrong message to the Federal Government and investors. If Pennsyvania's own governor does not realize
Maglev's economic potentials, why would anyone else?
This project is too important to fumble.
Again, I want to thank you for your time
and your attention and appreciate the opportunity to
address you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much
for your testimony.
I now recognize Representative Watson
for purposes of providing some testimony for the committee.
Welcome. Good afternoon.
REPRESENTATIVE WATSON: Good afternoon.
Recognizing you've probably had a long day already, my remarks are brief, short, confined to one topic.
Good afternoon, Chairman Barley and members
of the Appropriations Committee. Thank you for the
opportunity to speak with you today concerning the proposed
2001-2002 Budget and an issue of concern to me, other
legislators and many Pennsylvanians.
As part of the previous budget, the Legislature
and the Administration created and implemented the Volunteer
Fire Comany/Ambulance Service Grant Act for year 2000.
As a new member of the Legislature and a former local
township supervisor, I commend you for this supplemental
financial program that distributed $25 million in small grants to over 2600 volunteer fire and ambulance organizations
throughout the state. In my legislative district in
Bucks County, this program provided a total of $59,400
to six fire companies and 15,368 total dollars to two
ambulance organizations.
It is my understanding that the intent
of this expenditure was to improve and enhance the volunteer
fire and ambulance companies' capabilities to provide
services to residents in their jurisdiction or area.
While the intent was a worthy goal, it is a goal that
a one-year expenditure cannot attain. Several recent
studies of volunteer emergency response organizations in Pennsylvania have identified four problems impacting the survival of these organizations:
1. Funding
2. Recruitment and retention of volunteers
3. Training
4. Local government support.
The institutionalization of the Volunteer
Fire Company/Volunteer Ambulance Service Grant program, with some modifications, would be an integral part of a long-term funding solution, and it would reaffirm the Legislature's commitment to the volunteer emergency response community.
Therefore, I respectfully suggest that as part of the 2001-2001 Budget:
1. The Volunteer Fire Company/Volunteer Ambulance
Service Grant program be made a permanently funded line item in the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency
(PEMA) budget.
2. The amount of the funding be increased to $40 million for the 2001-2002 fiscal year
3. The program be administered by PEMA in consultation with the State Fire Commissioner.
4. PEMA would be responsible for the development of the grant guidelines, procedures, application instrument and public relations promoting the program
5. Funding for this program would come from the Fire Insurance Tax, a two percent tax paid on premiums received from out-of-state fire insurance companies
6. A 10 percent match from the emergency response volunteer organizations would be required so it would be clear that this program is not intended to be a substitute for local government funding and support, and I say that as a former local government official
7. For volunteer fire companies the award would be a minimum of $2500 and a maximum of $15,000
8. For volunteer ambulance services the award would be a minimum of $2500 and a maximum of $10,000 9. Eligible volunteer organizations would apply once annually for funding for projects such as the construction or renovation of the company's facility; the purchase and repair of fixtures and furnisings necessary to that facility; the purchase or repair of equipment; for debt reduction; or the implementation of an organized recruitment program that can be measured for its impact and success.
I trust that I have clearly outlined the need for this additional expenditure, its funding source, and the requirements of the program.
Helping Pennsylvania's volunteer fire and ambulance organizations remain viable, life-saving community resources is a sound and a wise investment.
I urge you to consider this proposal and I would refer you to Representative Karl Boyes' House Bill 5 which codifies much of what I have said and is co-sponsored by a significant number of House Members.
Again, I thank you for the opportunity to bring this matter of concern to your attention. Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you, Representative
Watson.
I now recognize Representative Costa for purposes of his presentation. Good afternoon. REPRESENTATIVE COSTA: Good afternoon,
Chairman. How are you doing today?
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Good.
REPRESENTATIVE COSTA: Chairman Barley,
Chairman Evans, committee, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you today about the upcoming budget, General Fund Budget.
My primary focus today will be on our local municialities' sewage needs and Pittsburg's Maglev project.
Too many muncipalities across the Commonwealth, including those in Allegheny County, must continue to exist with old sewer systems that are in desperate need of repair. Raw sewage is seeping into our streams and rivers and it is compromising the health and safety of our residents. Municipalities statewide are under
EPA mandates to restructure and repair their sewer systems.
And if they fail to meet these mandates, they will face
severe penalties. Allegheny County is facing a bill of about three billion dollars in repairs over the next
15 years. And I am sure other areas across the state are looking at similar costs.
This is a serious problem in our state
that must be addressed in this budget.
To help with this problem, I am reintroducing legislation that would use leftover money from the Century
Rebate Program and return it to counties as a one-time grant program for local water and sewer projects. Despite our best efforts to notify homeowners of this rebate, only 85 percent took advantage of it. The Revenue Department figures show that as of January 31st, there was approximately
$50 million left over of the initial $330 million that was allocated. Considering the rebate money was earmarked for local tax relief, it only makes sense to reallocate these funds to provide grants to local governments for projects that require the use of local revenues.
Keep in mind that my proposal uses no new money and would not require an offset of other budget line items.
Under my proposal, Chairman Barley, municipalities in your county of Lancaster would receive nearly $500,000 to address their sewer needs. Chairman Evans, in Philadelphia, the sewage department would get more than 14.7 million to fix its older sewer systems. My county, Allegheny, would receive approximately $6.2 million of the remaining money. And here is the best part, this money can be used as the local match, enabling municipalities to double their funds with federal grants.
Considering the governor has not earmarked any money for another rebate, I believe we should send leftover money from the previous program back to the taxpayers.
Another glaring omission in the governor's proposal is Maglev. As you heard the speaker prior to me, Representative Michlovic, and most of you are aware of the Pittsburgh Maglev Project, it is one of the two finalists in the nation and then they are in running for $950 million in federal transportation funds.
Maglev is an important conductor for our state, one that would solidfy our position as a leader in new technology.
But without any state money to complement funds we already have and hope to get, the federal government may not be too enthusiastic to invest in Pennsylvania.
This project is too important for the legislature to ignore. I believe we should include funds for the Pittsburgh
Maglev Projects.
And in closing, I hope the committee will consider my requests and work toward improving infrastructure and economic development for all Pennsyl- vanians.
And Chairman Evans, if I have a couple more minutes I would like to wish my wife a very Happy
Valentine's Day and say to my son, Michael, who is home sick from school today with strep throat, Michael, I hope you get well soon. Thank you very much. (Laughter)
ACTING CHAIRMAN DALLY: Representative
Steve Capelli from Williamsport. Representative Capelli, welcome.
REPRESENTATIVE CAPELLI: Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, members of the Appropriations Committee,
I thank you for this opportunity. I would like to quickly recognize some good friends and hard working professionals who are also constituents of mine from the Williamsport area, Lycoming County. Mrs. Carol Gilberti, Mrs. Patricia
Cohick, Susan Smith, Jim Campbell, Frank Borshay (pho netic), Joel Weaver, Bertha Hall, Ann Nickaturn (phonetic) and Mrs. Roseanne Fleshe, who is over here to my left.
These folks are very professional MH/MR care providers, community base care providers back in Lycoming County and are here today in support of one of the issues I would like to testify on, Mr. Chairman.
Community-based mental health and mental retardation services need your help to address the crisis in recruitment and retention of qualified staff. Approximately
70,000 individuals with mental retardation and 230,000 individuals with mental illness are currently being served in the community. Direct care staff are the front-line workers providing care to these persons 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. Additional funding is needed in FY2001-2002 to support program
health, safety and quality issues and to assure that
the General Assembly's commitments to expand community
services are achieved.
Many of you will recall that two studies, one in 1998 and one in 1999 document the chronic underfunding
in the state budget for existing community mental health and mental retardation services and has created the present situation where counties and providers of community
services have insufficient funding to maintain present programs, including direct care staff wages and benefits.
Mr. Chairman, we have 300,000 residents in our state who depend on community based care. Thirty-four to
34,000 direct care workers providing this essential and invaluable service to these very important constit uents. Most of them earn in fact less than $8.00 an hour. Almost a quarter of them, 25 percent earn less
than $7.00 hour. While the same counterparts, who are state employees, at our MH/MR facilities are earning more than $14.50 an hour. This is unacceptable and we need to change it and change it this year.
Governor Ridge has proposed an additional
$70.8 million in his budget proposal for Fiscal Year
2001-2002 regarding MH/MR funding. Our concern is that a large portion of this increase will be directed towards reducing the waiting list, the persons transitioning from state facilities to community based care. I certainly support that and support it wholeheartedly. However, we cannot continue to allow a 42 plus percent turnover rate to occur in our private community based MH/MR service community because of wages that can barely support a family, barely above the poverty threshold. This must change and only we, as legislators, can insure that adequate funding is in place.
The Community MH/MR Coalition for the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is requesting a $100 million additional appropriation this year. That is $30 million in excess of the Governor's budget. I would ask on behalf of the many MH/MR constituents I represent, the dedicated professionals who care for them each day, that we try and achieve that goal or some attainable goal between the Governor's budget proposal and that
$100 million. It is critically important. The legislature has done its studies. It can verify the shortcomings and we must address it and address it beginning this year.
Secondly and very quickly, Mr. Chairman,
I would ask that you seriously examine the Pennsylvania
Department of Aging's funding for additional funding to support the PDA's waiver program. The waiver program that allows citizens, senior citizens 60 years of age and over, to seek community based care as opposed to nursing home care. Currently the income limits are such that many, many are being denied this community based living because their income exceeds $1500 a month.
I would like to see FDA establish a program for this
General Assembly to fund it whereas those who earn up
to 135 percent of the current PDA waiver income limit be qualified for that community based care.
And lastly, Mr. Chairman, I won't address
it specifically but I did attach supplemental information
to my testimony concerning a very important program,
Keeping Women Healthy. This is a program by which we can provide preventative and diagnostic care to many women across our state who are uninsured, whose income limits preclude them from Medicaid accessability and
find themselves locked out of roar^ healtb"eare"3system.
These are services, including pap smears, cervical exams, diagnostic care for breast cancer. And I would hope
that this very successful enterprise, it already has
strong roots in our state, would receive funding that this General Assembly in a bipartisan fashion supported a year ago but did not include in the Governor's budget.
Thank you, sir.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much. I now recognize Representative Mundy for purposes of her making a presentation to the committee.
Good afternoon.
REPRESENTATIVE MUNDY: Good afternoon,
Chairman Barley, Chairman Evans. Happy Valentine's
Day. I am sure there is no way you would rather spend your Valentine's Day than listening to the budget priorities of members of the House. I do appreciate this opportunity to once again reiterate my strong support for my number one budget priority.
The passage of the Ounce of Prevention
Initiative to support voluntary home-visiting programs for at-risk children ages 0 to 5 remains my top budget priority. And this year, the Governor has seen fit to make it one of his.
Pennsylvania has many programs that deal with children who have problems. We pay for juvenile courts .
.Juvenile detention centers
.Alternative education for disruptive students
.Foster care for victims of abuse and neglect
.And remedial classes to help children try to catch up once they've fallen behind in the school
These programs focus on intervening when parents and children fail and they are very costly as we all know.
Past state budgets have largely ignored funding programs that can have a major impact on preventing many of these failures. I am encouraged this year, however, with the inclusion of two line-items in the
Governor's budget which allocate over $11 million in federal funds for home visiting initiatives.
The Governor's budget would direct $7.2 million f or musse-based home visitation programs within the Pennsylvania Commission on Crime and Delinquency.
In addition, $4 million is provided to the Department of Public Welfare for a literacy-based home visiting program. These are two primary components of the bill that Representative Pat Browne and I have introduced called the Owuce of Prevention Initiative and the Governor is to be commended for including them in his budget plan.
The significance of these proposals is that they begin to invest in effective prevention strategies that help children achieve their full potential as adults.
Pevention and education are far less costly than expulsion and incarceration.
There are many such programs operating successfully throughout Pennsylvania—Healthy Families, parents as Teachers, Early Headstart, Family Centers .k A. XS are examples of the kind of preventative strategies for at-risk families that work. But their funding is inconsistent and inadequate. Traditionally they have received little if any state dollars.
The Governor has taken an important step this year by directing federal funds towards providing the assistance these programs need. Nevertheless, a dedicated source of state funding £Q provide for continuity for home visiting programs should be our ultimate goal.
If the economy slows, federal monies may dwindle and be directed to other human service programs.
Moreover, future administrations may have other budget priorities that don't include line items for home visiting. programs.
We must provide an ongoing source of state funding to home visitation programs that help at-risk families. Once again this year, Representative
Pat Browne and I are prime sponsors of the Ounce of
Prevention Act (House Bill 400) of this session. The bill provides for a grant program to support home visiting programs that work. An identical bill has been introduced by Senators Charles Dent and Mike O'Pake.
The Ounce of Prevention is an important investment in our future—one that will bring huge benefits over the long term. Studies show that for every dollar invested in early childhood development, we can save up to $7 over the lifetime of that individual.
By supporting new parents we help children achieve their full potential as adults, and we greatly reduce the potential future costs to society in areas such as special education, health care, domestic abuse and crime.
Our lack of attention to children in their earliest years has resulted in even higher incidents of low birth-weight, child abuse, poor child health and, as children grow, a higher rate of truancy and more children entering the juvenile justice system and eventually our state prisons.
By supporting home visitation programs for at-risk children we can:
.Strengthen families
.Promote child growth and development
.Improve childhood immunization rates and well-child care
.Improve school readiness
.Increase family self-sufficiency
.And reduce child abuse and neglect
Since first introducing the Ounce of
Prevention Initiative last year, I have received numerous calls and letters from child advocacy groups and parents
throughout the Commonwealth in support of the legislation.
The people at the grass-roots understand
that Pennsylvania can no longer ignore the most important
years of a child's life. The Ounce of Prevention can
build on the Governor's budget proposals to accomplish
our goals.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound
of cure. Through education and prevention and giving
more children a healthy and happy start in life, we
can help children achieve their full potential as adults
and save the Commonwealth money.
House Bill 400 builds upon the Governor's
proposals by establishing a $10 million grant program
with a 25 percent match. In a $20 billion budget it's
a small investment but it will earn big dividends. I
urge you to help us make the commitment. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman, for your indulgence.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you, Representative Mundy.
I now recognize Representative Clymer
for purposes of making a presentation to the committee.
Welcome and good aftenoon.
REPRESENTATIVE CLYMER: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman and thank you members of Appropriations for this opportunity to share an issue.
My issue today is education and American
History. One of the concerns shared by many of those who fought in World War II, Korea, and yes, Vietnam is a lack of pages in the history books covering these important events. While public education does an admirable job in teaching about our nation's struggle for independence, about the Civil War and other major military engagements that involved our nation, the educational process seems to fall short when it comes to reporting on World War
II, Korea and Vietnam.
For example, learning and understanding about the major battles of World War II enables a student to not only appreciate the heroics, courage and sacrifices made by American soldiers, but it should also make an important mark that freedom is not free and the right to vote should be one of the most prized possessions of every American citizen. Realizing that many Americans who fought in these wars gave their lives so that democracy would not become an endangered species on plantet earth.
In World War II, in the Asian theaters,
I just mention a few names such as Corregidor, Iwo Jima,
Saipan, Bataan, Battle of Midway, Battle of the Coral
Sea, General Douglas MacArthur, the Battleship USS Miss ouri and the B29 Enola Gay are names and places that should be familiar to every high school student. I wonder.
In the European Theater, the miracle at Dunkirk, Salerno, Battle of the Bulge, the Normandy
Invasion should be names of significance to our students here in not only Pennsylvania, but in the United States.
But I wonder if they would know anything about these things I just mentioned. And generals such as Eisenhower,
Bradley, Patton and Marshall should shine as the true heroes of the 20 Century for our younger generations.
When we can remember the sacrifices of our fellow Americans, we take a giant step in perpetuating the legacy of America's strengths as a nation. That is to fight the oppressor, to remove the bond of slavery, to prevent catastrophic situations such as the Holocaust that occurred in Nazi Germany from ever occurring again.
When we can teach each succeeding genera tion to respect the flag and appreciate the unique place our country has had in being a world leader, we bring together our citizens so that we become one nation under
God unified in purpose and in spirit. While heritage diversity can be a source of pride, our allegiance to
America, our citizenship as Americans should be the focus of what each of us is most proud of. Public education is a critical link to our past. While America has had its problems and its faults, its splendid Constitution and Bill of Rights enables corrective changes to be made without having to overthrow the government. We make our governmental changes with ballots not bullets.
Our future generations need to know we
are a blessed nation and that our continued world leadership with its representative government continues to provide hope and promise to millions of people seeking a better
life.
As we begin this new century and connect
to the new opportunities provided by the information
age, we need to remember and hopefully never forget
those who labor unselfishly to lay the solid foundation
of what is referred to as the American Dream. Mr. Chair man and members of the committee, education plays a
critical role in our teaching our youth about the greatness
and the goodness of America.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much,
Representative Clymer.
We now recognize Representative Sturla
for his opportunity to make his five-minute presentation.
I had to remind him remembering from years past.
REPRESENTATIVE STURLA: I think I've
got it down this year, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Okay. Thank you. Welcome.
Good afternoon.
REPRESENTATIVE STURLA: Good afternoon.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity.
Consistent with past years, even though
I won't go as long, I would urge improvements to the budget which would benefit urban communities and neighbor hoods throughout the state.
The Governor has taken a step in the right direction with significant increases in this budget with regard to education. I would encourage the legislature to support him in this venture and perhaps nudge him a step further by looking seriously at proposals to cut school property taxes and increased funding for education.
Some school districts in many of the small urban areas and other older suburban areas, as well as areas like Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, with shrinking property tax bases and dwindling average .household incomes are, in many cases, near their breaking point.
For us the education funding portion of this budget is welcome relief. However, we need to know that these types of funding changes will be permanent and not just one time allocations. Structural changes to funding education formulas should accompany
this budget in order to assure stability and not just
emergency relief.
As an example, I would point out that
even with the 25 percent increase in special education
funding to my school district that is slated to be received
this year, we will still receive only about half the
reimbursement of many other school districts when calcuated
as a percentage of actual costs. In other words, we need these types of increases this year and next year
and the year after that and the year after that--in
order to achieve funding equity.
As an economic development tool related
to education, I would propose that we also earmark some
of the state budget dollars to promote higher education
as an "industry" in Pennsylvania. We have a wealth
of nationally recognized universities, both private
and public in the State of Pennsylvania. This "industry"
provides high paying jobs and an educated workforce
and imports millions of dollars from worldwide locations
into the Pennsylvania economy. Even if upon graduation,
an out-of-state student decides not to stay in Pennsylvania,
we at worst had a tourist that spent about $100,000
in the state.
This year's budget proposal, again, includes hundreds of millions of dollars for a state police force and dollars to service bond issues for volunteer fire departments. While I support these expenditures that are funded by all taxpayers, they largely provide services to only those areas without locally funded police and fire departments. I would urge that we begin to allocate some funding to support these locally funded departments as a matter of equity.
Finally, I would request that approximately five million dollars be earmarked for a home ownership mortgage insurance guarantee program with the Pennsylvania
Housing Finance Agency. By allowing PHFA in cooperation with private mortgage insurance providers to underwrite the risk of the last five percent of loan-to-value ratio of a mortgage, collateralized with the five million dollars, you allow banks to place these "in house" mortgages on the secondary market and, in turn, free up hundreds of millions of dollars in private banking dollars for reinvestment in Pennsylvania communities.
I could have listed another dozen or so issues that will help urban areas in the State of
Pennsylvania, but I think this gives you a quick overview of some of the types of issues that I would hope we could provide in this budget to help struggling communities in our state through thoughtful appropriations in the budget.
I thank you for your consideration.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you very much.
Appreciate your presentation.
We now will recognize Representative
Lewis for purposes of him making his presentation to the committee. Welcome and good afternoon.
REPRESENTATIVE LEWIS: Thank you, Mr.
Chairman, Minority Chairman Evans, Appropriations Committee members and guests. Thank you for the opportunity to address your committee today.
As many of you know, I unseated a long-term incumbent, Joseph Battisto, a good and honorable gentleman, to become the new representative from Monroe County.
One of the main issues in the Poconos and in my campaign for state representative was the school funding formula and school property taxes. Our present school funding system is unfair, inequitable and punishes homeowners on fixed incomes, especially citizens with moderate incomes. Going door to door in my County, I profoundly realized that the American dream of homeownership was becoming a version of the Pocono nightmare.
My legislative's district's school taxes have soared through the roof. Over the past few years, there have been many years when the Commonwealth has paid less than 20 percent of our school's annual operating budget. East Stroudsburg and Pocono Mountain School
Districts have seen more than 11 percent annualized school tax increases over the past 11 years. Stroudsburg has seen over nine percent annualized school tax increases.
There are a number of factors to consider.
First, is the dramatic growth, tremendous growth. Over
the past 10 years, East Stroudsburg has grown 74 percent,
Pocono Mountain 67 percent and Stroudsburg has grown
37 percent. In total, in these three school districts, we have added 8,417 students, a 62 percent increase.
For perspective, the other "fast growing" school dis
tricts, their average growth was 28 percent for the
same period.
Legislative history shows in 1991-1992, a dramatic change in the school funding formula hurt
Monroe County school districts. We went from the ESBE
formula (Equalized Subsidy for Basic Education) to a new funding formula that actually punishes fast growing
school districts instead of supporting them. Exhibit
2 shows the changes in average Per Pupil State Subsidy.
It is very clear: Our Average Per Pupil State Subsidy
in all three school districts is lower. Lower than
it was 10 years ago. At $788, $907, and $95 for those
three school districts, my three school districts are way below the $2,322 state average dramatically.
What do these figures mean? If our state
subsidy had just kept pace with inflation, we would have
over $6.3 million. Proportionately and in "real" dollars,
the ESBE changes clobbered fast growing schools, especial
ly Monroe County school districts.
As a direct result our school taxes have
skyrocketed.
Tnere are many options to address this
funding formula situation. One gigantic step would be
to return fast growing school districts to their 1991-1992
state subsidy. The 1992 legislation indicated that
schools would be "heldft&rmlaeGS^" against receiving any
less funds than they received in 1991. It is time to
renew our pledge and appropriate funding to accomplish
the same. The statewide cost to fund the same level
is $17.7 million dollars. We can't afford to wait.
The total statewide cost to remember
the 1992 pledge and keep all state subsidies at or above
the 1991-1992 subsidy level is probably greater than
, $177 million. I urge the Appropriations Committee to
eonsider increasing the education appropriation to
remember the 1992 pledge and appropriate sufficient
funding to accomplish this task.
In other business, I believe the present taxation systems for state county and local governments
need to be updated in this modern world. We have too
many nuisance taxes and we are taxing our people way
too much. In our fast growing areas I am concerned
that local taxpayers are subsidizing growth to the great
benefit of the new homeowners. It's time to modernize
and simplify our tax system.
We must also consider keeping spending growth . in line with inflation growth.
My next order of business is the various
funding concerns in my district.
I am looking for $6.5 million for AED
Heart Defibrillators. This bill is placed in memory
of Gregory W. Moyer, a 15 year old high school student
who died on December 2nd during a high school basketball
game. In Gregory's memory, this bill will make available
matching funds for the installation of AED Heart defib
rillators in every school building in the Commonwealth.
Together we can save lives.
I have a number of other grant and other
applications outstanding and I would like to present
them in writing to the committee if that is appropriate.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: That would be fine.
Thank you very much, Representative Lewis. We appreciate your testimony today.
REPRESENTATIVE LEWIS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: I now recognize Representa tive Cohen, Representative Mark Cohen, The Caucus Chairman of the Democratic Caucus.
REPRESENTATIVECOHEN: Chairman Barley, Chair man Evans, Members of the Appropriations Committee I am pleased that you have once again extended the opportunity to members to testify before you.
Governor Ridge said the time has come for Pennsylvania to strategically increase spending to increase Pennsylvania's greatness. I, too, agree with Governor Ridge that the time has come for Pennsylvania to shoot for greatness.
My first five recommenations deal with improving edcuation in Pennsylvania.
First, I would recommend that we have a state system of charter schools, with its own chief executive reporting to the Secretary of Education or to a state board. The innovative initial method of financing charter schools—taking all the money directly from school districts--was a good way to get the charter schools off the ground, but it is a bad way for the long run.
The existing funding system has led to an adversarial relationship between school districts and charter schools whereby each student who goes to a charter school is taking away money from his or her school district. We have nothing like this in higher education. A state-run system of charter schools, with all the money coming directly from the state, would gain the enthusiastic support of both charter schools and public school districts. In addition, it would make clear to all voters that the great innovation of charter schools comes directly from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Second, the growth of all day kindergartern in the Commonwealth has been erratic. Some Pennsylvania students can go to all day kindergarten, some can go to part-day kindergarten, and here and there are some students who have no kindergarten. The Commonwealth should be directly subsidizing all day kindergarten for all Pennsylvania students.
Third, there should be increased funding for special education and education for gifted children.
The costs of educating students requiring extra attention—a broad category which includes the mentally retarded and the physically disabled, as well as gifted students- continue to increase far and beyond our state appropriations.
Fourth, state funding should be increased for immigrant education. While immigrants at any time always seem strange and foreign, today's civic and business
leadership has a significant membership of people who
came to this country many years ago, or whose parents or grandparents came to this country many years ago.
The future of Pennsylvania in no small measure depends on the speed with which immigrants from foreign countries are assimilated, acculturated, and educated in Pennsylvania.
Fifth, there ought to be specific appropriations
for school districts undergoing student growth. Our
current funding system, to some degree, punishes school districts for attracting extra students by keeping funding
constant regardless of the precise number of students
enrolled.
Outside of education, I would recommend
that there be increased state funding for local court
costs, including especially a state subsidized increase
in the amount of pay received by jurors. A per diem payment which merely enables jurors to buy lunch creates
a significant disincentive for people to serve as jurors.
I would further recommend that there be significant funding for local police and paid fire departments. Expanded local policing will reduce crimes
committed, reduce state prison costs, and reduce the need to regularly create more judgeships to deal with the generally increasing crime rate. The volunteer
fire departments are increasingly becoming semi-professional
fire departments as one state benefit after another
is given to support their outstanding efforts. The
time has come for the Commonwealth to recognize paid
fire departments as well.
Finally, I wish to endorse the proposal
of the Pennsylvania Association of Township Commissioners
that the Commonwealth pay for traffic lights at intersections
of a state road and a local road. Localities all across
our state would benefit from this.
Pennsylvania cannot be great unless local
governments, school districts and judicial districts
are able to meet their responsibilities to the people
of Pennsylvania. A network of more competent local
governments and school districts solving problems that
are caused by a lack of financial resources, would
serve to reduce Pennsylvania's brain drain and attract new people here.
When citizens become aware of a problem,
they usually do not target any specific governmental
entity for blame. Instead, they all too often blame
government as a whole or their state as a whole. We
can make Pennsylvania perceived as a better place by
helping solve many local problems that keep many people away.
Finally, I wish to emulate Representative
Paul Costa and use the benefit of our TV cameras to wish my wife, Mona and daughter, Amanda, a Happy Valentine's
Day.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: That was quite thoughtful
of you.
(Laughter.)
Thank you very much and I now recognize
Representative Roebuck for purposes of his making a
presentation.
REPRESENTATIVE ROEBUCK: Chairman Barley,
Chairman Evans, Members of the Committee, good afternoon.
I want to thank you for this opportunity to make this
presentation.
Most people who come to testify before
the Appropriations Committee come to you with problems.
I come to you today with both a problem and a solution.
The problem? A critical shortage of teachers in urban
districts like Philadelphia.
The solution? A credible, viable, well
publicized loan forgiveness program as an incentive
for new college graduates to choose teaching in urban
districts as a career.
Many of you probably read the recent article in the Philadelphia Inquirer about the "precipitous
"drop in teacher applications in the Philadelphia School
District. There are still 100 vacancies in Philadelphia
in February and there may be as many as 800 vacancies
by the fall.
The broader context of this issue is--How
can we encourage college students to select teaching
as a career? How can we present teaching in an urban
school district as an attractive career choice?
I am advocating legislation that would
offer as an incentive to college graduates, who are
in the process of choosing a career, a program of loan
forgiveness that provides if a new graduate commits
to teach in Philadelphia or some other designated dis
trict for a period of five years, his or her PHEAA
loan payments will be suspended during those years.
If the new teacher is successful and completes their
five years of teaching in a designated district, than
his or her PHEAA loans, up to a maximum of $15,000, will
be completely forgiven.
I recognize that suburban school districts
often pay higher salaries than urban school districts
can afford. I realize that the decaying physical plant
of many of Philadelphia's schools can never compete
with the constant building and renovations in suburban districts.
Perhaps we can package this loan forgiveness
initiative with a public awareness campaign, even starting
the "recruitment effort" in high schools, as well as
in teacher training institutions.
Dean Trevor Sewell of Temple's College
of Education has advocated such a loan forgiveness program
for years, and it is now time to implement it. As you
all know, we once had a different version of loan forgive ness, but that program was phased out.
The current critical shortage of teachers
in distressed districts calls for new efforts to address
the problem.
It is difficult to separate out the shortage
of teachers from the inherent problems of our public
schools: the lack of resources, the antiquated buildings,
the lack of support systems which once existed. West
Philadelphia High School is located in my district and
West Philadelphia High School was built in 1911. Just
think of that, 1911. How many of you would allow your
children to be educated in an antique facility like that?
And it is not difficult to see why someone considering a teaching career would not volunteer for such an assignment.
My wife, Cheryl, is a music teacher
at the Meredith School in Philadelphia. Meredith is an integrated Arts School which teaches from kindergarten
through eighth grade.
She has been teaching for 18 years; four
years at Meredith and years before that at Nebinger
School.
Cheryl is a graduate of Olney High School
and Temple Unversity's Esther Boyer College of Music.
The superb grounding she received as a student in music
at Olney gave her an excellent start with the harp and
propelled her onto Temple's Music College.
Students today often do not have this
opporunity because of cutbacks. You all know that when
a district has financial problems, art and music programs
are often the first to be eliminated. And art and music
faculty are often most difficult to recruit.
I believe strongly that we need to educate
our young people, not just train them for jobs.
I hope that waiving the indebtedness
will serve as incentive to current college seniors to
consider making teaching a career.
Where is the sense of mission, the sense
of purpose, that many of us experienced as young people?
It is not just about getting a job and getting a healthy
paycheck. We wanted something for our lives and to con tribute Ito society in a positive way. We need to instill a sense of purpose
in our young people. If we start framing careers, particular .y
teaching in an inner city, as a valuable contribution
to society, perhaps, with the added incentive of loan
forgiveness, we can encourage a new wave of social commitment
that will result in a large number of outstanding college
graduates choosing teaching as a career. Opting, as
I would say, for a higher calling.
There are other things that urban districts might do such as signing bonuses and assistance in finding
low-cost mortgages for housing. And we all understand
that these things are perhaps also necessary.
We know that despite overcoming obstacles,
the Philadelphia school district has some of the finest
schools in the Commonwealth.
The 100 Philadelphia classrooms still
devoid of qualified and committed teachers, mid-way
through the school year, is simply unacceptable. We need to pass legislation for loan forgiveness in order
to provide an incentive for college students to give
serious consideration to teaching as a profession, particular!.y
teaching in a challenging district like Philadelphia.
We need to encourage our most promising
young people in high school and college to think about
teaching as a noble career choice. It strikes me that when a student is good in math and science, for example, we say to them why don't you be an engineer, why don't you be a doctor? I believe we should say to them why don't you consider being a teacher?
We need to emulate the efforts of colleges like Holy Family College which sponsors a semester for their students to spend time in urban settings like
Philadelphia.
We need to encourage major teaching institutions to acquaint their students who may know nothing of urban
schools with the potential for success in those schools and the joy, yes the joy of teaching in those schools.
Whether this public relations campaign should involve a coalition of community organizations, religous institutions, elected officials, teacher-unions, academics and other public relation professionals can certainly be decided at a later time.
For now, each of us can remember with gratitude a teacher who "discovered" us, who made us believe in ourselves. Now is the time to encourage
a whole new generation of teachers who will become an
inspiration to our students and provide them with the
incentive of leadership in our society which it so desper
ately needs. I believe a program of loan forgiveness
can be the first step in reaching that goal. I would thank the committee for the opportunity to offer these observations. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you, Representative
Roebuck.
We now have the final presenter of the day is Representative Stairs. Representative Stairs, welcome and you have the microphone.
REPRESENTATIVE STAIRS: Thank you, Chairman
Barley. I am somewhat apprehensive about being the last presenter. One thing tells me that by the time
I speak that all the money is spent. I am just going to be talking on deaf ears. But the other thing tells me maybe this committee is worn out by now and 1 might get them at a weak moment, that they might be able to spend some money on my request. So, you know, I am hoping for the latter. So we will see what happens
I guess as the budget process unfolds.
But I am not going to read verbatim my remarks. I think you have probably heard enough reading for one day and I will not bore you with that. But
I will just take about two minutes to kind of highlight some of the things that I want to leave with you today.
As I look at the Governor's message from last week, certainly, I am encouraged by his education budget. But, you know, I think in education we always want to strive to do better and to set very high standards for not only our Governor but for the legislature.
So I will kind of add a little bit to what he said.
Special ed--very pleased to hear $78 million of new monies. That is very welcome. He is not there yet, but that is a nice starting point.
I would also want to say that we need more than money in special ed. We have to change our funding formula.
The money has to follow the students. I am not here to tell you how we should do that, but a lot of districts, particularly the poor districts, are the ones that really are caught here. But the money in essence has to follow the students.
Vocational Education—Workforce Development has to be a keystone of basic education. Yesterday we passed House Resolution 16 unanimously which will set up a commission to study the business and the education role and linking the two, preparing our young students for the new century that we are now in and certainly adapting business to education. So, I am looking forward to chairing that committee and come up with recommendations that we can present. As the Governor said, not the
Brain Drain but the Brain Gain. So keep our young and brightest in Pennsylvania. We certainly spend a lot of money preparing them for their life's work and we it J want that life's work in Pennsylvania not some other distant state.
School funding--$151 million of new money is good. We can do better, but on that same token, we are going to have to revise our school financing which relies very heavily on the property tax. We will never get away from property tax I guess, but we have to use innovative ways to address that. I know the
Finance Committee is going to work with the Education
Committee, joint hearings. And we have to not only talk about this, but we have to work on some system,
I know it is tough, and when you propose this, there is always we can't do this or we can't do that. But we have to really sit down and get serious about this.
Even though we like to think Act 50 a couple years ago was going to resolve the problem, unfortunately, we have to do better than that.
As we look at school finance, I would be remiss if I didn't talk about the charter schools.
In a matter of a couple of years when we came up with the idea of charter schools and passed it, little did we envision the cyber schools. This issue must be addressed.
I don't think we can be naive and say it is going to go away. It certainly has a place to play in the future and a very important place. But when we passed the initial legislation, I for one, and I am sure my colleagues did not envision a cyber school concept that is happening in Pennsylvania.
And also we passed charter schools with two ideas. One to save money, and two, to bring new ideas and refreshing wind to education. Unfortunately, some districts are being hit financially and it is the poorer districts. Wilkinsburg for one and there is others. Up in Wilkinsburg which we heard in one of our committee hearings for one.
School readiness--well, here is an area that we have come up very short on. We have to do a couple things. One would be headstart assistance.
Two, might be grants for districts with high risk students.
Or three, I would propose to the Appropriations Committee to come up with new ways of assisting young kids to be ready for school. I am not telling you how, but we have to have our young people being ready for school and guarantees early success in education. So I am giving the Appropriations Committee a challenge and
I am certainly here to work with you on this challenge.
My last remarks--Higher Education. We had the Krebs Commission or the Druce Commission last year and they were looking at the financing and accountability.
Representative Krebs is the Subcommittee Chairman of Higher Education. He is going to be holding hearings
to kind of bring some of those recommendations into
fruition. And whether we come up with an accountability mechanism, a master plan, which I think we must do.
Working with the State Board of [Education i having a master plan, but we have to work to make our schools more
accountable, but not micro-managed. We don't want to
get into the daily operations. But certainly with
the amount of money we do spend, we certainly should
have some accountability from Higher Education.
And finally, Community Colleges--I speak
of my community college and also Cambria and maybe a
couple of other community colleges—and the variable
state share of ceiling. It does put a burden on these
schools and I say this quite proudly, we are getting
a quality education at the cost of $45 a credit. Now,
you are thinking what is he talking about $45 a credit,
yes, our community college does provide this and certainly
enables our young people and older people to go to a
community college and then transfer later on to another
higher institution. But this has been a restriction
on our community college and also a couple of other
community colleges. So, I would hope that we could
look at that and make the education proposals of the
Governor even better. And I look forward to working J. WW with the Appropriations Committee to make that a reality.
Thank you, Chairman Barley.
CHAIRMAN BARLEY: Thank you, Representative
Stairs. As I indicated, that concludes those who have asked for an opportunity to make formal presentations.
We do have written remarks from Representative Jewell
Williams. That will be presented for the record.
Again, that concludes the hearing for today.
We will reconvene for a hearing tomorrow morning here in the same location in the Majority Caucus Room at 9:30 a.m. and we will have the Public Utility Commission before us at that time.
The hearing stands adjourned for today.
(Whereupon at 2:55 p.m. the hearing
was concluded.)
(Prepared testimony of Representative Jane
Clare Orie was as follows:)
"Chairman Barley and Fellow Members of the House Appropriations Committee:
"On behalf of the Pennsylvania Coalition
Against Domestic Violence (PCADV), I would like to share with you some of the tremendous successes which have been accomplished on behalf of victims of domestic violence in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania over the past two years and request increased funding to assure these successes continue into the future.
"In December of 1998, Governor Ridge
signed the 'Domestic Violence Health Care Response Act1
into law, making Pennsylvania the first state in the nation to establish universal screening and domestic
violence medical advocacy projects in selected hospitals.
In effect for only its first full year, the bill has
increased the number of victims identified and served
in hospitals by almost 200 percent and it has increased
the numbers of health care professionals trained in
identifying and treating victims by nearly 500 percent.
"This legislation recently gave Pennsylvania
the only "A" grade in Domestic Violence Response as
rated by the Family Violence Prevention Fund (FVPF).
The FVP released the first ever, State-by-State Report
Card on Health Care Laws and Domestic Violence and gave
Pennsylvania 4 points out of five categories giving
the Commonwealth the only "A1 grade in the nation.
Three of those four points came as a direct result of
the "Domestic Violence Health Care Response Act" (Act
115 of 1998). Because of this bill, I recently became
the first Pennsylvania State Legislator to be invited
to speak at the National Conference on Health Care and
Domestic Violence. In addition, Pennsylvania has been
chosen to take the lead on developing national model legislation on domestic violence for the Family Violence
Prevention Fund.
"Mercy Hospital of Pittsburgh had the first screening and advocacy pilot project in Pennsylvania and the data collected from the project shows a 500 percent increase in detection of victims of domestic violence. From the success of this project and the passage of the Health Care Response Act, Pennsylvania became a leader on this issue,a model for the rest of the nation. Recently, I learned that the National Center
for Disease Control is looking to the Commonwealth for data and information on our programs and will be looking
to recommend expansion throughout the United States.
"Upon passage of the act, the response
from hospitals, healthcare providers and victims services organizations was overwhelming, garnering 30 applications
for funding assistance from partnerships between hospitals and domestic violence shelters. Originally, a total appropriation of two million dollars was requested in order to fund 25 sites across the Commonwealth. Only
12 sites were funded and 18 were left without funding
for training and program development. These projects were put on hold.
"I am pleased to announce that Governor
Ridge has placed an additional one million dollars in J--/ J- his recent budget proposal to fund domestic violence screening and medical advocacy. The funding will be used to implement projects in the 18 sites left unfunded last year. I praise Governor Ridge for his tremendous leadership on this issue. He is certainly a tireless advocate for domestic violence victims. In addition,
I would like to thank you, Chairman Barley, for your outstanding support of my efforts and the efforts of the PCADV to stop domestic violence. You have met with advocates and attended the rally last October for Domestic
Violence Awareness. I truly commend you for you concern and interest in this issue.
"I would like to take a moment, however, to request an extra one million dollars be added to the Governor's proposal to be used to expand the program in Allegheny County, Philadelphia County and 12 other counties which have expressed interest in beginning their own projects. This increase would solidify Pennsylvania as the national leader regarding this issue.
"I submit to you the overwhelming success the Commonwealth has achieved in benefiting victims of domestic violence. It is a beginning, but the work is far from over. Please support Governor Ridge's budgetary increase for medical advocacy and consider this request for an additional one million dollars and keep Pennsylvania a national leader on the issue of domestic violence prevention and intervention. With a total addition of two million dollars to the budget for medical advocacy we can take a significant step to comprehensively addressing this problem statewide.
"Thank you for your time and attention."
(Prepared testimony of Representative Timothy J.
Solobay was as follows:)
"As I listened to Governor Tom Ridge outline his budget plans, I was interested in all of the ideas he had for Pennsylvania.
"From funding biotechnology research centers to advancing programs to stem the flow of young, educated people out of the state, the governor's proposed budget is obviously concerned with the future strength of the Commonwealth.
"That's why I was so concerned when I realized what the governor had left out of the budget.
Specifically, there is no funding for a volunteer fire and ambulance company grant program.
"Last year, the Department of Emergency
Management distributed nearly $25 million worth of grants to volunteer fire and ambulance companies across the commonwealth. These much-needed grants were used to purchase equipment, to train volunteers, and to repay loans.
"This year, serveral members have suggested approving $40 million in grants to these volunteer companies, in order to ensure that each company receives the maximum grant offered last year--$15,000 for volunteer fire companies and $10,000 for volunteer ambulance companies.
"These volunteer service companies have long been the backbone of our public safety. With no compensation and very little public funding, these men and women risk their lives to protect ours. In order to purchase new equipment and supplies, these volunteers invest their time and energy into fundraisers of all kinds. That is an enormous time commitment to make, on top of the hours already dedicating to working for the volunteer company.
"By including a grant program in this
year's budget, we can make recruitment and retention
easier for these companies. All too often, I hear volunteer
firefighters explain their dwindling ranks, attributing
the low recruitment rates to the long hours required
by volunteering. These men and women devote hours to
saving lives, and then have to devote more of their
time to fundraising. That doesn't leave volunteers
with much room for a personal or professional life.
It becomes difficult for companies to recruit members, and increasingly difficult for them to retain older members.
"With this in mind, I urge the committee to consider including a similar grant program in the
2001-02 budget.
"Although such a grant program would obviously benefit volunteer fire and ambulance companies, it benefits the communities as a whole, as well. These grants enable companies to purchase updated equipment, and to repair equipment that has been damaged or broken.
"As a volunteer firefighter, I see first hand the importance of and need for the program. It is absolutely necessary for the continued existence and success of our volunteer fire and ambulance companies.
"The facts are simple: these men and women perform professional tasks at a volunteer level.
They serve our communities, and help us when we meet with unfortunate accidents. Without their help, we'd be lost. We owe it to them to include a grant program for them in the 2001-02 budget.
"Additionally, I'd like to address what
I see as a coming problem within the budget. Governor
Ridge has proposed to send $34.8 million in a total package to help counties fund managed care workers for the mentally retarded and the mentally ill. "In the past, the money allocated for these workers has been sent for use at the discretion of local authorities. As such, it has been tied up in administrative costs, and rarely has it gone directly to paying for these health care workers.
"The workers who deal with mentally retarded and mentally ill patients are underpaid, overworked, and under appreciated. While I respect and admire the governor's commitment to send these men and women more funding, his wording concerns me.
I plan to introduce an amendment changing the language of this distribution. My amendment would change the language. Instead of reading that the money
"may be used to fund direct care-worker salaries", it would read that the money "will be used to fund direct care-workers salaries".
"In the end, we all want a better life for Pennsylvanians. Although facing our loss of population, and advancing our medical research throughout the state, there are many smaller, quieter problems to deal with that often go unheard. As legislators, it is our duty to make sure that even these issues are addressed, as was my intention today. Thank you for your time and your consideration."
(Prepared Testimony of Representative Jim Wansacz was as follows:
"I appreciate the opportunity to share with the House Appropriations Committee some of my thoughts about Pennsylvania's 2001-2002 budget. This is my first budget process as a state representative and I look forward to it with great interest.
"While I am pleased with most of Governor
Tom Ridge's proposals in this budget, there are deficiencies that must be addressed. Such deficiencies the House should consider include relief for small businesses, ensuring continued PACE eligibility for senior citizens whose small cost-of-living increase in Social Security bumped them over income limits, help for volunteer firefighters, and residential property tax reform. There also are some important omissions in the governor's overall education proposal.
Because 1 am involved in a family business,
I am aware of the problems many small businesses face day to day and in the long term, une such problem is the fear of losing the business when ownership is transferred as inheritance. I am introducing legislation that would help preserve more family-owned businesses and family farms in this situation. Under my proposal, the first
$700,000 of the value of a farm or closely held business transferred between family members would be exempt from inheritance tax. The approximate cost of this legislation would be $25 million. Surely we can find a way to provide our small, family-owned farms and businesses with security
in knowing their business will continue for generations.
"No one is blind to the plight of our
senior citizens with respect to skyrocketing prescription drug costs. We've discussed it at length but have yet
to resolve a problem whose solution has come past due.
In January, seniors across the nation saw a small increase
in their Social Security checks. In Pennsylvania, those
small increases may have bumped those seniors who rely on PACE and PACENET benefits from the programs. It
is cruel at best to force our seniors to give up one benefit just to receive another. The small increase
in Social Security could cost them hundreds if not thousands of dollars in prescription drug costs. I ask the committee
to find room in this budget to help our seniors who are struggling to afford their life-saving medications.
"Last year, the state made available
$25 million for grants to volunteer fire and ambulance companies across the Commonwealth. These vital grants were used to purchase equipment, train volunteers, and repay loans. Volunteer firefighters risk their lives every day with no compensation and very little public
funding.
"They are often forced to spend more time and efforts on fundraising than fighting fires.
Last year's program was a very good step. Every resident of the Commonwealth is affected by our volunteers. Our residents need this money appropriated for their overall safety. We need to continue it by including a grant program in this year's budget so our volunteer companies can continue recruitment and retention efforts and purchase needed equipment without having to rely so heavily on fundraisers.
"The excessive burden of school property taxes continues to be an issue in almost every area of the state. While homeowners were dealt a slight reprieve through last year's $100 rebate, it didn't even scratch the surface of what is really needed. We all know that. At the very least, we should find room in the budget to continue a rebate program while we look at ways to provide meaningful property tax reform.
I was hoping that last year's step forward on the issue would inspire the governor to expand on the progress.
I'm disappointed it did not.
"With regard to education, I am frustrated that Governor Ridge has once again failed to include any funding for class size reduction. It is widely recognized that students achieve academically when they are taught the basics early in their education. But many young children in our state won't master the important skills of reading and math if we don't provide the individual instruction necessary and set a limit on the number of students we have in each classroom. We also must work to provide students with a secure building in which to learn. School reimbursement rates to school districts for the costs of new buildings or renovating old ones have not changed since 1987. We need to change the rate.
"The state budget is one of the most important pieces of legislation we pass on behalf of taxpayers each year. Let's make sure we address in it the issues our constituents are concerned about.
"Again, thank you for the opportunity for me to present some vital concerns, which I believe we must address in this year's budget."
(Prepared testimony of Representative
Leanna Washington was as follows:)
"Thank you, Chairman Barley and Chairman
Evans, for giving me this opportunity to speak before you and the Appropriations Committee today. When I look at the budget, and the budget process, it seems to me that our greatest aim in this process is to create equality amongst all Pennsylvanians.
"With that fact in mind, I am concerned with the inherent discrimination in funding present in this budget.
"This budget takes money away from programs of major importance to minorities, and puts that same money towards tax cuts for big businesses.
"In my community, and across Philadelphia, low income neighborhoods are expanding. These neighborhoods are overwhelmingly populated with minorities, who run the too everpresent risk of never reaching beyond their own neighborhood. Unfortunately for them, the quality of life in these neighborhoods is declining rapidly, with crime running rampant through the streets. Structurally, the neighborhoods are falling apart, with increasing numbers of collapsing homes. This budget puts no money towards bettering the way of life in these communities.
"Obviously, the easiest way to better the quality of life in our neighborhoods is through a quality education. However, this budget suggests only a four percent increase in funding for basic education.
While I laud the Governor for increasing the amount of money directed towards basic education, a four percent increase is simply not enough to offset the years of neglect that our schools have suffered, and certainly not enough of an increase to curtail the problems of an urban education. •I.VX
"This budget proposes no funds for a class size reduction. When third grade classrooms are filled to overflowing, it becomes impossible for these children to learn.
"There are no funds to increase reimbursements to school districts for the costs of building new schools or repairing old buildings. Anyone who has been to one of our older schools can tell you horror stories of the conditions that our children are forced to learn in. Rodent-infested cafeterias, leaking roofs, drafty classrooms--and those are just problems faced by schools in rural areas. Imagine the kind of disgusting learning environment we guarantee to children in already impoverished urban schools? Is it any wonder that the minority dropout rate grows every year?
"I won't stand before you and argue that the problems facing inner city youth will be solved by better funding their education. I'd be foolish and naive to suggest that that would prove a logical solution.
"But it's a start. It's a start in getting these kids off the streets and giving them a future.
It's a start in giving them the same equality of opportunity that students in the wealthier suburbs receive.
"Governor Ridge keeps discussing the
"Brain Drain" happening now in Pennsylvania--our most talented and brilliant students are leaving the state in search of better jobs.
"I'm far more concerned with the squandered opportunities the state faces every day. For every
child in a city school that drops out of school, for every child who receives a bare-bones education at the hands of an overstressed, overworked, and underpaid
teacher, for every student who progresses from grade
to grade without demonstrating the proper skill requirements necessary, that is an opportunity lost for Pennsylvania.
Imagine, if you will, the future of the Commonwealth
if every student, regardless of skin color or neighborhood,
received the same opportunities?
"With that in mind, I urge this committee to consider the amount allocated in the budget to educational funding, primarily the funding of schools in urban areas.
"Thank you."
(Prepared testimony of Representative
John Pallone was as follows:)
'\.0ne of the most important tasks of any government from local to federal, is to create and maintain a system of transportation. Hisorians have gone so far as to suggest that the source of Rome's power was her intricate system of roads, enabling citizens to move from village to village with ease. .•_ w *•?
"In the 21st Century our transportation concerns have moved beyond simply maintaining our roads.
In Pennsylvania alone, we have a complex network of highways, boats sailing through our rivers and airplanes departing from two of the nation's hub airports.
"What we don't have is a high-speed train system. But both the magentic levitation transit system and the Alle-Kiski communter train are leaps forward in transportation technology that can be implemented in Pennsylvania in the coming years. Strangely, neither of these technologically advanced transportation projects have been slated to receive any money in the governor's proposed budget. Let me repeat, neither the maglev project nor the Alle-Kiski communter train has been slated to receive state funds. In addition, there is no proposed increase in funding for mass transit.
"I'd like to paint a picture of the transit situation in Western Pennsylvania.
"We've been given an opportunity, by the federal government, to be the first state in the nation to implement magnetic levitation technology in transportation. The maglev train could carry commuters at safe speeds of up to 240 miles per hour, and would bring new businesses and prestige to Western Pennsylvania.
Yet this worthy project receives no proposed funding in the governor's budget.
"In tha Alle-Kiski valley, local and state legislators have been working to build the Alle-Kiski communter train, a high-speed train running from New
Kensington to Pittsburgh. The construction of this train would create jobs for the area, and use of the train would make it far easier for people outside Pittsburgh's city limits to work in the city of Pittsburgh. Since
Route 28, a major highway throughout the region, has been scheduled for a ten-year long construction project, the Alle-Kiski communter train is even more important to the Alle-Kiski valley. Yet this project receives no funding in the governor's proposal.
Western Pennsylvania's mass transit system is already advanced beyond that of many other cities.
It's a simple feat to get anywhere in the city of "Pittsburgh and the outlying suburbs. But rising fuel costs and increased ridership have forced PAT transit to raise its fares.
"By increasing the amount of money in the budget for mass transit, Pittsburgh's city transit system would be able to provide the same quality service, without having to raise the fares for the average consumer.
Yet this project received no increase in funding in the governor's proposal. "I urge the committee to consider funding for these issues. Although transportation may not seem like a high priority, especially when health care and education are so much in the forefront of legislation and so, obviously in need of funding, but I assure you an issue of equal importance to a system of government is its transportation system.
"We have a responsibility to the people of Western Pennsylvania and throughout the Commonwealth, to fund these worthy projects."
(Prepared testimony of Representative
Jewell Williams was as follows:
"Thank you, Chairman Barley and Chairman
Evans, for this opportunity to discuss some of the funding priorities I'd like to see included in the new state budget.
"Specifically, I believe more attention needs to be paid to the numerous problems that plague urban Pennsylvania and the minority community.
"Improving public education, providing affordable housing, eradicating violent crime and the scourge of drugs and drug activity, increasing access to quality health care, enhancing public transportation and creating meaningful jobs with family-sustaining wages are but a few of the most pressing issues facing J_ V V
Pennsylvania's urban areas.
"As a Commonwealth, we can and must do a better job of meeting the needs of our struggling communities many of which are located in our urban centers.
"In the area of education, for example,
I was disappointed that the Governor's budget contained no funding for reduced class size.
"Providing grants to schools for class-size red . activities would benefit students who now are being forced to learn in over-crowded classrooms--an environment not conducive to proper learning.
"If we don't invest in our children while they are young, they run a greater chance of developing problems when they're older. Education is part of that investment, and making sure kids have the best possible environment in which to learn is essential to providing a quality education.
"I also am concerned that many worthwhile programs that help residents in need to continue to be left out of the state funding loop.
"The Governor's budget does not provide funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program,
Minority Business Development, the Women, Infants and
Children Nutrdtion Program or Head Start.
"I find it particularly unconsciable that, given the high cost of home heating fuel and the inability of people all across Pennsylvania to pay to heat their homes, the governor still would have Pennsylvania remain one of the few states that do not contribute to the assistance program.
"State funding for LIHEAP should be part of the 2001-02 budget.
"While I am supportive of expanding the personal income tax forgiveness program, as this will help many working families keep a little extra money in their pockets, more can be done.
"All Pennsylvanians, for instance, deserve to be making a living wage.
"Yet, the current minimum wage is forcing many Pennsylvanians to live in poverty. This is wrong.
"Prior to my election, I spent years as a community activist working to help revitalize my north Philadelphia neighborhood. I plan to continue this effort as state representative.
To that end, I want to make sure that the state budget provides the resources necessary to effectively address the specific concerns faced by urban
Pennsylvanians.
"While not everyone has shared in the wealth, Pennsylvania has enjoyed a healthy economy for •I- V \J years, and we have the financial resources to fund the programs and ideas I have just mentioned.
"I hope the committee will give serious weight to these concerns on behalf of the Commonwealth's urban and minority communities.
"Thank you."
(Prepared testimony of Representative W. Curtis
Thomas was as follows:)
"Introduction:
"Good morning Honorable John Barley,
Majority Chairman, and Honorable Dwight Evans, Democratic
Chairman, House Appropriations Committee, and to the members of this esteemed Committee. Thank you for giving my colleagues and me an opportunity to address you on the 2001-2001 proposed State Budget. This represents the third year in which I have addressed the House Appropriations
Committee on the proposed budget.
"I thank you for the opportunity. The people of the 181st Legislative District and Philadelphia
County have benefited greatly from this process. You have provided a unique foundation for participation in the process.
"TESTIMONY:
"I come before you this morning to address three areas of major concern.
"A.Education
"Education (School to Work & School Demon
stration) . The first area is education, the sine qua non in determining whether our children are able to go forward in the 21st Century or remain at a crossroads.
I applaud the Governor for his increases in Basic and
Special Education funding.
"My concern is with the School to Work
Opportunities and School Demonstration Projects line
items of the proposed budget for Education. The School to Work Opportunities line items has been cut by $2,250,000 while the School Demonstration Projects line item has been deleted from funding in the 2001-2002 fiscal year.
Both line items have been cutting edge opportunities for thousands of young people throughout Pennsylvania.
"In Philadelphia County last year, the
School Demonstration Projects line funding was able to help over 500 students increase their academic perform ance, improve attendance and provide hands on exposure to careers in Health Care, Law & Justice, Maritime and
Technology. Also, students were able to make successful tansition from school to work and/or college.
"Over 80 percent of the students who benefited from the School to Work Program are in college. Twenty percent are in successful entry-level positions in their fields of interest. Fudning from this line item allowed the managers of the program to attract and secure 25 new private sector partners to the business of educating young people for the world of work tomorrow.
This same success was mirrored in every other school district that applied for funding under these two line items. Funding must be increased rather than reduced or deleted.
RECOMMENDATION
"Reduce the General Government Operations line items of the Department of Treasury and Banking by two million. Increase the School to Work Opportunities line item by $500,000 and the School Demonstration Projects line item by 1.5 million. This will bring the School
Demonstration Projects line item to more than seven million available for expenditure in the 2001-2002 fiscal year.
"Three hundred and fifty thousand should be earmarked for continuation of successful School to
Work model in Philadelphia. Your support for this recommend ation will be greatly appreciated.
"B. Community & Economic Development
"My second area of concern is Community and Economic Development. Under the Department of Community & Economic Development the proposed budget reduces funding in Housing & Redevelopment Assistance, slashes $4,420 from Emergency Shelter for the Homeless, and removes
$64,660 from Community Revitalization. These line items of the budget represent the cornerstone of hope for rebuilding our communities, especially those that are dying as a result of systemic blight.
"Within my legislative district, over
2,000 public housing units have been removed as a result of demolition. This represents a displacement of thousands of residents and the creation of massive vacant lots, which look like graveyards. The city has undertaken a major neighborhood revitalization campaign.
"A deteriorating tax base and flight has made it difficult, if not impossible, for municipalities like Philadelphia to rebuild neighborhoods without support from State Government. This is the time for increase in state support, not reduction. Neighborhoods destroyed as a result of neglect need State support now more than ever before. Revitalization is a multi-dimensional tool, which encourages job growth, sustained economic viability and communities where people can live and work.
"I am requesting a five million dollar reduction in the Truth In Sentencing Incentive Grant line item of the budget. Thirty million dollars has been proposed for funding this line item. The 2000-2001 appropriation was one million. The 2001-2002 appropriation
represents a 300 percent increase.
"The five million should be set aside
for the Pennsylvania Digital Empowerment Act.
"Again, thank you for your time and support."
I hereby certify that the evidence and proceedings are contained fully and accurately in the notes taken by me during the hearing of the within cause, and that this is a true and correct transcript of the
same.
Dorothy M«|-Mai one, RPR
The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the same by any means unless under the direct control and/or supervision of the certifying reporter. Memorandum e Honorable Matthew J. Ryan, Speaker e Honorable Robert C. Jubelirer, President Pro Tempore ie Honorable John M. Perzel, Majority Leader e Honorable David J. Brightbill, Majority Leader e Honorable John E. Barley, Chairman House, Appropriations Committee e Honorable Richard A. Tilghman, Chairman, Senate Appropriations Committee ie Montgomery County Delegation bruary 14,2001 request that the basic education subsidy be guaranteed at an alternative rate equal the 1991-92 per pupil subsidy multiplied by a school district's current average ip or 2 percent over the 2000-01 per pupil subsidy. It is our desire to see that this tie final budget. our consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
ert Godshall ReJ. Kate Harper jj jlative District ;ene McGill Rep/Roy Cornell islative District 152nd Legislative District JidaJGwtf COUWWL lOdUxuDJ fl ^ (J (AAAASKA r^w fond (L^^n^ n: ft isiness, I believe the present taxation systems for state, county and local governments updated in this modern world. We have too many nuisance taxes and we are taxing way too much. In our fast growing areas I am concerned that local taxpayers are I growth to the great benefit of new homeowners. It's time to modernize and simplify tern. lso consider keeping spending growth in line with inflation growth. y of appropriation requests for your review and consideration: pt of Education $ 17.7 million per capita Supplement. Kindly consider increasing our : growing school district's per pupil state subsidy to their 1991-92 level and make this nge to the school funding formula permanent. pt of Education over $178 million to "hold harmless" all fast growing school districts I compensate for the under-funding since 1991-92. The increases the recent have sed the gap but please consider closing the gap and funding its shortfall since 1991-92. Dt of Education $6.5 million. AED Heart Defibrillators. I respectfully request isideration for a bill due out in the next day or two. This bill is placed in memory of sgory W. Moyer, a 15 year old high student who died on December 2nd during a high ool basketball. A heart defibrillator may have saved his life. In Gregory's memory, i bill will make available matching funds for the installation of AED Heart ibrillators in every school building in the Commonwealth. Together we can save !S. inDot, $700,000. I respectfully request an additional Monroe County supplement to d Interstate 80 improvements to permit the enforcement of traffic laws. In less than > years we have experienced over 30 traffic accidents and six fatalities on one of the est sections of Interstate 80 in the country. We'll need bigger help as we move ward, but $700,000 will help PennDot address the situation promptly and permit the e police to safely enforcement our commonwealtiTspeed limits. Accordingly, I also uest your consideration to fund additional and constant state police patrols on a-state 80. While our region has grown tremendously our state police coverage has not reased fast enough. in Dot, $3 million. We need $3 million dollars for R^k Peltz and PennDot to tiplete the purchase of railroad lines on the path of rail restoration from New York y to Scranton through the Poconos. These monies are vital, necessary and part of the ingement with New Jersey. On behalf of many legislators, I urge your consideration. NR $10 million. With DCNR we need a $10 million dollar appropriation for trail ensions to connect the McDade Trail in the Delaware Water Gap Recreation Area on north end fromth e Park to Grey Towers, home of former Governor Gifford Pinchot 1 on the south end, from the Park to the Appalachian Trail in Delaware Water Gap. ;se trail extensions will connect our state trail system with the Appalachian Trail tem. Our part of the Appalachian Trail is the busiest part from Maine to Georgia. xndingly, the trail extensions will attract even more visitors to Pennsylvania. ED $75,000. With downtown Stroudsburg Borough potentially part of the "new timunity's". program, I urge your consideration in maintaining funding for these ntown projects. Downtown Stroudsburg has come a long way. Please consider ntaining this positive momentum and keeping the downtown Stroudsburg project / funded. This is an at-risk brain drain community due to its proximity to ropolitan New York/New Jersey. ED $2 million. Within the DCED tourism budget, I urge consideration of maintaining prior year funding level. Tourism is the number two business in Pennsylvania and recent investments have provided recognizable returns. The Pocono region is eriencing real tourism growth. Maintaining these funding levels and a concurrent rt to address Pocono traffic congestion will go a long way to maintaining this ortant industry. ED $75,000. Jackson Township desires funding assistance to renovate its township ding. This unique building requires updating and modern conveniences and your sideration of this funding project is appreciated. ED $17.5 million. (Birmelin district) Keystone Performing Arts Center. When this ect becomes viable, please consider funding this project. The fiscal impact of this ect will positively'assist many legislative districts. itinuing assistance in growing greener, land preservation, growing smarter and other ortant environmental initiatives. rate cover I will discuss the funding of various submitted and to be submitted grant s. I respectfully ask that you consider the same in your deliberations. y submitted, tentative A - Monroe Average Per Pupil State Subsidy jrg Average Average Percentage If we just Daily Per Pupil increase/ kept pace Membership State Subsidy decrease w/inflation (2.7%) 4,310 $ 811 4,717 $ 747 -7.9% $ 832.90 5,071 $ 702 -6.0% $ 855.39 5,330 $ 689 -1.9% $ 878.48 5,693 $ 710 3.0% $ 902.20 5,910 $ 665 -6.3% $ 926.56 6,161 $ 660 -0.8% $ 951.58 6,374 $ 694 5.2% $ 977.27 6,629 $ 723 4.2% $ 1,003.65 6,898 $ 757 4.7% $ 1,030.75 7,178 $ 788 4J% $ 1,058.58 icit 2,868 $ (23) -2.8% $ (247.58) $(1,777,171.89) _n Average Average Percentage If we just Daily Per Pupil increase/ kept pace Membership State Subsidy decrease w/inflation (2.7%) 6,783 $ 920 7,293 $ 846 -8.0% $ 944.84 7,857 $ 807 -4.6% $ 970.35 8,318 $ 786 -2.6% $ 996.55 8,749 $ 810 3.1% $ 1,023.46 9,043 $ 770 -4.9% $ 1,051.09 9,336 $ 793 3.0% $ 1,079.47 9,711 $ 826 4.2% $ 1,108.62 10,099 $ 848 2.7% $ 1,138.55 10,436 $ 876 3.3% $ 1,169.29 10,785 $ 907 3;5% $ 1,200.86 icit $ (13) -1.4% $ (280.86) $(3,028,948.75) Average Average Percentage If we just Dairy Per Pupil increase/ keotpace Membership State Subsidy decrease w/inflftion(2.7%) 3,597 $ 1,036 3,752 $ 998 -3.7% $ 1,063.97 3,783 $ 957 -4.1% $ 1,092.70 3,758 $ 959 0.2% $ 1,122.20 3,943 $ 987 2.9% $ 1,152.50 4,097 $ 941 -4.7% $ 1,183.62 4,298 $ 922 -2.0% $ 1.215.58 4,404 $ 939 1.8% $ 1,248.40 4,552 $ 963 2.6% $ 1,282.10 4,760 $ 985 2.3% $ 1,316.72 4,978 $ 995 ±0% $ 1,352.27 icit $ (41) -4.0% $ (316.27) $(1,574,256.10) Loss for all 3 school districts $ (6,380,376.74)1