Category: Testimony

Language Access Makes Public Services More Effective and Makes Economic Sense

Posted on by Marleina Ubel

Good morning, Chair Sarlo and members of the committee. My name is Marleina Ubel and I am a policy analyst at New Jersey Policy Perspective (NJPP), a nonpartisan think tank focused on advancing economic, social, and racial justice. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.

Everyone should be able to access basic government services. Yet lack of translation on websites and documents, especially when dealing with vital services like unemployment, health care, or even registering children for school, creates a barrier for the 2.6 million New Jerseyans who speak a language other than English at home, including over 350,000 seniors. In one of the most linguistically diverse states in the country, New Jersey needs to ensure that its residents can interact with their government.

I also want to lift up two points:

Language access makes public services more effective. The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated in real time how important it is for governments to produce timely, accurate translations of critical information (such as public health guidance and vaccination data) and government documents (such as unemployment applications, health insurance documents, and state websites). Google Translate, which is used for most state websites, often garbles technical definitions, creating the possibility of misunderstanding and inaccuracy. In fact, there were many accounts of text message alerts received during the COVID-19 crisis response that were unintelligible.

Language access makes economic sense. Given the fact that New Jersey still has $1.4 billion in ARP funds and that those funds are explicitly intended to create the kind of infrastructure that would avoid unintelligible communications from our government during a pandemic and create more accessibility within government, the up front cost to translate websites and documents seems like a no brainer. Additionally, the kinds of issues that folks would report if they had the ability to do so have the potential to make government operate more efficiently and thus, generate more revenue. Just one example: I spent a great deal of time as a social worker translating for folks that were trying to report wage theft. Employers who are not paying their employees, are also not paying taxes on those employees, not mention all the downstream effects of not receiving income you were expecting.

As a state whose strength has come from its diverse population, New Jersey deserves to be a place where all people have equal access to government services.

“Tough-on-Crime” Bills Do Not Address the Root Causes of Crime

Posted on by NJPP Staff

Good morning, Chairman Stack and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.

I’m Marleina Ubel from New Jersey Policy Perspective (NJPP), a nonpartisan think tank focused on advancing economic, social, and racial justice for New Jersey residents.

First, I want to acknowledge that the work you do is challenging. You are pulled in different directions by people who feel passionately about these issues, and I believe that you are all trying to do what you feel is right. When I was in college, I had a professor tell me once, “doing the right thing is easy. It is knowing what the right thing is that is the hard part.” So, today I will share some information to help you determine what the right thing is.

As written, S3346 will essentially turn trespassing into 2nd degree burglary subject to NERA. What that means is, this legislature is asking that someone who enters any place with an accommodation for sleeping without permission, whether or not the place is empty, be sent to prison for 5 to 10 years, have to serve at least 85% of their sentence before they are even eligible for parole, and have an additional mandatory period of supervision tacked on. Make no mistake, this will create a new mandatory minimum, even if those words do not appear in the bill. It will also make that person essentially ineligible for other programming, such as diversion programs for juveniles or recovery court for individuals who use drugs.

Given that research has shown that property crime like burglary is tied to economic circumstances, this bill will target some of the most vulnerable New Jerseyans and make them ineligible for services that might actually reduce the chances for reoffense. Thus, this bill will have unintended consequences and increase the chances that people reoffend by making support services — the kind that actually address root causes of crime — out of reach. This bill will also adversely affect juveniles, because a 2nd degree NERA offense makes it more likely that they are tried in an adult court even if their record is clean.

Lengthy sentences do not serve as deterrents or address root causes, and they do not reduce crime. In fact, research has shown that increased and continuous exposure to the penal system increases recidivism and exacerbates the circumstances that lead to criminal activity in the first place, things like, employment and educational opportunities, economic stability, relationships with community members and family – all of these things are ripped away from people when they are sent to prison. In this case, ripped away from someone who is likely vulnerable and nonviolent for what could be a decade.

Bills like this are how we got to where we are today, known across the world as the incarceration nation. Please do the right thing and vote no on this bill.

Thank you and happy to take any questions.

 

Social Equity Excise Fee Revenue Distribution Must Center Racial Justice

Posted on by Marleina Ubel

Good evening, Chairwoman Houenou, Vice-Chairman Delgado, and Commissioners of the Cannabis Regulatory Commission. Thank you for this opportunity to share my testimony.

My name is Marleina Ubel and I am a policy analyst at New Jersey Policy Perspective (NJPP), a nonpartisan think tank focused on advancing economic, social, and racial justice for New Jersey residents.

I want to start by thanking you for your recommendations from last year. It is clear that you heard the call to make sure that the money from the Social Equity Excise Fee be distributed back not just into municipalities, but into communities harmed by the War on Drugs and not spent on law enforcement.

The language surrounding the use of this revenue is vague, allowing the state to exercise tremendous discretion in how it’s spent. Therefore, there must be clear parameters on what is acceptable and what is not, along with the expectation that a participatory budgeting process must be followed. This is of utmost importance because the communities and the individuals who have been directly impacted by the drug war must have meaningful input on how the money is used.

Meaningful input also requires transparency. The public should have access to how much revenue is raised and where that revenue is going. This should not be a slush fund, nor should it be spent on coercive treatment, school resource officers, or otherwise invested in punitive measures connected to the criminal legal system, which is the very entity that caused the most harm enforcing cannabis prohibition.

As you outlined in your prior recommendations, revenue from the Social Equity Excise Fee should go directly toward promoting stronger, safer, and more resilient communities, as well as services that recognize substance use as a matter of public health. Examples of such investments include: recreation and community programming, harm reduction services, neighborhood restoration, after-school programming, and vouchers or direct payments for individual needs, such as utilities, rent, or medical costs.

New Jersey has an obligation to equitably invest this revenue, meaning they must center racial justice and reparations for people harmed by the War on Drugs. Anything less would fail the very communities and residents that the Social Equity Excise Fee is intended to support.

Thank you.

Language Access Removes Barriers and Makes Public Services More Effective

Posted on by Marleina Ubel

Good morning, Chair Beach and members of the committee. My name is Marleina Ubel and I am a policy analyst at New Jersey Policy Perspective (NJPP), a nonpartisan think tank focused on advancing economic, social, and racial justice. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.

Everyone should be able to access basic government services. Yet lack of translation on websites and documents, especially when dealing with vital services like unemployment, health care, or even registering children for school, creates a barrier for the 2.6 million New Jerseyans who speak a language other than English at home, including over 350,000 seniors. In one of the most linguistically diverse states in the country, New Jersey needs to ensure that its residents can interact with their government.

I also want to lift up two points:

Language access makes public services more effective. The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated in real time how important it is for governments to produce timely, accurate translations of critical information (such as public health guidance and vaccination data) and government documents (such as unemployment applications, health insurance documents, and state websites). Google Translate, which is used for most state websites, often garbles technical definitions, creating the possibility of misunderstanding and inaccuracy. In fact, there were many accounts of text message alerts received during the COVID-19 crisis response that were unintelligible.

Language access helps most those who have the least. People who speak a language other than English at home are more likely to live in poverty and are less likely to have completed college or high school, exactly the population most in need of assistance. Yet barriers to entry keep government services from reaching the people who need them. This population is also especially vulnerable to exploitation, such as wage theft. And when dealing with high stress situations such as medical or public safety emergencies, exploitation, or sudden loss of housing or employment, people with limited English proficiency should not face yet another hurdle to getting the help they need.

As a state whose strength has come from its diverse population, New Jersey deserves to be a place where all people have equal access to government services.

Data Disaggregation Gives Lawmakers a Full Picture of Communities and Advances Equity

Posted on by Marleina Ubel

Good morning, Chair Beach and members of the committee. My name is Marleina Ubel and I am a policy analyst at New Jersey Policy Perspective (NJPP), a nonpartisan think tank focused on advancing economic, social, and racial justice. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.

One of New Jersey’s great strengths is its diversity, which, as recent Census data show, continues to grow with increasing Asian American and Pacific Islander populations. To advance equity and effectively allocate resources, policymakers need a full picture of the needs of their residents. But without complete data, especially about New Jersey’s Asian American, Pacific Islander, Middle Eastern, and North African populations, policymakers are in the dark.

Unfortunately, when it comes to health, social services, the criminal legal system, housing, or education, many of the data collected for these populations lumps all of these communities into a single category as “Asian”, “AAPI”, or sometimes simply “Other” or “Unknown.”

These vague categories mask socioeconomic differences between and within national-origin and ethnic groups. The continent of Asia comprises more than half of all people on earth. One catch-all category of “Asian American” fails to capture the diverse backgrounds, let alone the separate experience of Pacific Islanders.

Perhaps the clearest example of the hazards of this one-size-fits-all approach has been the COVID-19 pandemic response. Although Asian Americans overall had lower mortality rates, specific populations, especially Filipino and South Asian national-origin groups, were overrepresented in COVID-19 deaths.

A-3092 would take an important step towards ensuring that when New Jersey policymakers, leaders, and community members look at state-collected data, they are seeing a complete picture, not one that erases entire communities.

Thank you.

New Jersey Must Prepare for the Next Big Storm

Posted on by Alex Ambrose

My name is Alex Ambrose, and I’m the Transportation and Climate Policy Analyst with New Jersey Policy Perspective. Thank you Chair Karabinchak, Chair Kennedy, and members of both committees for the opportunity to speak today.

It is past time the state takes action to secure the safety and wellbeing of our families, small business, and overall economic security. This month, we honor the people who lost their lives in the deadliest storm in NJ history. Not coincidentally, we also just passed the one-year anniversary of the second deadliest storm event, Ida. As someone who comes from a family of first responders, I saw firsthand the danger frontline workers face during these disasters.

Fortunately, New Jersey is poised to be a leader in storm resiliency.

First, we need to stabilize our current energy portfolio by reducing emissions, investing heavily in public transportation, elevating New Jersey union jobs in exciting new sectors like offshore wind and solar, and modernizing our grid. This will require a Clean Energy Jobs bill that will add not just jobs, but careers in our state and uphold local standards for craftsmanship.

Second, we need to end the diversion of Clean Energy Funds started by Governor Christie and continued in this administration. Spending the funds as they are intended opens up more funding for projects that create a better and more resilient state.

Third, we need to give the DEP full authority to regulate flooding on residential properties. As it stands right now, that authority is unclear and would best be affirmed with a legislative fix.

Finally, we ask you to join us in calling on the Murphy Administration to release the flood zone rules and NJ PACT rules promised nearly three years ago. These rules will ensure new development does not put families and small businesses in harm’s way just so a developer can make a profit. We need more housing in our state, and we need to make sure we don’t repeat our past mistakes and wake up the day after a storm to headlines of people drowning in their own apartment. It is time to stop looking to the past for planning where to build and instead to plan for the future.

I grew up in a house that was built in a 500-year flood zone. One of my earliest memories is my father carrying my family through the waist-deep waters of Hurricane Floyd. We were fortunate enough to make it to my grandparents’ house nearby before we faced imminent peril. There are too many New Jersey residents who have not been so fortunate.

For too long, our state has been exploited by corporations prioritizing profits over people. We deserve a New Jersey that values people over polluters. After Sandy, the motto said, “We are stronger than the storm.” I posit that we are also smarter than these storms. It is not a matter of if the next storm comes–it’s when. Let’s be proactive now and plan for that future. Thank you.

Common Sense Changes to the Tax Code Will Narrow Wealth Inequities

Posted on by Sheila Reynertson

New Jersey Policy Perspective (NJPP) is committed to closing the racial wealth gap through statewide policies that build and share wealth equitably. As a nonpartisan think tank that drives policy change to advance economic, social, and racial justice, NJPP has identified key policies that will begin to repair the harms of centuries of discrimination and exploitation.

1. Fair and Just Taxation

The most effective tool in equalizing wealth disparities is taxation aimed at the very wealthiest individuals and corporations. Fair and just taxation of existing wealth serves two critical goals: It ensures that people who have extracted the most value from the state’s economic system pay what they owe, and it ensures that the government has the resources it needs to support programs that advance wealth-building and human capital.

NJPP recommends three immediate commonsense changes to the tax code that will narrow wealth disparities:

  • Extend the Corporate Business Tax (CBT) surcharge on profits over $1 million. Corporate earnings over $1 million in New Jersey have been subject to a surtax since 2018. Because it only applies to very wealthy corporations, the surtax ensures that a portion of record-breaking profits benefits everyone. Scheduled to expire at the end of 2023, the surtax should instead be made permanent, turning huge corporate profits into publicly shared support and services.
  • Reform the inheritance tax to make it progressive. Lightly-tax and tax-free transfers of wealth at death widen the racial wealth gap. For example, in 2019, 30 percent of white households received an average inheritance of about $200,000, while only 10 percent of Black households received one which, on average, was half the amount. Worse, New Jersey’s mostly flat tax on inheritances over a certain amount leads to these smaller inheritances being taxed at roughly the same rate as multimillion dollar transfers. To reduce the transfer of concentrated wealth, NJPP proposes expanding the tax to direct heirs and, to make it more progressive, lifting the exemption for smaller inheritances up to $1 million.
  • Close corporate loopholes to treat all businesses fairly. New Jersey’s combined-reporting law has a big loophole that allows wealthy multistate corporations to transfer their profits out of New Jersey to other states or countries with low or no corporate taxes. Fixing this and other remaining flaws will stop corporations with deep pockets, like Amazon and Walmart, from taking advantage of tax avoidance schemes that reduce what they owe and rob the state of resources needed to strengthen everyone’s ability to build wealth.

 

These tax policies are only the start. NJPP has other progressive proposals that end preferential tax breaks and target wealth held by the most affluent members of society, like the restoration of the estate tax and strengthening how New Jersey taxes capital gains income, among others.

At its root, taxation is the single most powerful tool to equalize wealth disparities. No doubt these hearings will include many proposals for outstanding and innovative programs: baby bonds, home buying assistance, guaranteed income. But to fund these programs at the level needed to meaningfully close the state’s substantial wealth disparities, New Jersey will need to simultaneously pursue fair taxation of the state’s wealthiest individuals and corporations.

2. Affordable for All: Putting Money in Families’ Pockets

A perpetual obstacle to wealth-building among low- and middle-income households are the day-in, day-out expenses and surprise costs, such as medical emergencies or a car repair. Accumulating wealth is nearly impossible for families who must dip into savings or take additional debt simply to make ends meet.

NJPP supports any policy that puts cash back in the pockets of low- and middle-income households to help ease the pain of these expenses and begin to build savings:

  • Expand the Child Tax Credit. New Jersey has created its first state-level Child Tax Credit, but at $500 per child under age 6 for households earning less than $30,000 annually, this does not come close to meeting the high cost of child-rearing. Raising the credit from $500 to at least $1,000 would defray these costs, as would expanding the credit to families with children age 6 and older.
  • Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). The EITC is a powerful anti-poverty tool, but many New Jerseyans who pay into the tax system don’t get the benefit of the EITC because they lack a Social Security number. Including ITIN-holders would advance equity among all New Jersey families living paycheck to paycheck.
  • Reform WorkFirst NJ. New Jersey’s assistance program for very low-income residents is in immediate need of reform to keep households stable and move them out of poverty. Increasing the benefit amount and ending policies that trap households in a cycle of poverty will change lives, especially the lives of children.

 

Cash in families’ pockets acts as an income support first and foremost. But absent sufficient financial resources to make ends meet, no household can effectively begin building wealth in the first place.

3. Innovative Wealth-Building Programs

Existing asset-building programs have thus far failed to build the base of wealth necessary to begin closing the wealth gap. Indeed, many programs and tax structures have instead widened the gap, by providing disproportionate benefits to the already-wealthy.

NJPP proposes these creative solutions to explicitly build wealth in households that have been left behind for far too long:

  • Pay reparations for tangible harms of slavery and racial discrimination. Direct payments to Black communities harmed by the American slave trade, as well as discriminatory practices such as redlining, segregation and employment discrimination, would directly close the racial wealth gap. NJPP supports legislation to create a task force on reparations to Black residents.
  • Fund robust baby bonds programs. Connecticut and Washington, DC have passed baby bonds legislation, which funds savings accounts for all births covered by their Medicaid programs. These accounts receive additional contributions from the state before the bonds and children reach maturity. Such a program would help close the wealth gap for children and young adults by giving families an opportunity to build assets without dipping into savings or going into debt.

 

NJPP supports a broad array of proposals to reduce wealth inequality in New Jersey, but real change comes down to appropriately taxing the obscene accumulation of wealth by the top one percent of individuals and corporations, while building assets and reducing deprivation for working-class families.

Thank you.

Reevaluation of Fines and Fees in the Criminal Legal System is Essential to Reducing Wealth Inequality

Posted on by Marleina Ubel

Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. My name is Marleina Ubel and I am a policy analyst at New Jersey Policy Perspective (NJPP), a nonpartisan think tank focused on advancing economic, racial, and social justice for New Jersey residents.

The criminal justice system creates and exacerbates racial wealth gaps. Mass incarceration and its disparate application to Black and Hispanic/Latinx communities has reduced their earnings potential, employment opportunities, and wealth accumulation. However, my focus today will be on monetary fines and fees, which can turn minor offenses into massive and long-lasting disparities, especially for people already in dire economic circumstances.

A brief overview of the terminology: fines and fees, or monetary sanctions, are costs imposed by the courts. Fines are meant to serve as a punishment, such as a ticket for jaywalking, while fees are meant to pay for the day-to-day operations of the criminal justice system. Often, when one is charged with a fine, they also are charged with a fee. However, for a person with outstanding fines or fees, the effect is the same — an amount owed that they likely cannot pay, which can balloon into substantial economic hardship down the road. A recent study showed that Black and Hispanic/Latinx defendants spent more time in the court system before disposition and owed more fines and fees 90 days after disposition than white defendants with similar charges.[i]

Let me illustrate how broken the system of fines and fees is with a fairly commonplace criminal justice system interaction: When a person is accused of a crime but can’t afford their own attorney, they are entitled to representation by a public defender. But in New Jersey, this is not free — despite the defendant having to demonstrate financial indigence to qualify for the service. State law requires that the public defender’s office bill defendants a minimum of $150.[ii] Within six months of disposition of the case, the defendant must pay the bill or be in debt to the State of New Jersey.[iii]

This applies to municipal public defenders for municipal offenses, meaning that even low-level municipal offenses can result in liens placed on low-income defendants, yet another drag on ability to build wealth, even if the charges are dismissed or other fines and fees are successfully paid.[iv]

And, while these costs do not appear enormous, roughly one-third of American adults cannot cover a $400 expense without going into debt or selling assets.[v]

Although steps have been taken by the Legislature, judiciary, and the Attorney General to reduce the impact of these fines and fees on individuals, the reality is that even cursory interaction with criminal courts can result in charges that hamper wealth accumulation. Getting a lawyer, obtaining court documents pertaining to one’s own case, and applying for expungement of one’s record all come with costs that low-income individuals are unlikely to afford.

NJPP recommends eliminating all public defender fees and funding residents’ constitutional right to an attorney through sustainable public funding. Neighboring states like New York and Pennsylvania do not charge for legal representation and neither should we.[vi]

However, beyond these fees, NJPP recommends a wholesale reevaluation of fines and fees across the criminal legal system, in line with recent legislation that heavily reduces or eliminates juvenile-justice-related fees.[vii] The vicious cycle of fines and fees, inability to pay, and subsequent increased interaction with police and courts — leading to lost work time, drained savings, and of course, additional fines and fees — must be broken to reduce wealth inequality in New Jersey.

End Notes

[i] Lindsay Bing et al., Incomparable Punishments: How Economic Inequality Contributes to the Disparate Impact of Legal Fines and Fees, RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences January 2022, 8 (2) 118-136. https://www.rsfjournal.org/content/8/2/118

[ii] N.J. Admin. Code Sec. 17:39-3.1

[iii] N.J. Stat. Sec. 2A:158A-17

[iv] N.J. Stat. Sec. 2B:24-13

[v] See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households in 2021 (May 2022),  p. 35-36.

[vi] Marea Beeman et al., National Legal Aid and Defender Association, At What Cost? Findings from an Examination into the Imposition of Public Defense System Fees (July 2022), tbl. 2 at p. 15, https://www.nlada.org/sites/default/files/NLADA_At_What_Cost.pdf?v=2.0

[vii] P.L. 2021, c.342.

It’s Time for New Jersey to Fix WorkFirst NJ to Better Support Low-Income Families

Posted on by Brittany Holom-Trundy

Good afternoon Chairman Vitale and members of the Committee. Thank you for this opportunity to provide my testimony on the proposed Work First New Jersey (WFNJ) reforms. My name is Dr. Brittany Holom-Trundy, and I am a senior policy analyst at New Jersey Policy Perspective (NJPP). NJPP is a non-partisan, non-profit research institution that focuses on policies that can improve the lives of low- and middle-income people, strengthen our state’s economy, and enhance the quality of life in New Jersey.

NJPP strongly supports the changes proposed in S1642. We believe that the comprehensive reforms proposed in this bill are a good step toward a WFNJ that more effectively tackles childhood poverty, helps support low-income families, and builds a stronger, more equitable future for the state.

New Jerseyans need these changes now, as the program’s structure falls short of effectively addressing poverty. As of February 2022, fewer than 10,000 — only 9,976 — families were participating in TANF. This means that TANF is supporting fewer than one in six New Jersey families in poverty. And this number has only fallen over the past two and a half decades since the last major reform at the federal level.

WFNJ falls short not only in the number of residents it serves, but in how it serves them. Administrative barriers arbitrarily limit assistance, and even those who receive that assistance do not get enough to make ends meet. Monthly cash benefits in the program remain at less than ⅓ of the Federal Poverty Level, meaning that cash assistance now has only a quarter of the strength relative to federal poverty levels than the cash assistance that was provided in the 1970s. Benefit cliffs and inadequate off-ramps for the program leave families hanging, facing the reality that working full time in a minimum wage job in New Jersey today will still leave a parent with two children below the federal poverty level…And this does not even take into account that the federal poverty level is tens of thousands of dollars below estimates of what it takes to pay monthly food, utility, housing, and other necessary bills in New Jersey. All of these problematic limitations of the program leave families with an inability to save, to prepare for unexpected expenses, and to ultimately break free from the cycle of poverty.

This bill advances comprehensive reforms to address many of these shortcomings. By increasing the monthly grant (benefit) amount to at least 50% FPL with automatic cost of living adjustments, improving off-ramps, modifying work requirements to better meet realities for working parents, and making other important changes to rules that bring the program into the 21st century, we can make the WFNJ program truly work for New Jerseyans.

We hope that the committee will advance these reforms today. Now more than ever New Jersey’s parents and children need commitments from our state leaders to support their well-being and a brighter future.

Thank you for your time.

Without Transparency, New Jersey Risks Spending ARP Funds in Ways That Don’t Provide True Relief

Posted on by Sheila Reynertson

If used as intended by the Biden administration, the state fiscal recovery funds granted to New Jersey through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARP) offer a once-in-a-lifetime chance to advance racial equity by investing in communities that were hardest hit by the pandemic and historically left behind in the lawmaking process. Yet, despite repeated calls from policy experts, community leaders, and advocates to prioritize disproportionately harmed residents, elected leaders have failed to deliver adequate direct relief to those who need it most.

With less than $1 billion remaining, New Jersey’s unique opportunity to provide immediate and meaningful relief to these families and communities is quickly slipping away. As Governor Murphy and lawmakers decide how to use the remaining funds, let’s not forget the “Rescue” in the American Rescue Plan. There are a lot of workers and families still struggling who would benefit from:

  • Direct relief for immigrant workers
  • Hazard pay for essential workers
  • Rental assistance for those facing eviction
  • Cash assistance for residents who maxed out their TANF benefits

Transparency Not Treated as a Priority

Based on current, available documentation, each new allocation of ARP funds in the latest budget lacks any kind of description, meaning there is no way to tell who exactly benefits from hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of spending. For example, lawmakers allocated $300 million to water infrastructure, but without basic details it’s unclear which communities will benefit and which will be left behind.

In other cases, the allocation goes to a new or existing program that will require ongoing funding, drawing into question the state’s commitment toward its success once the federal funds are gone. Case in point: The state’s only public hospital received $50 million for a building assessment plan, but with no guarantee that the plan will be implemented.

The lack of information on ARP allocations also calls into question whether some of these investments were necessary at all — especially for funds sent to private institutions that should have plenty of resources to cover the costs themselves. For example, $13 million has been granted to two health systems for “hospital infrastructure” and workforce education.

The truth is: we’re nervous.

Despite ongoing requests to address the harms of the pandemic itself and the economic and social aftermath, the transparency with which final decisions are made has been dismal. The public, in fact, has not been granted a meaningful process by which to weigh in on how the remaining dollars are spent and, based on the uneven quality of issuances so far, that must change.

Lawmakers can start by allowing public testimony at future JBOC hearings — consistent with most other legislative committee hearings — so that policy experts, essential workers, and community leaders alike can weigh in on ARP spending proposals before they’re approved.

Thank you.

«« Previous Posts∞Older Posts »»