With three days left in the 2007 General Assembly Session, three big mandates threaten residential and business property taxpayers.

We have come here today to urge the Governor and state legislators to reject these proposals and deliver on the promises state policymakers have made to help – not hurt – beleaguered property taxpayers.

Property Tax Cap

CCM has been clear that a property tax cap along the lines of what has been proposed by the Governor would cripple the ability of local governments to respond to the service needs of their residents and businesses.

She has made the property tax cap key to an agreement with legislative leaders on a budget and tax package. We urge legislative leaders and the rank and file to stand strong and reject this proposal.

It would be wrong for the State to substitute its “wisdom” for that of local residents – most municipalities have some sort of referendum mechanism, and others decide their budgets through their elected leaders. Why should the State dictate that it knows better than local voters about how high municipal taxes and the level of local services should be? It is insulting.

In Massachusetts, Proposition 21/2 resulted in closed schools, libraries and firehouses, among other things.

Let’s be clear: a property tax cap by itself does not constitute relief or reform. Such a cap would hurt citizens and local businesses, not help them.

When CCM has discussed a property tax cap in the past, we’ve said a temporary cap would only be acceptable if it came with a massive influx of new state aid, mandates reform, and enactment of comprehensive smart/responsible growth land use policies. Those things aren’t happening, and they aren’t on the horizon for this session. A property tax cap now would be feel-good, look-good legislation that delivers only pain.

Huge Workers’ Compensation Mandate For Public Safety Employees

We thank the House of Representatives for resisting on Saturday the pressure to pass the biggest mandate in decades – one that would cost local governments millions of dollars by changing presumptions under workers compensation for heart disease, hypertension, certain cancers and some infectious diseases. This expensive mandate would be the opposite of property tax relief. It would saddle local property taxpayers with enormous costs for generations to come.

A bipartisan group – including Democrats like Brendan Sharkey and Denise Merrill, and Republicans like Craig Miner and Clark Chapin – bucked intense pressure and helped convince their colleagues not to move forward with this costly mandate. They deserve the thanks of property taxpayers and local officials across the state.

We urge the House to take no action on this proposal.

Mandatory Participation in a State-run Health Pool for Local Employees

Some legislators are pushing a new plan that would mandate that towns and cities participate in a state-run health insurance pool for municipal employees and teachers. This is a well-intentioned proposal and we appreciate that legislators are looking for ways to help cut long-term costs for towns and cities, but it is bad public policy.

We continue to support the idea of a state-run health care pool. One that could help save money for towns and cities in this expensive area – but mandating participation would do the opposite. It doesn’t make sense. If the goal is property tax relief and the pooling benefits are universal, municipalities should not have a gun put to their heads to participate. Town and cities should be free to use less expensive options.

If a town or city can deliver health care to its employees less expensively, forcing them into a state pool would increase their costs. Even if the State were to hold towns harmless from increased costs, we are afraid that those types of subsidies would disappear in the future.

CCM will continue to work with legislators to design a voluntary pool that will work for towns and cities and the State. But mandating participation is not the way to go.

Summary

We have taken the unusual step of coming to the Capitol in the last three days of the legislative session because, taken together, these three mandates pose an enormous threat to local budgets and the ability of residents to make decisions affecting their own communities.

We urge the Governor and state legislators to do the right thing and stand up for property taxpayers and hometowns across Connecticut by rejecting these proposals.

Thank you.