Nonpartisan legislative analysts say they can vouch for less than 40 percent of the $1.6 billion in labor savings figured into the next biennial budget, and are unable to assess the rest--more than $1 billion--because of unanswered questions or insufficient data, according to a memo submitted late Monday to the General Assembly.
The Office of Fiscal Analysis was careful neither to endorse nor refute the Malloy Administration's savings estimates involving proposed changes to pension and health benefits, longevity pay or undefined policy changes involving health care, technology and other government operations.
But legislative analysts were pressed for answers as the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives debated another omnibus policy bill designed to help implement the biennial budget adopted last month. The bill was passed early Tuesday on an 83 to 63 vote.
And since that plan hinges on a tentative concession deal that the administration insists is worth $700.7 million next fiscal year and $901.2 million in 2012-13, minority Republicans balked Monday at provision in the measure that would effectively pre-approve the deal - even though state employee unions aren't expected to complete their votes on ratification until late June.
"I think it's important to discuss the terms of the agreement," said House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero, R-Norwalk, who requested further data from OFA after an initial fiscal note reported the savings projected by the administration, but offered no further comment on them. "If they (the savings) are not verifiable, if they're not true, if they're not achieved, our budget is out of balance."
"Please note that at this time we are unable to determine or verify the levels that are contained in these estimates in many cases," OFA Director Alan Calandro wrote in a memo to Cafero.
The memo also showed several unanswered questions tied to more than $665 million in projected savings for the next two years involving health and pension benefits and longevity pay for senior state employees.
No actuarial analysis was offered to defend $67 million to be saved by increasing penalties for senior employees who retire earlier than the normal age.
Analysts could not determine how much state government would contribute to provide a new hybrid retirement plan for higher education employees.
In evaluating health care provisions forecasted to save $245.9 million over two years, OFA asked for the reasoning behind several assumptions.
A key part of the plan savings is the introduction of a Health Enhancement Program, in which participants would be required to get recommended preventive services and, for those with chronic conditions including asthma, diabetes, or hypertension, participate in disease management programs. The plan would be optional, but those who don't select it would have to pay an additional $100 a month in premiums and face a $350 deductible.
Milliman, the state's actuarial consulting firm on the health care provisions, projected that the Health Enhancement Program could reduce health care claims by 4 percent in the first year and 10 percent in the second. But OFA said it received no documentation to show how that assumption was reached.
And OFA asked whether the plan changes could in fact increase medical costs, since the Health Enhancement Plan requires people to get preventive services. Similarly, OFA noted, the use of dental services could increase since the plan requires people who receive state dental coverage to get two cleanings per year. But the increased costs from more people getting dental care were not included in the savings estimates, according to OFA.
The administration attributed most of the $245.9 million savings to the additional premiums people who do not participate in the Health Enhancement Plan would pay, according to OFA. But that, too, is based on an assumption that OFA said it did not have the information to evaluate. The administration assumes that half of those eligible would join the Health Enhancement Plan, but didn't explain how that figure was reached.
In addition, OFA asked whether certain changes to the health plan would trigger additional changes--and costs.
The tentative agreement would add a $35 copayment for health plan members who use the emergency room unnecessarily, and require preauthorization for certain services, including some MRIs.
OFA said that could cause the state employee health plan to lose its status as a "grandfathered" plan under the federal health reform law, making it subject to new rules that took effect last year. Those include covering preventive care at no cost to the consumer and eliminating lifetime limits on benefits.
OFA said it is unclear if the projected savings take into account the implications of losing grandfathered status. Plans can lose grandfathered status by significantly raising deductibles or raising copayments by more than $5. The proposed emergency room copayment would be an increase of $35.
Malloy's budget director, Office of Policy and Management Secretary Benjamin Barnes, called the GOP complaints "a delaying tactic" to hold up approval of a new state budget that closed the $3 billion-plus deficit Malloy inherited for the coming fiscal year.
Barnes also said his office has cooperated with legislative analysts and never shied away from the fact that some of the savings targets in the concession deal, though reasonable, are less precise than more traditional concessions, such as a pay freeze or pension benefit restrictions.
Among the less defined savings targets in the deal are: $180 million to be saved through "reduced procurement costs [and] more efficient agency operations; $90 million from utilizing new technologies and reducing use of private technology consultants; and $75 million from ideas to be provided by a labor-management health care cost containment panel.
But OFA also made it clear that it could not provide any assessment of these less defined savings targets, which total $345 million, because "information as to how savings were estimated has not been provided."
The budget policy bill, which the Democrat-controlled House is expected to adopt, was designed to spare legislators from having to adopt the concession package in special session later this summer.
Traditionally, unions vote first on any tentative deal. The legislature, which will adjourn its regular session at midnight Wednesday, could return in special session later this summer if members want to vote on any labor-ratified agreement. But instead the policy bill debated late Monday and approved early Tuesday makes it clear the that if the legislature doesn't call itself into special session within five days after union ratification or by June 30 -- whichever comes first -- "the agreement is deemed approved by the General Assembly."
Rep. Toni Walker, D-New Haven, co-chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, defended the pre-approval option. While the legislature did vote to ratify a 2009 labor concession deal, it routinely allows arbitrated contract awards with its unionized employees to take effect without any vote. "The process of doing this, I believe, has been around for some time," Walker said.
"We're talking about $1.6 billion," Cafero replied. "Why would we not come back?"
"We all take our roles very seriously. We are the budget authority," said Rep. Vincent J. Candelora, R-North Branford. "The Executive Branch is here to administer that policy. I fear we have got it backwards."
State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition spokesman Matt O'Connor said Monday that he couldn't speak to the legislature's pre-ratification proposal. The legislature approved the 2009 union concession deal after bargaining units had ratified it. "We're just beginning the ratification process," O'Connor said.
Staff Writer Jacqueline Rabe contributed to this story.
What needs to be done at the end of the 2011-12 budget year is have an honest analysis of what was budgeted for the taxes raised from the income, sales and corporate taxes so the citizens will see how they have been scammed by malloy and the legislature. The $180 million from the suggestion box is one of the most laughable items in a budget I've ever heard of.
No worries OFA - 45000 state employees can't figure it out either. How do you vote, yeh or ney, on something no one can fully understand or quantify?
Start over - with a focus on savings specific to the biennial budget. Kill the pension and healthcare nonsense. It won't pass.
Want to save jobs? This time include membership in the discussions so they can actually be "part of the solution". This will go down as one of the most poorly handled budgets in CT history.
Its like declaring your team World Series Champions... but with a shortstop and center fielder
Read MoreOur esteemed Legislative Democrats are using an old Jedi mind trick learned from Jedi Master Nancy Pelosi from California. “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy." You just can’t make this stuff up.
No Really - Don't tell me that Malloy and the Union Bobble-heads fudged the numbers. Votenotoconcessions.com
I'd hate for this deal to pass, the savings not be there, and then 4 years from when the no layoff clause expires the budget is worse and we are asked to give even MORE. Problem is there isn't that much more to give.
Management needs to do a straw poll to gauge whether this is going to pass. If its going to fail, people need to swallow their pride and re-negotiate.
Suggestions for next time: Shared sacrifice: Don't put the pension changes all on their Tier II and IIa members, share it
Read MoreDannel's got it all figured out. The Democrats want to go on summer vacation. SO it doesn't matter if the numbers are accurate. They'll pass it, worry about it latter, and blame Bush and the Republicans. You voters put in an all Democrat team folks. So live with it. The only way to change it is to vote the tax and spend Dems out. To bad we don't do recalls in this state.
Can you say fraud? What in the world is going on up at our Capitol these days? The Governor is a bully, the legislators are sheep, the state workers are political pawns, and the taxpayers and businesses are just a mat for the Governor and his sidekicks to walk all over. Who the heck ratifies something that they have no authority (yet) to ratify? The governor and legislators are like cars hurtling down 84 at 100 mph - and no one is at the wheel.
Malloy's words i believe were to get rid of all non-unionized management. Hmmmmmm. Did he mean to say make them unionized??? I am a bit confused with the whole budget crisis. I have read that other people who have implemented the cost savings healthcare programs have lost millions of dollars in the first 2 years of service. Should we not be focusing on this until we get less deeper in the hole??? I do not believe the numbers that have been concocted by the OPM! I do not belive we need to lay off
Read MoreI am curious about the comments from Republicans. Malloy has been Governor for five months and certainly did not create the fiscal mess at the state level. Republicans controlled the Governor's seat for the previous 20 years. Why did the Republicans in the House and Senate not do their job over the past decade and convince their own party's Governor to produce decent budgets? Complaining about a 4-year deal with SEBAC? Republican Governor Rowland did a 20 year deal. 20 years! It seems that some legislators believe we all have extremely short memories
Read MoreAnd Alice said, "If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?” (But Alice, such a place already exists. It is called the Connecticut State Government).
Jon Pelto, very clever ........with an air of truth as well.
But Hapkido, I could not agree more. The pension and healthcare changes are going nowhere - it was naive and foolish to think they would given the demographics of the workforce. Give us some suggestions about how we can help with this immediate two year budget and we will.
Time, beyond time for the games to stop - both Dems and Repubs. You're all an embarassment and spreading bad info and lies. Let's work together on getting the budget back on the right track. Rell had ordered all state agencies to prepare for 5, 10 and 15 % budget cuts. They did. Why hasn't Malloy called for at least 5% cuts, in addition to 5-10% state worker layoffs and some concessions from state workers (unionized and not).
After that, if needed, slighty raise some taxes. Admittedly, I have no economic or political experience. I'm a hard-working, dedicated state employee.
The Office of Fiscal Analysis (OFA), the experts in assessing the fiscal impacts of legislation, can't figure out how the Administration arrives at 1.6 billion in concession savings. Telling, don't you think?
The Dems budget implementer bill has a provision to allow the SEBAC and wage givebacks to pass without a legislative vote. This is contrary to the process where the Gov proposes a budget and the legislature approves it.
The budget will exceed the Constitutional Spending Cap...which creates a constitutional crisis and requires a state of fiscal emergency. Note: the Constitutional spending cap was put in place at
Read MoreI am begging the Press to be all over this and determine if it is true that the Administration did not (perhaps could not?) provide answers to OFA. It is the only way the people of CT will find out if Malloy and his staff are telling the truth. I am not saying they aren't, just that if OFA, which is non-partisan, can't figure it out I think that says a lot.
This OFA nonsense is something "new" or "unexpected"? LOL! Republicans and Democrats BOTH constantly criticize each other's efforts. And as far as OFA goes, when it comes to new or significantly changed programs or union contracts they ALWAYS claim they can't figure out what the actual bottom line will wind up being! ALWAYS!
NOTHING new or unexpected here. Regardless, like Rep. O'Neill (a Republican) and others said yesterday, if the final budget figures are "off" they're only off by about plus or minus a million, nothing that final line-item adjustments can't handle.
Curious. The governor proposes a budget. The legislature for the past 20 years has been controlled by the dems. They are the ones that put the budget together. Rell and Rowland were bad gobs but the dems controlled the budget
The Governor and the union leaders are a bunch of bullies. To the public they have been threatening us for weeks now. If we dont vote yes then they continue to say what they are going to do to us.
The union leaders get their salaries from our union dues.
Who are they representing ???? We have nothing in writing that explains anything about the health care plan it is extremely disturbing. The union leaders have no integrity and they need to step down.
Governor Malloy has not even been in 6 months omg can you imagine for 3
Read Morebackdoor you said it all in the ctnewsjunkie good job!
Where is the news media ????? Why arent you investigating what we are saying?
Dan Livingston and Jose Figueroa where did the 41 million dollars go?What is going on with our union leaders ???? They need to step down this deal should be off the table period.
Josephine it is over the dems won and the union lost. Trouble is the union will back the dems next election.
ctmirror SHOULD do an article on how the union is handling the vote. its a sham. a cardboard box, no oversight, union delegates runing it. what a joke.
Notice how the number of layoffs keep growing day by day????? The governor is really getting nervous. Doesn't know what to do next. Let's up the numbers so the state employees get nervous.
Has anyone heard about any programs getting cut?? No, just state employee layoffs. Let's try to save money other ways first.
Let's get a third party to count union votes.... The A&R union is getting electronic voting---why not all the unions. AFSME is the biggest union, gets the most dues and should have looked into electronic voting long before now.
In my best Gomer Pyle voice...Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!
No one knows anything about where the savings is coming from...it's all smoke and mirrors and that so called, "fuzzy math."
They can get all the details in the state and it still won't add up!
Just wait until the concessions get voted down, rut ro raggy!
re the vote -
Please make sure you vote, yes or no, however you feel is right.
According to union bylaws, not voting = a yes vote....
"Submitted by missy on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 5:30pm.
re the vote -
Please make sure you vote, yes or no, however you feel is right.
According to union bylaws, not voting = a yes vote...."
- NOT true. Not voting = abstention (doesn't count as either a yes OR a no).
"Steve HC" -
Maybe not for your union, but my bylaws so state. Everyone should be aware of their own particular circumstance and act accordingly.
"Submitted by missy on Wed, 06/08/2011 - 7:36pm.
"Steve HC" -
Maybe not for your union, but my bylaws so state. Everyone should be aware of their own particular circumstance and act accordingly."
Oh? Which State employee union & bargaining unit is it that counts a member's failure to vote as a "yes" vote? No one I've ever spoken with has ever heard of such a thing.
"He brings experience. He's been elected."
Mike Clark on endorsing State Sen. Andrew Roraback for the Republican nomination for the 5th Congressional District race.
Get the latest headlines right to your mobile
Visit m.ctmirror.org on your mobile device
FOLLOW US ON: 
PROUD SPONSOR
MINIMUM WAGE IN CONNECTICUT
January 1, 1980 $3.12
January 1, 1981 $3.37
October 1, 1987 $3.75
October 1, 1988 $4.25
April 1, 1991 $4.27
October 1, 1996 $4.77
Septem 1, 1997 $5.18
January 1, 1999 $5.65
January 1, 2000 $6.15
January 1, 2001 $6.40
January 1, 2002 $6.70
January 1, 2003 $6.90
January 1, 2004 $7.10
January 1, 2006 $7.40
January 1, 2007 $7.65
January 1, 2009 $8.00
January 1, 2010 $8.25
PROUD SPONSOR
Printer-friendly version
Send to a friend