Article

PLANET EXCLUSIVE: SUPPRESSED REPORT ON PITTSFIELD MFG. JOBS PREDICTS CITY’s FINANCIAL COLLAPSE BY 2022 … SBNC HID THE REPORT

0 0 votes
Article Rating

BY DAN VALENTI

PLANET VALENTI NEWS AND COMMENTARY

(FORTRESS OF SOLITUDE, MONDAY, MARCH 7, 2016) — It made for a deceptively good headline: “Jobs Report Shows Brisk U.S. Hiring in February” (NY Times). The mainstream media across the country gobbled it up, spoon-fed. The report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) comes from the U.S. Department of Labor, which is in Washington, D.C. It means, of course, that you can’t trust the data. Oh, you can believe the surface, but once you mine the information, another picture emerges. Believing the government report on face value is like looking at a Formica-coated kitchen counter and believing you’re looking at stone.

The BLS February report claims a net gain to the economy of 242,000 non-farm jobs.

What strikes you about that number?

THE PLANET is immediately hit by the roundness. The “000” number proves the figure to be essentially meaningless and fictitious. Burrowing into the number, we find that almost all of the jobs came in health care, social assistance, retail trade, and “drinking places” (Lach’s Lounge Rides Again!). These sectors produce low-pay,no-benefit jobs. Sinking further, we learn that on the whole, employers are cutting the hours (therefore the pay) of new workers. Finally, the numbers show wages trending down. If you’re happy with that, you definitely have not read Dickens’ Great Expectations.

In short, the “good news” story about jobs is fake.

Kinnas Digs It Out, THE PLANET Exposes It

Now on to the local scene. Last Thursday on PLANET VALENTI TELEVISION, supercitizen and former Pittsfield School Committee member Terry Kinnas revealed interesting information hidden in the 147 pages of followup material to the agenda for tomorrow’s meeting of our Right Honorable Good Friends in the city council. Agenda item six spells out Mayor Linda Tyer‘s request to borrow $2,027,157 for “traffic signal improvements” at two intersections: East Street and Woodlawn Avenue, and Tyler Street at Woodlawn. It’s part of the opening of the Woodlawn section connecting East and Tyler.

It’s easy to get into a discussion about whether the city should spend more than $2 million+ on more traffic signals. You mean there aren’t enough already? You mean to say that the city couldn’t better apply the $2 million+ to something else? Or better yet, you mean to say the city would be better off not borrowing an additional $2 million+ when it is already countless millions in the hole? THE PLANET hopes The Tyer Administration produces some answers tomorrow night. Until then, count us as Missourians — you know, “Show Me.”

Part of the data in the council packet supporting this expensive request is a copy of a letter sent Dec. 15, 2015 by Rod Jane, president of Pittsfield’s consultant New England Expansion Strategies (NEES) to Matthew Sucholdski of the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Economic Development Administration, Philadelphia Regional Office. The letter is buried inside a mountain of pages. Credit Kinnas for rescuing it from anonymity, for the letter proves that government in Pittsfield isn’t on the level.

The Pittsfield Economic Development Authority (PEDA) asked NEES to “develop an estimate of the projected job loss in manufacturing that will likely happen over the next 10 years” in the city and environs. Beware of that for which you ask. The information confirms the most dour projections one might conjure and certainly supports everything THE PLANET has written or spoken about the true state of Pittsfield’s finances. You can be sure PEDA wasn’t counting on that.

Shocking Jobs Loss, and an Even More Frightful Projection

NEES found that from 1969, with GE still at peak employment, to 2011, far after the company left the city high, dry, and loaded with industrial toxins, the city lost 78% of its manufacturing jobs. NEES then projected out the expected loss from 2012 to 2022. Over that decade and prior to SABIC Plastics‘ announcement of its exit from Pittsfield, NEES projected a loss of about 3.54% of the remaining total for each of the 10 years — and expected loss of 1,011 full time manufacturing jobs by 2022.

A Cluster F**k

NEES said the data were harvested prior to “the knowledge that SABIC was considering closing their Pittsfield facility.” Factoring in SABIC, Pittsfield will lose the entire decade’s projected loss by 2017 — next year! This leaves five more years of an expected annual decline of 3.54%. Bottom line is what NEES called in its letter to the Feds the Manufacturing Cluster Tipping Point (MCTP). An ominous sounding phrase, not to be confused with a “Cluster F**k.”

The MCTP is the point where the manufacturing declines “to a point where it becomes too small to sustain itself.” In other words, at the tipping point, the city’s economy begins to implode. In plain English, the report pinpoints the economic death of Pittsfield by 2022.

Here’s the punchline to this sick joke. Despite being armed with this data, the city’s School Building Needs Committee, chaired by school supt. Jason “Jake” JIV McCandless and Kathy Amuso, and the School Committee, chaired by Kathy “Lady Boots” Yonsuppressed the information while approving the $200 million construction of a new high school.

Call it what you will — manipulation, malfeasance, misappropriation of funds, corruption — it proves that The Fix Was In on the THS building project.

————————————————————————————————

“We must not fret over our own imperfections.”St. Francis de Sales, from his Golden Counsels, (1610).

“OPEN THE WINDOW, AUNT MILLIE.”

LOVE TO ALL.

The views expressed in the comment section or opinions published within the text other than those of PLANET VALENTI are not those of PLANET VALENTI or endorsed in any way by PLANET VALENTI; this website reserves the right to remove any comment which violates its Rules of Conduct, and it is not liable for the consequences of any posted comment as provided in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and PLANET VALENTI’s terms of service.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
44 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Economic Injun
Economic Injun
8 years ago

2022? I thought the City was already dead.

Distressed Cat
Distressed Cat
8 years ago

They can’t predict the weather for tomorrow, so whatever.

Gene
Gene
8 years ago

Thanks you Mr. Kinnas and thank you DV for this expose. You are the only ones with the courage to dig out the information, report it, and analyze it.

johnny dingo
johnny dingo
8 years ago

Didn’t the ex mayor say the new school is going to be an economic engine? We are going to train the kids for high tech jobs. But you say the jobs won’t be in Pittsfield and so the kids will be leaving the area after we school them?

Do you think the tax base will shrink when the jobs leave? I sure hope taxes don’t go up as a result.

acheshirecat
acheshirecat
Reply to  johnny dingo
8 years ago

According to the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for Career and College test that our students took last year (first year for this test was given) our students are not ready for any job, let alone college. And Super Jake quickly states that “This was a pilot test of a test not a test of our students,” Read it for yourself if you might have missed it. Maybe Mr. Kinnas has some info on this pilot test.

http://www.iberkshires.com/story/51283/Pittsfield-School-Officials-Not-Happy-With-PARCC-Results.html

johnny dingo
johnny dingo
Reply to  acheshirecat
8 years ago

Speaking of pilots…how did that airport investigation go?

Brockton West
Brockton West
Reply to  johnny dingo
8 years ago

Investigation? We’re lucky if we finally get some actual dollar amounts in the third meeting on Wednesday. How much comes to the city from the airport and vice versa?

ASC is supposed to conduct a cost-benefit analysis. That’s its main task.

Somehow I don’t think we’ll get any numbers on the expansion itself–we paid $3.5 mil? How about the $4.5 mil. in land takings? Did we pay for that too?

Perhaps a denizen of the Planet can inform us.

And we’re getting back what?

Whole thing is welfare for the rich, a close cousin of crony capitalism.

Jim M
Jim M
Reply to  Brockton West
8 years ago

As of a couple years ago the airport operated on about $190,000 and took in about $170,000. The land taking was paid for by the FAA.

The entire budget of $190,000 is only a little more than what’s paid to many of the top school department slugs.

Included in the $190,000 are the airport manager and airport inspector ‘s salaries all Norman maintenence, snow plowing, and yes, any extra money left in the budget, especially snow removal, is returned to the city.

I hope I was able to answer your questions.

Brockton West
Brockton West
Reply to  Brockton West
8 years ago

Jim M:

So the city spends 20K a year on the airport, give or take?

Brockton West
Brockton West
Reply to  Brockton West
8 years ago

I’m sorry, what’s the bottom line cost/receipt to the city for the airport? I know the airport gets at least 100K a year from the FAA.

Should have had these number from the ASC by now.

And if the ASC could perhaps submit questions to the airport folks ahead of time so they’ll come with some answers . . .

But I’ll take even some form of order or agenda for the meetings.

Jim M
Jim M
Reply to  Brockton West
8 years ago

The yearly cost to the city is about $20,000. The FAA does not give money to the airport in a lump sum, what is does is fund many of the projects at a rate of 90% to 95% of the cost. The state puts in 3% to 5% and the city pays the balance.The FAA money comes from a tax on all airline tickets but the state money is from the taxpayers throughout the state.

All of the equipment including a couple of pick up trucks 2 large plows and snow blower attachment and other equipment only cost the city 3 or 4% of the actual costs.

The problem is that lease contracts which were made 20 to 40 years ago don’t contain any provisions for rate increases which would contribute to the city’s general fund. They can also be renewed for 20 year time periods just by the tenant asking to do so at the end of each lease period. Nothing that I know of can be don about the leases, they are legal, binding contracts.

Just to let you know I was on the airport commission for over 17 years and chairman for 8 years throughout the expansion, that’s how I have this information.

Brockton West
Brockton West
Reply to  Brockton West
8 years ago

Thank you, Jim M.

It has only taken me about three weeks and many hours and many questions to ASC members to even get the answers you’ve given.

I’ve been told that the real reason for the expansion was that the FAA would not pay for runway resurfacing if we said no. Bribery, basically.

But couldn’t the airport pay for the resurfacing once every 20 years with revenue from landing fees, for example?

Pat
Pat
8 years ago

I think Bianchi meant the new school would be an economic engine for the Pittsfield schools not for the entire city. Big difference. The whole project of a new Taconic is to keep the school system expanding.

Now how to stop the expensive Taconic project. I remember some insiders snickering on this site after the city council approved the project. They said if Pittsfield residents really wanted to stop the project all they needed to do was get a signed petition to stop it. They were savvy enough to know that putting that hurdle in front of residents who opposed the project would guarantee that the project wouldn’t be stopped. It was the middle of winter when the city council approved the project and an extremely cold and brutal winter. There was a 30 day window in which to stop the city council’s decision. Standing outside in front of supermarkets trying to get signatures in last winters cold would have been very difficult and the GOB knew it wouldn’t happen. They had already prevented a vote on the project which they knew would doom the project.

Shakes His Head
Shakes His Head
Reply to  Pat
8 years ago

The report indicates that without corrective action, and you all can debate what the corrective actions should be, the “tipping point” is within a decade.

On another note, how much are they paying these consultants that use a jaded jargon term like “tipping point”? Christ the central Berkshires are screwed.

Shakes His Head
Shakes His Head
Reply to  Shakes His Head
8 years ago

Also, point of clarification, and perhaps even more sobering, the SABIC closure isn’t manufacturing, its RD, with higher salaries and a more significant effect on the local economy.

Paul
Paul
Reply to  Shakes His Head
8 years ago

Very well said SHH I totally agree.

Brockton West
Brockton West
Reply to  Shakes His Head
8 years ago

And SABIC NEVER used the PMA!

Largest Pittsfield user is GD–once or twice a month!

thus colon
thus colon
8 years ago

Ok, now here is the reality:
Those property owners who chose to stay in Pittsfield will bear the brunt of the sky high taxes. By 2022, most will probaby default and be unable to sell their property to anyone with half a brain. Thus the city of Pittsfield will seize their property as the true owners.

The proverbial frog sits in the nice warm water as the heat(taxes) is slowly turned up: only to find one day: its goose is cooked.

The new high school will prove to be the straw that broke the camel’s back.

Thus the progressive liberal agenda end game.
The score: the government wins: you lose.
Game over.

Pat
Pat
Reply to  thus colon
8 years ago

How about getting rid of the progressives? Are they a plague that just won’t go away? Why don’t people vote them out when they see the destruction they cause wherever they go? I just don’t get it. Do Pittsfield people see themselves as victims? Is this why they don’t try to save themselves and the city by making logical choices and putting candidates in office who care about what is happening.

painter
painter
8 years ago

I don’t think the mayor is qualified to know if the traffic lights are needed. The road by G E has been closed for ever and there is no way to know if there is a needed un till the road is open.

johnny dingo
johnny dingo
Reply to  painter
8 years ago

Unless of course someone knows something we don’t. Like a big box store moving into the area?

Painter
Painter
Reply to  johnny dingo
8 years ago

There was going to be stores at the former Big N also.

acheshirecat
acheshirecat
Reply to  Painter
8 years ago

Back in July 2010 the developer of that shopping plaza entered into an agreement with Big Y that prevents any other grocery from locating at the site. So there won’t be any grocery stores going there.

johnny dingo
johnny dingo
Reply to  acheshirecat
8 years ago

There is no shingles on the roof so my guess is that the whole thing will need to be demolished before anything could go there. And, it sits in a flood plain and so the insurance for any venture will be super high. Cost of paving and upkeep of parking lot is huge.

Dig up the pavement and let the swamp it once was reclaim it. Turn it into a wildlife habitat.

EddieP
EddieP
8 years ago

Think back to when the bridge at the North entrance to the mall was replaced. At the time all it serviced was the entrance to Old State Rd. In Lanesboro. Nobody knew anything then, but the fix was in for the mall. About that time, the race was on between the Kelly lumber property in Coltsville and the Berkshire site Peter Arlos was going nuts over it.

Spider
Spider
8 years ago

Aren’t there already flashing lights at Woodlawn and East St?

That’s a hell of a lot of money for lights. That amount should be vetted.

K-Man
K-Man
8 years ago

More than $2 million for lights? What the existing lights aren’t enough? You mean to say, the mayor means to say that drivers can’t negotiate those two intersections now safely? Something doesn’t sound right.

johnny dingo
johnny dingo
Reply to  K-Man
8 years ago

Probably a finders fee in there somewhere.

Shakes His Head
Shakes His Head
8 years ago

That intersection of Woodlawn and Tyler/dalton is really dangerous. Isn’t there MassDOT funding to fix it?

joetaxpayer
joetaxpayer
8 years ago

Dalton/Tyler no longer State road

Shakes His Head
Shakes His Head
Reply to  joetaxpayer
8 years ago

Federal highway safety funding flows through MassDOT.

joetaxpayer
joetaxpayer
8 years ago

Who payed for the lights at Berkshire Crossing?

Thomas More
Thomas More
Reply to  joetaxpayer
8 years ago

jim kelly

K L Stevens
K L Stevens
8 years ago

G G FIX FLAG POLE. YOU PROBABLY DON’T KNOW HOW (SO SMART) JUST A JOKE.

Already Tyred
Already Tyred
Reply to  K L Stevens
8 years ago

Why are you casting stones at somebody who’s trying to help? You must be a GOBSIG.

Brockton West
Brockton West
8 years ago

Did the city of Pittsfield spend 750K of taxpayer money to consultants to the SBNC?

Jonathan Melle
Jonathan Melle
8 years ago

The government report about loss of manufacturing jobs in Pittsfield is just more of the same bad news that has been around for the past 4 decades. Pittsfield’s economy is in a downward spiral. About 70% of local residents live in or near poverty.

southeast
southeast
8 years ago

I have been watching the Airport Committee meetings. They have revealed several nuggets of cool information. But what is most intriguing is the lack of basic information the airport folks are armed with. It almost is as if they are not taking the meetings seriously enough to come prepared. Nobody knew nothing. Guesses and round abouts were all they released and even then, all the players had conflicting answers.
The most basic information that is lacking and most of these questions were asked in some form (except 6,11 and 12 – which are mine):
1. Who pays landing and take-off fees and how much are they? And as a follow up, how many take-offs and landings occurred at the airport by planes that do not pay fees – by type and size o aircraft?
2. Of the 17,500 or so take offs and landings at the airport each year, exactly how many qualify to pay a fee?
3. How many usable tie down spots are there at the airport? How much is the annual rent – and how much would it cost to restore the unusable tie down spots?
4. How many hanger spots are there at the airport?
5. What is the annual rent for these spots? How many are rented by the FBO?
6. When was the last rent comparability study performed and what airports were used as comps?
7. What was the date the City ceased pumping fuel and the FBO took over the tank farm?
8. What is the per gallon tax on fuel that the City is allowed to levy?
9. How much does the FBO levy per gallon?
10. How many gallons of fuel, including in the FBO’s own aircraft flows through the airport each year?
11. How much was the cost presented for the City to replace the tank farm? How much did it cost the FBO to install a new tank farm? Did the City officials see a proposal for the tam farm that the FBO ultimately installed?
12. Is there a written agreement as to how long the FBO could levy the tax to repay itself for the tank farm? Is it based on fuel flow (gallons) or years? Is it based on the maximum levy assessed or the one being charged, and of course it includes the FBO’s own use – correct?
If the airport “only” costs Pittsfield $20,000 per year – how are we to judge that? Is it being compared to airports with similar numbers of planes and activity? What if those airports generate a $40K or even and $80,000 surplus? That means we could be losing $60-$100,000 per year.
You see for years, we have been told that an airport is a critical piece of infrastructure. But Sabic is leaving and KB went bankrupt. At the meeting, we were told that aircraft owners are whores who will fly 75 miles to save a nickel a gallon on fuel and land 30 miles out of their way to save a few bucks on landing fees. But we are consistently being told that the airport is critical since folks don’t want to land in Albany and drive to Pittsfield. It cannot be both.
In fact it really seems like it is a convenience being subsidized for a few wealthy plane owners who come to Canyon Ranch or Tanglewood and for an FBO who if he was not here would go somewhere else where taxpayers could subsidize him.
If we proposed that we let him (the current FBO) keep all the revenue from fuel and fees – but paid the City $100K per year to operate and lease the 600 acres you would instantly find more hangers for rent at better rates and he would know to the penny how much fuel flowed and how many planes were supposed to pay fees to take off and land. That is not a gamble, that is a fact.

Shakes His Head
Shakes His Head
Reply to  danvalenti
8 years ago

This information should generally be available and presented in the 5-year airport plan.

Brockton West
Brockton West
Reply to  southeast
8 years ago

This is what I’ve learned from watching both meetings, the second one twice:

1. Who pays landing and take-off fees and how much are they? And as a follow up, how many take-offs and landings occurred at the airport by planes that do not pay fees – by type and size of aircraft?

Smaller aircraft do not pay, only twin-engines and bigger on a sliding scale–$20, $50, $80, $125. Lyon’s jets don’t pay.

2. Of the 17,500 or so take offs and landings at the airport each year, exactly how many qualify to pay a fee?

“Uh, we don’t have those numbers with us tonight.”

There are about 1,500 jets a year. 75% of jets pay landing fees. The numbers look big because a training flight might land and take off several times in an hour.

3. How many usable tie down spots are there at the airport? How much is the annual rent – and how much would it cost to restore the unusable tie down spots?

I heard $190 a year(?) for tie-down parking. Many spots are damaged. But people prefer indoor parking.

4. How many hanger spots are there at the airport?

Not many. Supposedly there are now 20 requests for hangar space.

5. What is the annual rent for these spots? How many are rented by the FBO?

$225(?) a month for hangar space. FBO has four planes here. I assume in hangars.

6. When was the last rent comparability study performed and what airports were used as comps?

Ask the hand.

7. What was the date the City ceased pumping fuel and the FBO took over the tank farm?

I think Lyon said in the mid- to late 1990s? Could have been early 2000s.

8. What is the per gallon tax on fuel that the City is allowed to levy?
9. How much does the FBO levy per gallon?

I heard that the “fuel flowage fee” is 2 or 3 cents a gal.

10. How many gallons of fuel, including in the FBO’s own aircraft flows through the airport each year?

Yeah, right, wouldn’t hold your breath on that answer.

11. How much was the cost presented for the City to replace the tank farm? How much did it cost the FBO to install a new tank farm? Did the City officials see a proposal for the tank farm that the FBO ultimately installed?

See previous answer.

12. Is there a written agreement as to how long the FBO could levy the tax to repay itself for the tank farm? Is it based on fuel flow (gallons) or years? Is it based on the maximum levy assessed or the one being charged, and of course it includes the FBO’s own use – correct?

Maybe Santa will bring the answer to the ASC meeting and let us know.

If the airport “only” costs Pittsfield $20,000 per year – how are we to judge that? Is it being compared to airports with similar numbers of planes and activity? What if those airports generate a $40K or even and $80,000 surplus? That means we could be losing $60-$100,000 per year.

City losing money? Nah.

–You see for years, we have been told that an airport is a critical piece of infrastructure. But Sabic is leaving and KB went bankrupt. At the meeting, we were told that aircraft owners are whores who will fly 75 miles to save a nickel a gallon on fuel and land 30 miles out of their way to save a few bucks on landing fees. But we are consistently being told that the airport is critical since folks don’t want to land in Albany and drive to Pittsfield. It cannot be both.

“You’re asking too many questions—and must be dealt with. And, hey, man, the past is past—we’re looking to the future.”

But it does save a Williams trustee about 20 minutes each way to fly into PMA instead of ALB. Isn’t that worth it?

–In fact it really seems like it is a convenience being subsidized for a few wealthy plane owners who come to Canyon Ranch or Tanglewood and for an FBO who if he was not here would go somewhere else where taxpayers could subsidize him.

ON THE NOSEY!!

“Yeah, there’s a really rich guy that uses the airport. He owns a whole country somewhere. Hey, he might look around and decide to open a hot dog stand at Clapp Park.”

mi
mi
8 years ago

No money for the city in this airport..that’s a fact.

Already Tyred
Already Tyred
8 years ago

This City is truly in sad shape……doesn’t make any difference what your skin color is. Unless you work for the City, the x
school dept or the hospital you are screwed…..if you have one of these good jobs you can afford tax increases, but most of us can’t…..Linda Tyer…can you stop tax increases and start the meter going the other way? If you don’t this city will die. Do the right thing Linda.