Breaking Down Richard Tisei’s 6-Point Jobs Plan for the 6th District

Richard Tisei, the Republican nominee for Congress in the 6^th District of Massachusetts, recently unveiled a six-point jobs plan to spur economic development in Northeast Mass. While politicians always like to exaggerate their potential influence over local economies, Tisei’s plan is disappointing for its lack of creativity and its failure to take into account some of the greatest assets of Essex County and its surrounding communities.

That’s not to say that every element of Tisei’s plan is without merit. His emphasis on the need to better link economic development with workforce development is long overdue and greater flexibility for local economic development agencies to direct workforce dollars will better enable regions to create human capital that is responsive to industry need.

Unfortunately, that’s where Tisei’s good ideas end and the parade of protectionism and tax giveaways begins. From ginning up reasons to maintain defense spending that ballooned to over $700 billion in 2011 (more than the next 11 highest spending nations, combined—see chart) and targeting tax breaks at specific industries rather than at investment writ large, to the traditional GOP talking points of slashing corporate taxes (despite the fact that many corporations pay next to nothing in income tax) and environmental/financial regulations designed to maintain stability in the markets, Tisei’s plan does little to lay the groundwork for private sector growth.

A true jobs agenda for the 6^th District takes advantage of Northeast Massachusetts’ historic strengths while also being aware of the trends of the 21^st century global economy.

It means (1) building on the success of the Route 128 job corridor by providing federal support for the creation of sustainable, walkable communities that attract creative class workers.

It means (2) laying the foundation for growth (and spurring construction jobs in the process) by investing heavily in improved infrastructure—both modern energy grids and public transit, such as the long-proposed Blue Line extension to Central Square, Lynn.

It means (3) supporting mixed-use projects along the waterfront, like those ongoing in Haverhill, Gloucester, and communities throughout Essex County, which promise to create an “active” street life by leveraging our “working waterfront” and recognizing the importance of tourism to Essex County’s economy.

It means (4) making work pay by boosting the income of the 6^th District’s poor and working class residents through an expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit.

It means (5) looking ahead to the industries of tomorrow, especially renewable energy, rather than subsidizing the slow death of industries that have fled the U.S. as globalization has taken root. Instead, Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) budget—which stands as a midterm priority list for the GOP—slashes civilian research and development by $92 billion from the current baseline over the next decade.

Cities and towns throughout Northeast Mass. have historically relied on clean energy. For over 150 years, Lawrence has embraced hydroelectric power—from the Great Stone Dam in 1848 to the launch of a hydroelectric plant powering 7000 homes a year, in 1981. In Beverly, Salem, and Marblehead, windmills were grinding corn and bark as early as the 17^th and 18^th centuries.

With an immense coastline, a regulatory environment supportive of renewables, and countless students committed to investing their futures in the field, the 6^th District is the perfect laboratory for the transformative energy technology of tomorrow. Our institutions of higher learning—from Gordon College in Wenham and Endicott College in Beverly to Salem State University in Salem, Northshore CC campuses throughout the region, and Merrimack College in North Andover—must be nodes of innovation.

Lastly, (6) with home prices increasingly out-of-reach in many towns in the District and long-term trend lines for Millennials showing a shifting preference for renting/apartment living, the federal government must reassess current tax breaks that disproportionately benefit the wealthy (such as the mortgage interest deduction) and boost tax credits for investment in smaller, more environmentally-efficient homes that permit greater density near transit hubs in places like Salem and Newburyport.

That’s a true 6-point plan for economic growth in the 6^th District—one that puts private sector innovation at the core, not through tax giveaways and weakened regulation, but by boosting the human and physical infrastructure needed for long-term, sustainable development that can support middle class jobs.

The "Magic Semicircle": The Future of the Route 128 Corridor

“Route 128 is more than a highway…It is, as the blue signs posted for many years, ‘America’s Technology Region.’”

--Alan Earls, Route 128 and the Birth of the Age of High Tech, 2002

This week, the Martin Institute for Prosperity published a new report, “Start-up City: The Urban Shift in Venture Capital and High Technology.” Written by University of Toronto/NYU Professor Richard Florida (author of The Rise of the Creative Class), the report finds that while “[s]uburban high tech is not going away…the newest and most innovative developments in the industry are likely to emerge from urban and urban-like locations.”

While the 128 corridor remains, in Florida’s words, a “classic suburban nerdistan,” the highway once known as “the road to nowhere” has lost share of VC funding in recent years to Cambridge and Boston.  Indeed, while the “978” remains the 15^th largest recipient of VC funding—with 42 deals worth nearly $350 million in 2012—there is room to grow VC funding on the 128 belt—particularly in Essex County, as shown in the map below.

Source: "Start-up City" Report, Martin Institute, p.25

How then can Massachusetts poiicymakers ensure that the “Massachusetts Miracle” of the 1970s, which witnessed the establishment of Route 128 as one of the nation’s leading tech hubs does not fade into the Massachusetts mirage? [for a terrific primer on Route 128’s history, check out “Silicon Valley and Route 128: The Camelots of Economic Development,” in the May 2013 issue of the Journal of Applied Research in Economic Development].

We can start to answer that question by defining what cities and towns in Essex County cannot do: become dense metropolises like New York City. The infrastructure of the North Shore won’t allow it and the proud history of the Essex County National Heritage Area precludes communities from tectonic shifts in development priorities.

To state the obvious, Northeast Massachusetts can’t compete with New York and San Francisco on the playing field of the “global city.” Instead, our region must leverage its unique assets to drive growth in a way that shows fidelity to history and takes advantage of new modes of suburban living that emphasize mixed-use, sustainable neighborhoods.

We already have models of what these walkable suburban centers can look like. Salem and Lynn earn relatively high scores from WalkScore, but when you drill deeper into the mapping, it is clear that the downtowns of these ancient cities are extremely walkable. Not coincidentally, these downtowns are located near train stations that can whisk residents to Boston in about a half hour.

In recent years, development throughout NE Mass has focused on walkable neighborhoods and live-work environments. As stated in the 2009 Bridge Street Revitalization Plan prepared for Salem, “The Bridge Street Neck neighborhood should be an active mixed-use neighborhood, incorporating lively commercial and residential areas. The neighborhood should have a safe and enjoyable pedestrian environment that connects its different amenities and serves its residents and businesses.” The City of Beverly has also promoted its walkable downtown in its effort to woo business to the home of the Panthers.

Governor Deval Patrick must have been listening. Three years later, he announced a plan called the “Compact Neighborhoods Policy” which calls for the construction of multi-family homes, rental apartments, and starter homes near jobs, transit, and city and town centers. Providing incentives to cities and towns to engage in such “smart growth” is one of the keys to ensuring the continued vitality of the suburban ring, not just the entrepreneurial engines of Boston and Cambridge.

In addition to embracing smart growth and walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods, Essex County also needs to do more to capitalize on the creativity of our college students. Gordon College in Wenham, Endicott College in Beverly, Salem State University in Salem, Northshore CC campuses throughout the region, Merrimack College in North Andover—each of these institutions of higher learning should be nodes for innovation on the North Shore.

Public-private partnerships that position incubators and affordable housing near campuses (linked to downtowns with free/low-cost bus/van transportation) can help to ensure that graduates not only see Essex County as a great place to learn, but also as a prime location to start a business and raise a family. Salem State’s Enterprise Center is a terrific start, but more can be done to harness this enduring asset. In particular, universities should actively partner with existing private sector incubators with proven results, from Newburyport’s CleanTech Center to Beverly’s North Shore InnoVentures.

This last element leads me to my final ingredient for the success of the Route 128 corridor—preserving the natural treasures and community assets that make Essex County such a sought-after place to live. This means protecting our beaches, from Salisbury and Crane to Good Harbor and Preston, as well as taking advantage of our history to drive tourism.

But it also means continuing to invest in our schools, many of which consistently rank among the best in Massachusetts. Salem Academy Charter School ranks 5^th in the State and 139^th in the nation, serving a diverse student body where 2 in 5 students are economically disadvantaged. And last year, Masconomet Regional High School ranked in the top 15 in statewide testing on math and science.

Route 128 may no longer be known as “America’s Technology Region,” but on the North Shore, it remains a critical job corridor in the modern innovation economy—one that can and should be exploited to transform the ancient industrial cities and shipbuilding ports of Essex County into engines of creative class growth.

Essex County Health: A Data-Driven Look

This week, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute released its annual county-by-county health rankings in all 50 states. Today, we’re going to take a deep dive into—you guessed it—Essex County, Massachusetts, to analyze for trends, identify problems, and find solutions.

Essex County is ranked the 6^th healthiest county (of 14) in Massachusetts. The good news is that Massachusetts is one of the healthiest states in the country on a wide variety of metrics, from having the lowest percentage of uninsured residents to one of the highest immunization rates in the U.S. (on the other hand, Massachusetts has one of the worst records on binge drinking and health disparity based on level of educational attainment).

The bad news is that we still have a ways to go to root out preventable health dangers, provide all people have access to quality, affordable, preventive care, and arm Bay Staters with the skills and tools they need to keep their families strong.

The North Shore continues to suffer from high rates of impaired/drunk driving. Nearly 1 in 3 driving deaths involve alcohol, above the Massachusetts average of 28 percent and far higher than the national leaders at 14 percent.

           

Essex County also suffers from:

·      the third highest Chlamydia rate in the Commonwealth

·      a well-below average ratio of primary care physicians per capita

·      a high rate of single-parent households (nearly 1/3)

·      the most severe housing problems (overcrowding, high housing costs, or lack of kitchen or plumbing facilities) outside of Boston and the islands

·      long commutes (39 percent of commuters who drive themselves to work commute for longer than 30 minutes each way)

There are a number of steps policymakers should take to address these concerns. First, while only 3.1 percent of residents in the 6^th Congressional District (roughly continuous with Essex County) are uninsured, further outreach is needed to communities that remain underinsured.

In Lynn, over 11 percent of residents 18-64 are uninsured, the sixth highest rate in the state. In Salem, nearly 7 percent of 18-64 year-olds are uninsured. In Beverly, 4.6 percent of children are uninsured, the fourth highest rate in the Commonwealth. Furthermore, according to the Census Bureau, over one-third of all uninsured residents of Essex County are immigrants.

Getting these neighbors quality insurance is critical since Blue Cross has found that a significant percentage of the uninsured face a variety of unmet medical needs, from dentists and preventive care to prescription drugs.

Making the Bay State healthier goes beyond insurance, though. It also involves changing habits and encouraging beneficial behavior. Cities and towns in Northeast Mass. should canvass the country for pioneering public health initiatives. In New York City, calorie counts at restaurants have provided transparency to consumers about nutrition information. While evidence is mixed as to their effects, simply making people aware of the choices they are making is a step in the right direction.

In Chicago, Mayor Rahm Emanuel has banned the sale of tobacco products marketed to children in school zones and has taken concrete steps to keep e-cigarettes out of the hands of kids. 

Closer to home, on the South Shore, the Southcoast Hospitals Group has invested in a health van that serves community organizations at sites throughout Greater Fall River, New Bedford and Wareham and surrounding communities, providing free education and screenings to the community. Hospitals in Essex County should work together with local governments to sponsor a similar program.

The Bay State already provides a wellness tax credit for businesses. But Beacon Hill should do more to nudge people toward better health outcomes.

In particular, our sales tax is a mess. For instance, while running sneakers are exempt, cleated sneakers are not. We should exempt cleats, along with condoms and approved weight loss aids to encourage healthy behavior.

Lastly, our schools should be on the cutting edge of nutrition—going beyond was is required by the Mass. School Nutrition Standards, to help reduce childhood obesity that can lead to diabetes. While come students have complained about the lack of cookies, the benefits of healthy lunch in school far outweigh the costs.

Massachusetts has been a leader in public health for generations, ever since the Supreme Court upheld the Commonwealth’s mandatory vaccination law in the landmark case of Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905). It is our responsibility to remain a model for others to follow and, in the process, ensure a better life for our citizens.

An Eternal Asset: Making the Most of Essex County’s Waterfront

“She knew they were her woods by the smell of pines and the quality of the air, a scrubbed, cool, clean sensation that she associated with the Merrimack River. She could hear the river, distantly, a gentle, soothing rush of sound that was really in no way like static.”

--Joe Hill, NOS4A2 (2013)

As the story goes, in 1004, Thorewald the Norseman, a seafaring fellow meandered down the New England coast in search of the perfect dwelling place. Upon laying his eyes on Cape Ann (or, as others assert, Nahant), Thorewald declared, “It is beautiful; and here I would like to fix my dwelling.”

Whether he was steering his vessel around the jagged cliffs of Rockport, the brilliance of Dolliber Cove, or the tiny peninsula of Nahant, the truth is that Thorewald couldn’t go wrong. Indeed, with nearly 500 miles of coastline, not to mention flowing rivers from the Merrimack to the Ipswich, Essex County is a beautiful a place to fix a dwelling as it was a millennia ago.

It goes without saying that much has transpired since Thorewald’s voyage. In particular, how we engage with our coastline has undergone a series of shifts—from the pre-industrial economy of the colonial era, to the industrial economy of the 19^th century and now, as we forge ahead in the 21^st, a hybrid of commercial and recreational uses.

Twenty years ago, in a profile of Cape Ann for the New York Times, Suzanne Berne wrote that “[w]hile Gloucester maintains a fishing industry and a palpable grittiness, Rockport has cleated its future to galleries and craft shops.”

The tension between a “working waterfront” and the importance of tourism to Essex County’s economy is an important element in how policymakers and communities approach reshaping waterfronts as part of an integrated economic development strategy.

The future of Essex County’s rivers and shores is one of mixed-uses, fighting to protect fisheries and ports, while simultaneously welcoming people to engage with the water in new ways. This model is on display today in Haverhill, where a plan forged through a public-private partnership is in place to reconnect residents with the Merrimack River by literally tearing down a block of buildings that close off the waterfront and rebuilding downtown with office and retail space, apartments, restaurants, a boardwalk, and—most importantly, perhaps—a new satellite campus for UMass-Lowell.

While Haverhill appears ready to pull shovels in the ground this fall, Lynn’s Master Waterfront Plan is now six years old and progress has been frustratingly slow on the 305-acre site which sits a mere 10 miles north of Boston. 2014 may be the year things speed up, though, as ferry service from Lynn to Boston may finally arrive (thanks in no small part to the efforts of State Senator Thomas McGee). Nothing is more important to jumpstart the private-sector investment that is essential to the plan’s success than the creation of transit links like the ferry and the extension of the Blue Line to Central Square.

Despite delays in getting its master plan off the ground, Lynn’s embrace of mixed-use plans along the waterfront, just like that of Haverhill, Gloucester, and communities throughout Essex County, promises to create an “active” street life that promotes business development and reconnects our communities to their historic roots.

Innovative waterfront development must also exploit modern technology and antiquated infrastructure to draw people to the water and teach both tourists and natives alike about the County’s history.

In Gloucester, Mayor Carolyn Kirk has embraced technology as a way to support both critical economic drivers. In 2012, Mayor Kirk launched the Gloucester Harborwalk, 1.2-mile stroll full of stories about Gloucester’s past and present history and fully integrated into a mobile app.

Similarly, the 4.3-mile Danvers Rail Trail (a grassroots project that has transformed an old, unused rail line into an active recreational space) has used technology to link recreational and commercial opportunities, even creating a hide and seek type game with gift cards from local businesses hidden along the trail that require visitors to download a mobile app (as a sidenote, another unused rail spur stretches from Downtown Salem to Peabody and Danvers, allowing for a potential extension of the Danvers Trail to Cedar Pond and the Crane and Waters Rivers).

Other efforts, like the 1.3-mile Amesbury (or Powwow) Riverwalk (part of the Coastal Trails Network linking Amesbury, Salisbury, Newbury, and Newburyport—see map), hold similar promise.

As one of only 49 National Heritage Areas, Essex County’s many historic assets will continue to play a key role in our economic future. However, more eternal and more vital than any colonial home or ancient artifact is our waterfront. It is essential that our cities and towns work together to make the most of its potential for generations to come.

North Shore Taxis Must be Accessible to All

“With today’s signing of the landmark Americans for Disabilities Act, every man, woman, and child with a disability can now pass through once-closed doors into a bright new era of equality, independence, and freedom.”

-- President George H.W. Bush, 1990

This week, as reported by the Salem Evening News, the Peabody City Council unveiled a compromise for new taxi licenses, dividing the 15 new permits equally among three cab companies. However, the article buried a truly distressing piece of news—none of the new taxi licenses would be for accessible taxicabs. 

Peabody Councilor Tom Walsh rightly grilled taxi owners on their failure to provide this service, saying that if restaurants and hotels can do it, certainly a critical element of the North Shore’s transportation network should be able to as well. Nevertheless, North Shore Taxi’s lawyer, James Mears Jr., described the accessible taxis as “cost-prohibitive,” requiring not only a special vehicle but also a trained driver.

This is a completely insufficient excuse for failing to provide service to people with disabilities on the North Shore (not to mention thousands more who do not technically qualify as disabled, but whose limited mobility makes the features of accessible taxis essential to comfort and accessibility).

Indeed, when Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Act nearly 25 years ago, it was indicative of a commitment made by the American People to share the costs of making our society—its public institutions, places of accommodation, and, yes, transportation networks—available to all users. Just as we pay slightly higher property taxes to retrofit our schools and Town Halls, so our transportation system must absorb the expense of full and complete access into the cost of doing business.

(as a sidebar, let’s not forget the groups who lobbied aggressively against the ADA—the same groups that have continued to fight landmark legislation to improve conditions for workers and their families, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Businesses)

Furthermore, technology offers several ways of making the system less expensive for business and more convenient for users.  As I noted in a letter to the Boston Globe last year, cabs in Massachusetts should embrace tech-savvy services such as Accessible Dispatch, which serves New York City and allows people to digitally hail accessible cabs through mobile apps or over the phone.

London has a 100 percent accessible taxi fleet. Given the density difference between the North Shore (where a significant portion of cab service is by pre-arrangement) and cities like New York and London (where most cab service is by hail), having a 100 percent accessible fleet may not be necessary to ensure an equivalent level of service for all users in our area.

However, I believe it is essential that every cab company operating in the Bay State have at least one accessible cab on the road 24 hours a day, 7 days a week (or whenever the cab company is serving customers). Taxi passengers, taxi operators, and taxpayers should share the costs associated with this service. For instance, in New York, which recently agreed to adopt regulations requiring that half of the City’s yellow cabs be accessible to people with disabilities within six years, the City and State are providing tax credits to aid companies in converting old cabs to accessible cabs or purchasing new vehicles. 

In the end, if the ADA’s eternal promise is, as President Bush declared, that “people with disabilities are given the basic guarantees…[of] independence, freedom of choice, control of their lives, [and] the opportunity to blend fully and equally into the rich mosaic of the American mainstream,” surely we can do better on the North Shore of Massachusetts than to simply throw up our hands and say that honoring this promise is too expensive.

Cowing of Congressional Courage: Flood Maps in a Warming World

“Oh, Master, make me chaste and celibate - but not yet!”

--Saint Augustine, Confessions, 398 CE

In 1968, Congress passed the National Flood Insurance Act, which was designed to reduce federal disaster relief by creating a mechanism to insure vulnerable property on our nation’s shoreline. However, as the Heritage Foundation recently noted, while the national flood insurance program (NFIP) was paved with good intentions, it has ended up promoting development in flood zones, thus paradoxically worsening the effects of natural disasters and saddling taxpayers with the bill in the process.

These subsidies have largely benefitted wealthy Americans. As detailed in a report from the Institute for Policy Integrity at NYU, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) found that over 40 percent of subsidized coastal properties grandfathered into the NFIP program are worth over $500,000, and 12 percent are worth more than $1 million. Nearly a quarter of the subsidized properties in the CBO’s coastal sample were vacation homes.

Furthermore, as Mindy Lubber, the President of Ceres, noted, “Instead of encouraging behavior that reduces risks from extreme weather events, [NFIP is] encouraging behavior that increases these risks.”

After decades of advocacy by environmental groups, budget watchdogs, and consumer organizations, Congress appeared to commit to fundamental reform of America’s national flood insurance program when it passed the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012

Biggert-Waters sought to stabilize NFIP finances and protect taxpayers by requiring NFIP to raise rates (through a multi-year phase in) to reflect true flood risk. That process involved updating antiquated flood maps created by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (according to the Government Accountability Office, as of 2008, half of NFIP’s maps were more than 15 years old, and another 8 percent were 10–15 years old).

In the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy, FEMA has launched an ambitious effort to modernize the flood maps, taking into account the threats of climate change on coastal areas. While it is essential that FEMA ensure the accuracy of these new maps—Rockport, Mass. successfully challenged FEMA’s methodology, which should affect maps throughout Cape Ann—the ultimate goal of accurately gauging risk and refashioning insurance rates accordingly is critical to taxpayers and our environment.

And yet, despite the fact that the vast majority of Congress—including Rep. John Tierney (D-MA) and the entire Massachusetts delegation—signed on to the 2012 reform, Congress is now doing it’s best Saint Augustine impersonation—expressing outrage at the effects of its own reform and vowing to roll it back.

The reaction of Congress reminds me of a Seinfeld bit about the check at the end of a meal:

Never liked the check at the end of the meal system, because money’s a very different thing before and after you eat. Before you eat, money has no value. And you don’t care about money when you’re hungry…Then the check comes at that moment. People are always upset, you know. They’re mystified by the check. “What is this? How could this be?” They start passing it around the table, “Does this look right to you? We’re not hungry now. Why are we buying all this food?

Indeed, while Congress was more than willing to engage in disciplined, principled changes to NFIP in 2012, now that the bill has come due, the response is one of shock and outrage.

This is Congress at its worst—trying to have its cake (a courageous vote for reform!) and eat it too (rolling back that reform at the first sign of its effect). That’s why I found myself in complete agreement with Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) this week when he called out members of his own party for their similarly guileless effort on the debt ceiling. Cruz, a darling of the Tea Party, said that the his colleagues decision to allow a debt ceiling increase to proceed with 50 votes, only to then turn around and vote against the bill, was a “show vote,” and “trickery to the constituents.”

The lack of courage, the bald-faced bait and switch of legislators heralding reform and then shirking from its effects—this is the type of behavior that leads to pitiful Congressional approval ratings and, more importantly, cynicism about the exercise of American Democracy.

To its credit, the Obama Administration has warned against rolling back NFIP reform. One hopes that Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) takes a similar stand when the bill to gut Biggert-Waters comes before the House this week.

Cupid's Arrow: Consolidating Governments to Save Taxpayer Money

This Valentine’s Day, let’s train Cupid’s Arrow at local governments in New York and Massachusetts—a surefire way to streamline services and save taxpayer money.

New York State has over 10,000 local governments—cities, towns, villages, counties, special water districts, sewer districts, fire districts, etc. These overlapping jurisdictions impose significant and unnecessary administrative and operating costs on the public, leading the Empire State to have the highest property taxes in the nation.

Governor Andrew Cuomo has taken concrete steps to nudge municipalities to consolidate services—or, perhaps more directly, to provide an incentive for citizens to push for consolidation forcefully at the ballot box.

The Governor announced his latest consolidation initiative in his State of the State address last month. The plan creates a two-year freeze on property taxes for upstate municipalities that have agreed to abide by a 2 percent property tax cap. In year one, homeowners earning under $500,000 would receive a 2 percent tax rebate simply for living in a community that respected the tax cap. In the second year, homeowners would only qualify for the credit if their municipality submits a plan to consolidate or share services with their neighbors that saves 1 percent of the levy a year for three years.

While the push for consolidation has been opposed by unions representing municipal workers—who understandably fear the loss of jobs that comes with greater efficiency—the long term effects on the economy of upstate New York should be positive. Instead of having individuals duplicate efforts town by town, those people will gravitate toward more productive employment. Phasing in consolidation via attrition may be one way to achieve a compromise with unions, while securing long-term savings.

In addition to nudging local governments toward consolidation, the State should take steps to eliminate red tape that prevents counties from exploring joint procurement of health insurance and other goods/services. As Stephen Acquario, the executive director of the New York State Association of Counties, told City and State, “There is no reason why a county should not be authorized to reach out to towns, villages, cities, school districts and centralize procurement of health insurance for all of the local governments within its jurisdiction.”

New York is perhaps the most egregious example of the proliferation of government. However, Bay State is not immune from this waste. While Massachusetts eliminated most county government between 1997-2000 (sheriffs and county courts remain vestiges of the old guard), additional progress can and should be made.

To that end, Governor Deval Patrick launched the Community Innovation Challenge (CIC) grant program in 2012, designed to encourage sharing of services. In two years, the program has invested $6.25 million in 49 projects in 197 municipalities across the Commonwealth.

Last week, Hamilton and Wenham—long partners in running the Hamilton-Wenham Regional School District—received a CIC grant of $90,000 to continue their efforts in forming the State’s first-ever combined Public Facilities and Infrastructure Department. This continues a trend of shared service delivery by the two towns, which included the opening of Massachusetts’ first joint library in 2001.

All too often, conservatives lead this type of streamlining. But the truth is that efficient government is even more important for liberals, who believe that government should play a central role in ensuring opportunity for all, investing in public infrastructure, and enacting policy to protect the environment and strengthen the middle class. After all, if we want the public to place its trust in government's ability to invest their hard-earned money, we must do everything we can to make every dollar count.

Experimentation and Opportunity: Essex County Schools

[A] single courageous State may, if its citizens choose, serve as a laboratory; and try novel social and economic experiments without risk to the rest of the country.

-- Louis Brandeis, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court,

New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann, 285 U.S. 262 (1932).

As reported in today’s Boston Globe, Governor Deval Patrick awarded five grants totaling $50,000 to the Pentucket Regional School District for innovative learning academies within existing schools. Other Essex County schools also received grants, including the O’Maley Innovation Middle School in Gloucester and the Tilton Innovation School in Haverhill.

The Commonwealth’s commitment to flexibility and experimentation in education is one of the critical reasons why Massachusetts’ public schools consistently rank near the top in the nation. Pentucket’s five programs will run the gamut—from an International Baccalaureate program and visual arts to a program focused on safety and public service.

What is most critical now is for the State to have measures in place to objectively analyze the successes and failures of each academy so that best practices can be shared with other districts and other ideas can be dropped if deemed ineffective.

But experimentation is not enough to ensure that all students have access to a quality education. Cities and towns in the Commonwealth that have excellent schools also have a responsibility to open their doors to students who, largely by accident of birth, do not have access to the same high-quality education.

One such school is my alma mater—Hamilton-Wenham Regional High School. Last week, the HW School Committee reauthorized the School Choice program at the Regional. There is no doubt that School Choice imposes significant financial costs on districts that welcome students to their schools. Indeed, it is high time that the State cast a critical eye on the amount of School Choice tuition (paid to HW by the town of the choice student), which has not changed since it was first set by the state legislature at $5,000 in 1991.

Nevertheless, the benefits of choice—both to the students who take advantage of it and the broader student body—should not be underestimated (and I don’t just say that because my sister married her high school sweetheart, who just happened to be a choice student from Essex).

Choice students add a diverse array of experience/perspective to a class that, for the most part, grows up in a relatively insulated bubble from K-8. Furthermore, with demographics data projecting fewer resident students at the high school over the next 10 years, School Choice students help the Regional maintain a critical mass of students necessary for a robust, engaging curriculum.

As Horace Mann, the Father of American Public Education and a Massachusetts native himself, said 165 years ago:

Education then, beyond all other devices of human origin, is the great equalizer of the conditions of men, the balance-wheel of the social machinery…[and] [t]he people of Massachusetts have…appreciated the truth that the unexampled prosperity of the State…is attributable to the education, more or less perfect, which all its people have received.

The Commonwealth is stronger when we all have common experience and opportunity and I am proud that my hometown and my home county continue to embody the principles of Horace Mann and Louis Brandeis.