Latest news with #McCay
NZ Herald
30-04-2025
- Health
- NZ Herald
Nationwide healthcare strike under way, thousands of procedures affected
Sutherland called the strike significant, and the focus would be on keeping hospitals safe today. 'We're well prepared, we've done a lot of planning... we're working closely with the union. 'The bigger issue is those deferrals, those postponements of care,' Sutherland said. About 370 perioperative nurses working at Auckland City Hospital, Starship Hospital and Greenlane Clinical Centre are striking. New Zealand Nurses Organisation (NZNO) chief executive Paul Goulter said Health NZ is attempting not to pay nurses for involuntary overtime. 'They are fed up with their goodwill being taken advantage of. They have sacrificed enough and want recognition for the years of work they have done.' Goulter said the perioperative nurses have been doing involuntary and unpaid overtime for years because 'they put their patients first'. The senior doctors are being represented by the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists (ASMS) in the union's first 24-hour strike since it was established in 1989. President of the Aotearoa NZ Committee at the Royal Australasian College of Physicians, Dr Hamish McCay, said the Government doesn't have a clear solution. 'A strike action is absolutely the last resort for healthcare workers. This decision highlights just how urgent the need for change is.' McCay said the strike underscores concern that cuts to the health budget will worsen the healthcare workforce crisis. 'The Government's Healthcare Workforce Plan recognises that we need at least an additional 3450 doctors over the next nine years, yet the Government has not articulated a clear pathway to achieving that goal and has slashed the health budget.' McCay said the demand for medical specialists has continued to grow at the same time that the healthcare system is facing a severe workforce shortage. 'This has meant that doctors and other health professionals have been navigating unsustainable workloads and inadequate working conditions.' Health Minister Simeon Brown expressed disappointment with the union, saying the strike would affect patient care. 'This isn't how we fix the health system,' Brown said. 'It's a decision that will hurt patients.' Health NZ advised patients that, unless contacted, they should attend any scheduled appointments or treatments. People with non-urgent health conditions should contact their GP in the first instance. Jaime Lyth is a multimedia journalist for the New Zealand Herald, focusing on crime and breaking news. Lyth began working under the NZ Herald masthead in 2021 as a reporter for the Northern Advocate in Whangārei.
Yahoo
19-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion: Changes to SB197 fail to protect low-income seniors
On February 14th, my op-ed was published regarding SB197, the bill that Sen. Dan McCay proposed in the Legislature that within five years would've wiped out any hope for financial relief for low-income senior property owners via Utah's four-decade-old Circuit Breaker program. Evidently, that editorial hit home. The bill was changed, but not enough to fix it. The first change was to exclusively grandfather in anyone who received relief in 2024, but that was it. No one else. A later version added folks who get approved in 2025. But again, just those particular senior Utahns could stay on. Unfortunately, punitive qualifying factors and measures were added for that exclusive group. No new applicants allowed after this year. Anyone not 66 years old by this December 31st is out. If you happen to not qualify for whatever reason, you can't get back on. The sponsor stated he wanted this bill to inspire seniors to move, to downsize and open up housing stock. Not sure where these seniors might move to that makes financial sense for them in this market, but once they do, they're off the program, as this bill states you need to be in the same residence you were in previously to continue. Another thing SB197 does is to lock in the income chart from 2024 without future adjustments for inflation, as has been the policy in the past. That $40,840 figure can be easily exceeded when minimal SSA COLA raises are granted, or when a family member needs to move in to care for their elderly parents. In January of this year, the tax commission proposed a maximum income of $42,623 for this year's Circuit Breaker and Renter Refund programs. Senator Wayne Harper's SB224, which got buried after McCay's SB197 was proposed, had proposed a $46,000 maximum income. Oddly, in SB197, renters can have a maximum household income of $46,000, but not property owners. Why the discrepancy? The $40,840 figure is too low, and being locked in will make qualifying much harder in the future. Consider that the governor's housing advisor, Steve Waldrip, proposed a $45,807 maximum in HB401 in 2022, three inflationary years ago. Yes, so much of this doesn't make any sense, and it gets worse. The new deferral programs SB197 creates are a revamped version of the failed deferral program McCay instituted two years ago that benefited only eight households. In looking over the plans, tax auditors around the state have found many obstacles and pitfalls too numerous to detail here. Some senior Utahns who have a reverse mortgage will be disqualified from deferral, while some Utahns of any age who are not financially strapped will be able to game the system and use it to take out low-interest loans for years and years to come. It's just bad policy. As long-time Chief Deputy Treasurer Phil Conder wrote to the Governor, 'I know of no County Tax Administrators in the State who support this bill. Not from an implementation perspective, financial perspective, nor compassionate perspective.' Another fallacy is that SB197 is meant to stem a program growing unsustainably. Participation in homeowner's credit actually decreased this year and now the number of households participating is fewer than in 2023. The state funding of the 2024 senior homeowner's credit amounted to only 8.6% of the entire Circuit Breaker program. For cost savings, SB197 aims at the wrong target. In 2023, another program had its benefits raised by 90%, and that has resulted in a cost increase to the counties of $22 million dollars in two years. That's where the 'growth' is. Unfortunately, SB197 was circled until the fifth version was unveiled and hurriedly passed with three hours left in the legislative session with a short debate cut off abruptly. Please promptly contact the governor's office at (801) 538-1000 or use one of these links to share your opposition to SB 197. We need county tax administrators to be able to share their accumulated wisdom and help craft a fair and useful deferral program Utahns can be proud of.
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Utah Legislature bans pride flags from schools, public buildings
(Getty Images) The Utah Legislature has passed a bill aimed at banning LGBTQ+ flags from Utah's public schools and government buildings in the name of 'neutrality.' After a fiery debate Thursday — the second-to-last day of the Utah Legislature's 2025 session — the Utah Senate voted 21-8 to approve the bill, with two Republicans (Sens. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, and Dan Thatcher, R-West Valley) joining Democrats in opposition. The House also gave a final nod of approval, 53-20. If Gov. Spencer Cox signs HB77, it will ban almost all flags from being displayed on or in public buildings, except for flags explicitly allowed in a prescriptive list included in the bill, such as the U.S. flag, the state flag, military flags, Olympic flags, college or university flags, or others. Pride flags or other LGBTQ+ flags — which Utah lawmakers in recent years have repeatedly tried to bar from schools in various ways — would be prohibited. As critics decry 'gross government overreach,' bill to ban pride flags from schools advances The bill's sponsors, Rep. Trevor Lee, R-Layton, and Sen. Dan McCay, R-Riverton, argued it's meant to encourage 'political neutrality' from government workers, including teachers. But critics, including Democrats, argued the broad ban on all government properties will invite free speech litigation while also leaving some Utahns, including the LGBTQ+ community, feeling unwelcome and erased. While the bill started out as one aimed at classrooms, McCay's arguments on the Senate floor reflected an appetite to also prevent other city governments from displaying certain flags, like pride flags, on their buildings' exterior. Utah Democratic capital city, Salt Lake City, hosts the Utah Pride Festival and Pride Parade every year at Library Square. Senate leaders told reporters Thursday that HB71 will prevent government officials from hanging pride flags in and around city and county buildings, but would still allow Utahns who are protesting or rallying to carry their flags in public. McCay said he thinks other local governments should be more like how the Utah Capitol is run. 'You know, we at the Capitol here at the state, we have strong rules about what (can be displayed) on the outside of the building,' he said. 'We're very careful and do all we can to make sure that everyone is welcome and everyone feels, you know, that the outside of the building appears to be politically neutral.' Without naming Salt Lake City or other cities or counties, McCay said 'that is not the case in several government buildings around the state.' 'The effort here is to try and restore that political neutrality' to public buildings and school classrooms, McCay said. Sen. Stephanie Pitcher, D-Salt Lake City, tried unsuccessfully to scale the bill back closer to applying only to school districts, warning that its current language could be unconstitutional, but a majority of Senate Republicans rejected her proposed amendment. 'The Supreme Court has recognized that local government entities hold independent free speech rights known as the government speech doctrine,' Pitcher said, adding that case law has established that 'government entities have the right to speak for itself.' 'I think we can save ourselves a lot of money and litigation by passing this amendment and bringing this bill to a place where it's constitutionally sound,' Pitcher said, before the Senate voted it down. McCay pushed back, arguing that while the Supreme Court 'says there is room for local expression, it does not mean that the majority has the ability to change the historical focus or warp the building into its own political speech.' Thatcher — a Republican who at times strays from his fellow GOP senators, especially on LGBTQ+ issues — argued against the bill, saying cities and counties 'elect their own representation' and 'they know their own people.' Utah bill to ban LGBTQ+ flags from schools — and in all government buildings — heads to House 'I'm wearing my Gadsden flag today,' Thatcher said, pointing to a yellow pin on his lapel with the 'Don't Tread On Me' logo, 'because I feel like we have been doing an awful lot of treading this year. And I think liberty is liberty, even if people want to liberty different than us.' Sen. Kathleen Riebe, D-Cottonwood Heights, also spoke against the bill, arguing lawmakers shouldn't infringe on free speech. 'I don't think that it disappoints people when we have different flags in our schools, I think it empowers them to find connections and to find understanding,' she said. Sen. Jen Plumb, D-Salt Lake City, argued against the bill, saying the issue 'feels so much bigger than just who likes your flag.' 'Taking away the ability for people to speak and represent who they are, just seems so fundamentally un-American to me,' Plumb said, urging lawmakers to consider what it means to take away freedom of speech, 'which I think every single one of us clings to and cherishes. It doesn't matter to me what population it is, I don't want it taken from anyone.' McCay — who last year was part of an unsuccessful effort to pass a previous flag ban on the final night of the 2024 session — argued HB77 isn't about taking away people's 'right to express themselves.' 'I believe that all those rights of expression … are important, and they need to be respected for the individuals to express them,' McCay said. 'The government, on the other hand, is intended to do the people's business, regardless of their political perspective, political identity or ideology.' McCay also compared the debate to restricting religion from government buildings and classrooms, calling the arguments against HB77 'ironic.' 'The fact that that's the interpretation that people took from the Constitution is such a perverted end result,' he said. 'When you remove the morality or the ability to express morality on one side, you do not get to replace it with your own.' McCay added 'the government is meant to be for all people. It should not be subject to the majority decision about what the outside of the building should become as a method of political speech.' He went on to argue that 'ideology' shouldn't be on display in classrooms, either. 'The sad truth of the matter is, as the left has removed religion entirely and morality from classrooms,' McCay said, before he was interrupted by a 'point of order' from Riebe. McCay balked, saying he's been 'called a racist' on the Senate floor before Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton, told him to stay focused on the bill. Still, McCay continued. 'At the end of the day, those who have fought for removing religion or morality from our classrooms, they have invited in a presence that is unwelcome by many,' McCay said. 'This is just an effort to try and trim back, in our classrooms, that type of political speech.' In two legislative public hearings on HB77, Utahns including those identifying with the LGBTQ+ community passionately argued pride or LGBTQ+ flags aren't 'political' or trying to push an 'agenda,' but rather they're meant to signal to youth that they're loved as they are. Research shows LGBTQ+ youth face an increased risk of self harm and suicidal attempts compared to heterosexual youth. Equality Utah — the state's largest LGBTQ+ advocacy organization — issued a statement Thursday saying lawmakers passed a 'blatantly unconstitutional bill.' 'This legislation, seemingly fueled by an ongoing dispute with Salt Lake City, strips away local control and targets the free expression of Utah's communities,' Equality Utah's executive director, Troy Williams, and the group's policy director Marina Lowe, said in the statement. 'In this political tug-of-war, LGBTQ Utahns have unfairly become collateral damage.' While Williams and Lowe said they were able to secure 'critical amendments' to the bill — which preserve 'the right of students and teachers to wear rainbow stickers, pins, and patches in classrooms — this does not erase the bill's broader harm.' They said McCay's arguments on the Senate floor 'made it clear that HB77 aims to censor the free speech rights of municipalities statewide, a move that oversteps legislative authority and invites legal scrutiny.' 'Equality Utah is frustrated by this outcome, but our resolve remains unshaken,' Williams and Lowe said. 'We will continue to fight for the rights and visibility of LGBTQ Utahns, supporting efforts to challenge this bill in court and hold the state accountable.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
14-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion: SB197 threatens the financial stability of Utah seniors
In five years, low-income seniors throughout Utah, many on fixed incomes, would no longer be able to get any tax relief on their property taxes if Sen. Dan McCay gets his way with SB 197. That's right. Read that sentence again and let it sink in. Almost 10,000 senior households in the state rely on this relief to help them get by. That could easily be 15-20,000 people. They are your parents, your elderly friends and neighbors, struggling to keep up with rising prices and medical costs while living on fixed incomes. This is the first time legislation has been proposed to destroy this senior benefit in the over 40 years it's been working for low-income senior Utahns in danger of being taxed out of their homes, which is the reason it was created by the Legislature. If SB197 passes, the fiscal note says taxpayers might save $4.55 per year in taxes, while costing seniors $930 per year in critical help. What's smarter and more compassionate? That $4.55 per year gets 204 times the return to support our seniors. I think Utahns, with a history of charity, goodwill and caring see the sense in that equation and would be willing to contribute $4.55 once a year to support our low-income seniors. Is it really worth just over a penny a day to force our grandparents from their homes due to increased costs and inflation? A better solution is Senator Wayne Harper's SB224, keeping the program intact with slight improvements to keep up with inflation and rising costs. What's amazing is that it will cost taxpayers only 68 cents per year, according to the fiscal note analysis! This is the bill the 10,000 Utah households who received this help and those Utahns who support humane tax policy need to support. A prompt call to your legislators and the governor to support SB224 is absolutely critical. This program is also essential for widows and widowers. Let's remember what happens when a spouse passes when a couple is living on Social Security: you lose the income your spouse was getting, resulting in a severe ongoing cash crunch. Many times medical issues precede the spouse's passing, often impacting the bank account these seniors rely on for co-pays, medications and higher premiums. Why is this even being proposed? Past reports showed the state's share on the Circuit Breaker program was less than 10% of the cost, with the rest being borne by Utah's counties. Sen. McCay apparently laments chipping in anything, and the fiscal note on Sen. Harper's SB224 estimates that amount will be $4.5 million, a bargain compared to what else our tax dollars go to. How is it that 15-20,000 low-income seniors don't deserve critical relief when last year, just 10,000 students were awarded 18 times that amount, $82 million, through the Utah Fits All Scholarship program? Oddly, in 2023, McCay's committee mandated an increase in costs to the counties of over three times that estimate, resulting in a $14 million cost increase in just one year. SB197 is also more costly. Many tax administrators around the state are not happy with the deferral program that allows people to not pay their taxes until ownership is transferred. They fear the unpredictability when the numbers of households deferring their taxes vary and their annual budgets fluctuate, while deferral will simultaneously create the need to hire more administrative staff to implement the program when 10,000 households are forced on to it. The deferral program was implemented in Salt Lake and Weber counties in 2023. Dozens applied, but only one household between those two counties benefited. Last year it went statewide and only seven households benefited, while about 10,000 households got homeowner's credit. This failed program is being revamped and the newest experiment is being forced onto the seniors of our state while denying them any opportunity for actual financial relief. So now you get to make the choice: show love to 10,000 senior low-income households for 68 cents per year, or reap $4.55 in yearly savings. Please call.
Yahoo
13-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Could Utah's inland ports help provide low-income housing? What a new bill would do
Help for low-income Utahns seeking to become homeowners near Utah Inland Port Authority project areas could be coming under a bill advanced by state lawmakers Wednesday. State law already permits the use of up to 10% of the general differential revenue collected through inland port developments to be used to pay for affordable housing in or near one of the dozen project areas throughout Utah, including 16,000 acres in the northwest quadrant of Salt Lake County. But SB250, sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Kirk Cullimore, R-Draper, gets more specific, calling for the revenue to be used to 'assist low-income individuals and families who would qualify for income targeted housing to achieve homeownership, or retain homeownership, within a 15-mile radius of the project area.' Cullimore told the Deseret News the new language 'expands this to more home ownership,' as opposed to helping Utahns get into apartments or other rental properties. He said it's part of the Utah Legislature's efforts this session to add more 'little tools, here and there' to address the state's housing needs. 'We need all types of products in the housing market. But we've actually seen a pretty big proliferation of rental housing,' the majority leader said. 'Our rents are still high, but they've actually stabilized. But home ownership has not stabilized. So I think the focus will be on more, what incentives can we do for attainable type home ownership housing.' His bill passed unanimously out of the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee and now heads to the full Senate. The committee's chairman, Sen. Dan McCay, R-Riverton, asked Cullimore about limiting the housing that could be funded to within a 15-mile radius of an inland port project area. 'For the inland port, it's all permissive,' Cullimore answered, adding that 'because oftentimes an inland port area that might be subject to tax increment financing may or may not be appropriate for housing, it just gave them a little bit more parameters to do housing should they choose to do it.' He said the option to use the revenues for housing could be transferred to a local housing authority or other nonprofit. McCay also wanted to know if the inland port authority could zone property to develop low-income housing. When he was told that's not the case, McCay said, 'that's good to know. I just wasn't sure how we were expanding the scope of the inland port.' Utah Inland Port Authority Executive Director Ben Hart told the Deseret News that housing 'is in the conversation in every project area.' Hart said the inland port authority did not seek the change in the law. Nor has it taken a position on the bill, although Hart noted he doesn't 'see any red flags. If it was compulsory and we were being forced to do something, we would probably take a little stronger stand one way or the other.' Some entities that share in the inland port project revenues are already contributing funds to local housing authorities, he said. As for housing fits into the inland port authority's mission, Hart said that's left 'up to the collaborative processes for cities to work through. Obviously, we're primarily industrially oriented, so trying to fit and co-locate housing nearby can be a little bit difficult. But several of our project areas are working to include housing.' The inland port authority 'may not necessarily provide financial support for those efforts but it's certainly something that we are pro, and for. Because housing and workforce go together. Workforce is the lifeblood of the economy and so having well-planned communities really makes sense,' he said, expressing interest in supporting 'economic areas of strength wherever we can. And that definitely includes housing.' Still, how money is used in the project areas is often 'predetermined. So it's hard for us to go back and say we're going to pry 10% loose from other projects,' Hart said. 'We're already very focused on industrial properties. We already are focused on logistics projects.'
