Green Hill Golf Course controversy, again

By Scott Zoback

The controversy over beer at the Green Hill Golf Course feels as stale and skunked as a sun-drenched Coors Light, yet here we go again.

It’s an odd situation, if only because it’s not often that city officials are the ones advocating for more booze. But this Thursday, City Manager Michael O’Brien will continue his administration’s quest for booze at the course, and go before the License Commission to request a two-day license (with Gus Giordano) for a golf tournament on the greens.

The move should come as no surprise. Exactly two years ago, Public Works Commissioner Robert Moylan announced the city’s plans to go after a two-day license for the Walter Cosgrove Annual Golf Tournament, and approval for a limited number of events a year, no more than 10 events or 15 days.

That plan was kyboshed when the Parks Commission reportedly interpreted the motion as asking for a blanket beer license. The city divided over the issue. Officials and golfers pushed for drinking, saying it would allow the park to compete on an equal level with its competitors. Opponents (under the guise of park and neighborhood advocates) claiming that it would ruin the “jewel” of the park system and would be unfriendly to families.

It’s been such a contested issue that in the heat of it, some duffers drinking beer in the parking lot after a round had the cops called on them.

But later in 2006, the Parks and Recreation Commission unanimously adopted a plan that allowed alcohol for select events on Worcester Common, and allowed for the possibility of alcohol at the golf course. The Commission made it clear though that such a license wouldn’t even be considered without a master plan for the park.

The year 2007 was relatively quiet on the beer-in-parks front, save for a little spat at the budget hearings. When Moylan acknowledged that the city was working on a master plan that would include “enhancing the golf experience,” Mayor Konnie Lukes shot back, “Does that mean imbibing?”

“It means a lot of things,” said Moylan. Later, O’Brien attempted to deflect the conversation, asking for discussion to be tabled until after the plan came out.

“OK, I understand you don’t want to talk about it right now,” said Lukes.

In January, the city manager unveiled his Green Hill Park master plan, including revenue from beer and wine sales.

Which brings us to now.

At Tuesday’s City Council meeting, the councilors voted to “accept with gratitude” the services of Maxwell Silverman’s, a precursor to Thursday’s License Commission hearing. It was clear that not all councilors were in favor of the motion; Mayor Lukes and Phil Palmieri in particular remain critics of the idea of drinking in parks.

While Lukes voted to thank Gus Giordano and Maxwell Silverman’s, she used the occasion to pontificate a bit about not wanting alcohol at the parks, though she said the order was about thanking the restaurant, not being political.

In response, Giordano used the bully pulpit to his advantage: “I do think prohibition should end at Green Hill. I think bootlegging should stop,” adding that proper liquor service could bring a profit to Green Hill Golf Course.

On Tuesday, Lukes told Worcester Magazine that she’s “still opposed to serving alcohol in parks,” and that “carving out” one park versus another is “not good policy. Once it’s approved, it’ll be contagious. It won’t be limited to the golf course. Kids and adults will be exposed to [addictive behavior] and there will be no sanctuary,” she says. o

Personal care attendants organizing rally for financial support and respect

By Chet Williamson

They meet every week in coffee shops in cities and towns all across the state. They congregate as independent workers uniting to improve the conditions of their profession.

They are known as personal care attendants or PCAs — the unlicensed, unskilled health care providers who tend to the sick, elderly and disabled. Their work allows thousands of Massachusetts residents to still live at home, independently.

For years, for little more than minimum wage, PCAs have worked with no health insurance and no benefits — many with no vacations, sick days or time off for bereavement.

In July 2006, the Massachusetts Legislature cleared the way for personal care attendants to organize. The law became known as The Quality Home Care Bill, which is designed not only to improve workers’ wages, but the entire home care delivery system of the state.

The legislation was originally vetoed by outgoing Gov. Mitt Romney, but unanimously overturned by both the House and Senate.

“I don’t think there was any better bill to pass the Legislation,” says State Sen. Steven Tolman, who sponsored the bill. “I am proud to be a small part of it.”

In November, more than 20,000 PCAs took advantage of the law by voting to join Local 1199 of the Service Employees International Union (1199 SEIU). The election was run by the American Arbitration Association and it was the largest union organizing election in New England history with 94% of the PCAs voting in favor of becoming members.

The Local 1199 SEIU, which represents nearly 300,000 health care workers in Massachusetts, Maryland, New York and Washington, D.C., had been trying to organize PCAs for the past three years. In joining the union with its 1.9 million workers throughout the country, this allows PCAs to negotiate for wage increases, vacation time benefits and health insurance.

This past January the group entered into its first-ever labor contract negotiation with the state-appointed Quality Home Care Workforce Council, which is comprised of a majority of consumers who use PCA services through MassHealth, which is paid by the state and federal governments. Its budget is in excess of $6 million.

PCAs are currently paid $10.48 per hour. They are asking for a pay increase to $12 per hour as of July 1 and retroactive back to Jan. 1. The PCAs also wanted a two-year contract with a dollar increase to $13 hour for 2009 and additional money set aside for training.

There are more than nearly 700 PCAs living and caring for people in Worcester, and more than 1,300 in Central Massachusetts.

In early March, the PCAs received word from the governor’s Office of Administration and Finance that the state was only willing to offer a pay increase of 36 cents an hour.

“This is completely unacceptable,” says Jean Atkinson, a negotiating team member for the rank and file of local PCAs. Taking a seat in Dunkin’ Donuts at Harrington Corner on Main Street, she adds, “We only wanted a two-year contract. They want to stick us with 36 cents for three years. With the cost of living rising the way it is that is totally unacceptable.”

The next PCA bargaining session will be held on May 14, at which time the Quality Home Care Workforce Council will submit an updated proposal by the state for review by the PCA negotiating team.

In the meantime, Atkinson is preparing for the worst. She and other negotiators have drafted a letter to the rank and file requesting their attendance at a Wednesday, June 18, rally at the State House.

In her letter, Atkinson wrote: “Gov. Patrick and the Legislature know that since they unanimously voted in the law allowing us to have the union, it is now time to fund our contract in good faith. Gov. Patrick keeps talking about creating 22,000 good jobs — well, we have 22,000 jobs. Now he just has to make them good ones.” o

$510,000: The amount of money the WRTA says it will save in fuel, labor and fringe costs by eliminating 4 routes, modifying 2 routes and increasing the headway on 1 route. The estimated cost of the 1 new “flex” route is $90,000.