Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations

HARTFORD � Just how much the state would save under the deal struck between Gov. Dannel P. Malloy and labor leaders hadn�t been determined early today by legislative analysts � but the House of Representatives voted to count $1.6 billion in the two-year budget for the deal anyway.

�Our own Office of Fiscal Analysis says they don�t have enough information to verify it,� House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, said in debate late Monday of the savings from state employee unions. �Yet we are going to pass this bill on June 6, based on that?�

The Office of Fiscal Analysis is the legislature�s nonpartisan budget office. Cafero had asked Alan Calandro, the office�s director, for his own projections of how much the concessions package would save. Administration and union officials say it�s worth $1.6 billion over two years. That�s roughly $900 million in the budget�s first year and $700 million in the second.

Calandro�s answer: �We don�t have enough information to judge the likelihood of the savings estimates coming to fruition,� he said in an interview.

Lawmakers were debating one of several bills to finalize the state�s two-year, $40.1 billion budget that starts July 1. The 277-page omnibus measure the Democrat-controlled House approved early today sets the policies creating the budget�s $2.6 billion tax increase, spells out the savings expected to be reached by the labor package, and allows the legislature to reconvene to approve or reject the deal if union members approve it, among other things.

If the concession and savings projections are off, the budget would be thrown out of balance.

The measure passed the House in an 83-63 vote that mostly followed party lines. It now heads to the Senate, which Democrats also control. The regular legislative session ends Wednesday.

Rep. Kathleen M. Tallarita of Enfield was one of 11 Democrats who voted against the measure, saying she couldn�t support the tax hikes. She also voted against the budget when the legislature approved it last month.

Cafero and other Republicans criticized lawmakers for relying upon the administration�s numbers on the concession deal. �We are a legislature,� he said. �We are a separate but equal branch of government.�

He pointed to a letter from Calandro, who�d asked administration officials for documentation detailing how savings figures were reached. The information provided wasn�t sufficient to verify the savings, Calandro wrote.

The concession agreement calls for two years of wage freezes for state employees followed by three years of 3 percent raises, with a four-year, no-layoff guarantee. Also contained in the package is a preventative health insurance system called the �Health Enhancement Program,� which requires doctor�s visits and certain screenings. If employees don�t comply, they�d pay $100 more a month toward health insurance. The deal also hikes by two years the retirement age for most employees, and doubles the financial penalty for retiring early.

Employees will vote on the deal over the next several weeks. The health insurance and retirement changes require approval from 14 of the 15 unions. Each of the 34 individual bargaining groups will decide on the pay changes and layoff protection.

But many of the savings aren�t predictable, Cafero said. He pointed to areas of the deal that aren�t concessions, including $90 million over two years in unidentified changes to technology, $180 million in savings from employee suggestions, and $130 million from an extra 1,000 employees retiring because of the deal.

He called $600 million of the proposed $1.6 billion �wishful thinking.�

�No answers have been provided here because there�s no data to provide,� he said.

Cafero and Republicans also said the legislature should sign off on any deal the unions ratify. The measure allows the legislature to accept or reject the agreement, but the concession package can go into effect without a legislative vote.

�We�re abdicating our responsibility,� Cafero said.

One amendment Republicans proposed would have required the legislature to call a special session to approve the agreement. They also would use the session to apply the changes to nonunion employees. It failed in a party-line vote.

Mark Ojakian, Malloy�s deputy budget director and the administration�s lead negotiator, stood by the savings figures.

�We�re very, very confident that we�ll be able to achieve the $1.6 billion over the biennium,� Ojakian said.

Actuaries calculated the savings for health insurance and pension changes, he said. Those from union members� money-saving ideas were vetted by administration experts.

�We have savings targets which have been developed after extensive discussions with front-line state employees,� Ojakian said. �They�re confident that we can achieve these savings.�

Ojakian also expressed surprise that Calandro and the Office of Fiscal Analysis reported not having enough information to reach their own projections.

�We have made ourselves available to OFA,� he said.

Benjamin Barnes, Malloy�s budget director, gave OFA officials a briefing on the concessions and savings package. Letters from consultants and actuaries were turned over to Calandro, Ojakian said.

�This is the first I�ve heard that they did not have the information,� he said.

Calandro, meanwhile, was careful to say that not being able to confirm the $1.6 billion figure doesn�t mean he�s refuting it, either.

�For most of the stuff, we need more information,� Calandro said. He also said his office hasn�t had much time to devote to working with administration officials on the issue.

House Speaker Christopher G. Donovan, D-Meriden, said it�s not uncommon for the legislature to rely on administration figures. Legislative analysts often don�t address contract changes until they�re before the legislature, after the unions have ratified them.

�We know the governor did some actuarial studies working with the unions on some of the savings,� Donovan said. �We believe that the savings are there.�

Allowing the concession package to be ratified without a legislative vote also is typical, he said. To do otherwise could interfere with the ratification process, Donovan said.

Rep. Toni E. Walker, D-New Haven and co-chair of the legislature�s budget-writing Appropriations Committee, said it�s important that the labor changes take effect as soon as the fiscal year starts July 1 so the savings can be realized. Calling lawmakers back for a special session could delay that, Walker said.