Hartford - Proposed legislation to fill a $1.6 billion hole in the state budget would give Gov. Dannel P. Malloy unprecedented power, Republican legislative leaders said Thursday.

That hole was created by state employees' rejection of a concessions agreement negotiated by labor leaders and the Malloy administration, and the bill would empower the governor to fill it by cutting line items in the budget and laying off state employees.

The bill would also give SEBAC, the State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition, until Aug. 31 to accept the concessions package.

For Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield, and House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafaro, R-Norwalk, the bill was tantamount to the legislative branch of government ceding its power to the executive.

"The one thing we know is going to happen at this point is that the Democratic leadership and Democratic members of the General Assembly are going to hand to one person, Gov. Malloy, the unprecedented power to cut $1.6 billion from our budget," said McKinney. "Never before in the history of the state of Connecticut have we given such power to the governor.

"My question to my colleagues is, 'Why did you run for office? If you're unwilling to make decisions, even tough decisions, get out, step out of the way and let someone in who is willing to make those decisions,'" he said.

A second bill proposed by Malloy also got no respect from Republicans. That bill would freeze and eliminate state employees' longevity pay and remove overtime pay and other fees from being used to calculate their retirement benefits in future negotiations.

"With respect to the changes regarding collective bargaining, it's all a show," McKinney said. "There is no intention of passing that legislation. It's just about showing that they're tough when in fact they really aren't."

Debating the bill on the floor of the House Thursday night, Cafero questioned several passages in the bill. Where in the bill, he asked, did it specify how many layoffs there might be and how much they would save?

"The layoff amount would be up to 10 percent of the work force," answered state Rep. Toni Walker, D-New Haven, House co-chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

Cafero also questioned why the governor wanted to extend the deadline for the unions to approve the concessions agreement from this past Monday to Aug. 31.

"A lot of us believed that that time had come and gone," he said. "That they had their chance to ratify the agreement, they chose to vote no, and we have to move on and balance the budget. Am I to understand that there is a possibility or a window open that they could ratify the agreement?"

"I think the answer really is that we need not expand our unemployment in the state of Connecticut," Walker said. "We have to make the effort to try and understand that by laying off people in the state of Connecticut, no matter where they are, it is going to impact all of us."

So the state would keep the door open until Aug. 31, she said, but would move ahead with plans for layoffs and budget cuts in the meantime.

Cafero questioned the wording in the bill, which no longer refers to the concessions agreement of May 27 but now simply refers to "an" agreement, which suggests, he said, that the governor would be willing to modify the agreement.

Walker admitted that the language of the bill would leave room for that.

But that was a contention that was strongly disputed by Roy Occhiogrosso, the govenor's senior adviser. While the governor might consider "clarifying" the language in the agreement, there would be no changes to "the substance" of the agreement, he said.

Occhiogrosso also took umbrage at Republicans' suggestions that the governor was not sincere about layoffs or his proposed curbs to collective bargaining.

"If the legislature puts that bill on his desk, he'll sign it," Occhiogrosso said. "I'm not sure how that's 'for show.'"

As to the proposed curbs in collective bargaining rights proposed by the governor, Occhiogrosso said, "I think he thinks it's time to have that conversation. I think he thinks it's a good start. He's jump-started the conversation, which is more than anyone's done around here in a long time."

Taking threats seriously

Sal Luciano, executive director of AFSCME Council 4, which voted to reject the concessions package, said union members and supporters certainly did not think the governor's proposals were 'for show.' They are taking the governor's threats to curb collective bargaining rights seriously, he said.

"I don't think he would prefer it, but I think he's as serious as a heart attack," Luciano said of the proposal.

Luciano also said he thinks it is fair to compare the governor's proposal with efforts in states such as Wisconsin to roll back collective bargaining rights of public sector workers.

"It's all a matter of degree. Two weeks ago, I don't think anyone would think this was possible," he said.

He said union leaders would be meeting again today, and they still hoped to work out some way to avoid massive layoffs.

Meanwhile, Cafero bemoaned the "unprecedented power" the bill would give the governor.

"It's no longer that May 27 deal we're talking about, folks. It's any deal that that governor might agree to. And as far as us even having the opportunity to discuss that deal and its impact on the state finances, well, read a little further," Cafero said.

"It says if we don't do anything ... it automatically takes effect, so what we're talking about here, folks, is that the governor of the state of Connecticut, with the passage of one bill, can negotiate an agreement that we've never seen and it will become law. Or could make cuts amounting to $1.6 billion and you or I will never have the opportunity to say a word about it.

"Nothing," he said. "We're giving up our power, the separate but equal branches of government. What the founders of this country and this state's constitution said ... unprecedented power. Is that what we're all about?"

k.robinson@theday.com