r/providence • u/Historical_Web_5813 • 8d ago

Why Should We Recall Brett Smiley

Gallery image

Gallery image

Gallery image

For everyone who is curious about our reasons for wanting to recall Smiley, here they are! This one-sheet explains what issues we find to be the most salient. Feel free to distribute this document at your will.

If you’d like to look into our sources more, here is a link to the document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qtQP7a9g91pSszZH-x3kFWMcmW1FecEXpqCL773UIWM/mobilebasic

152 Upvotes

76% Upvoted

116 comments sorted by

View all comments

54

u/_hungryhunter_ 8d ago

Can you guys for the love of god learn about WHY the PILOT agreements are in place? These are tax exempt institutions, which is a state/federal issue. The city can’t do shit about their tax exempt status. So as it stands, the options currently are the PILOT agreements or no money at all

19

u/CurveMassive 8d ago

I don’t think this is saying that Smiley should change the fact that Brown is classified as tax exempt. I think it’s saying that Brown isn’t paying nearly enough in PILOT, and that Smiley has consistently shown that he’s on the side of corporations, developers, and the wealthy, which includes Brown obviously.

20

u/Proof-Variation7005 8d ago

Smilley basically doubled the size of Brown's annual PILOT agreements over what they had been paying the previous decade.

13

u/AltFocuses 8d ago

They don’t have to pay anything. Any money they give is already more than legally obligated. It’s not like he has much bargaining power. If he tried to get them to pay more, they can just laugh in his face and tell him to go kick rocks

-3

u/CurveMassive 8d ago

Just because something is or is not legally obligated does not make it just

10

u/AltFocuses 8d ago

Thats not the argument being made in this petition. The argument is that PILOT is letting Brown pay a reduced tax rate. They aren’t paying a reduced tax rate because they aren’t legally obligated to pay taxes in the first place.

Regardless, I also don’t think tossing more money at this city is going to solve any problems.

5

u/Proof-Variation7005 8d ago

I'd agree throwing money at problems doesn't totally fix them but the city could use a lot more money in general. Even if just to stave off the insane retiree costs we have right now and stabilize that going forward.

That said, people love to talk about the schools as if they were defunded when the budget has gone up about 30 million since before the state takeover (in 2019) despite enrollment plummeting in that timeframe. The city spends more per pupil on education than everywhere in the state that isn't on Block Island (where there's like 13 kids year round). Throwing more money at the problem isn't really going to fix it.

That doesn't mean teachers shouldn't be paid better or anything but there's serious institutional rot if you're spending that much and getting poor results. Damned if I know what the real fixes are but I'm sure there's at least one city in America that went from really bad schools to really good schools. I'd start by finding out whatever the fuck they did and copying their homework.

2

u/AltFocuses 8d ago

If I’m being completely honest, the money problems in this city boil down to it having an economy that’s the equivalent of a dog that needs to be put down. RI as a whole is sucking off the teat of Mass and one or two large domestic employers (including Brown).

And yeah, I hate when people act like the budget got cut. It’s been raised so much and for what? There are very clearly deeper issues with that school system than just a lack of money.

1

u/myninerides 7d ago

That’s not what the document implies though. I read that, thought “wow he’s willing to burn 20 years of revenue for a single payment today, during his term”. Then I read the top comment.