OT: Public Employee Unions Attack the City of San Diego/Prop B

[livinincali]

[quote=CA renter]It’s a **service** industry. Of course most of their costs are labor-related!

The reason they are struggling, though, is because their market share is declining as electronic communication grows.[/quote]

Well the biggest reason their struggling is because they’re extremely handicapped by government regulation over how they can right size their business. If FedEx or UPS see declining business they can layoff workers. They can choose to exit markets that operate at a loss. It’s the inflexibility placed upon the post office from the unions on one side and the government regulations on the other.

The biggest problem with most public sector business is that they can’t improve their labor costs with efficiency because it’s difficult to lay people off. Your water/sewer bill use to require a small army of people to open and process the mail each day. About 15 years ago they got a machine to process mail automatically which cost quite a bit of money but they didn’t layoff that previous army of workers to see the cost savings. They just moved them into other jobs whether they needed them or not. Maybe that was a nice thing to do but it certainly wasn’t an efficient use of tax payer dollars.

[bearishgurl]

When paramount posted his CalWatchdog video to begin this thread, I have to admit I was not paying attention to Prop B or the 2012 SD mayoral campaigns when they were going on as I don’t live in SD and don’t watch TV. Originally, I wanted to know the outcome of the litigation leading up to and following the “successful” placement of Prop B on the SD ballot. When I actually looked into the timeline as to how this thing actually found its way to the ballot, I was incredulous but when I then looked into the 2012 mayoral campaigns (after the primary) of both Bob Filner and Carl DeMaio, I was even MORE incredulous to learn that DeMaio actually received over 48% of the vote!

DeMaio could very well have actually been voted in as SD’s mayor, which would have been disastrous for the City, IMO. He is/was delusional with a capital “D.” I have to wonder where his legal counsel was during his campaign or if he even had any!

Not only was DeMaio in the pocket of Doug Manchester, one of the biggest commercial developers SD has ever seen and the biggest contributor to his mayoral campaign, he ran on the platform of “pension reform” and “pay freezes for all City workers,” neither of which he could actually deliver on in any way, shape or form.

In a news video with he and running-mate Bob Filner, linked below, taken during his campaign, DeMaio made the “prophetic” statement:

“The ballot measure has to comply with state labor law.”

Duh! . . . . B-but … it didn’t.

“(If I become mayor), I will require the maximum legal allowable pension contribution from City employees.” When Filner chimed in (by telephone), that “we already do that,” DeMaio just kept babbling on about “pension spiking.”

Filner then brought up the fact that City workers hadn’t been putting anything towards Social Security for decades (and so would have to rely on solely on their pensions).

The commentator than asked Filner if he thought voters knew what this ballot measure meant? He stated, “No, because Mr. DeMaio and (other) supporters of the referendum aren’t telling the truth.” He then gave examples of “pension spiking” (which occurred primarily in the City mgmt ranks) and clarified that (Joe Q rank-and-file worker) doesn’t have this opportunity and has an average pension of $27K annually. He further stated if he became mayor he would immediately cap all pensions at $100K.

By the time DeMaio stated, “Now, as we move forward, we’ve figured out how to actually reform pensions (and) move to 401K’s,” it became clear to me that DeMaio had absolutely NO IDEA what he was talking about. He was STILL delusional after everything was repeatedly pointed out to him by the commentator and Filner.

The commentator then asks Filner to have the last (brief) word where he states that the proposed prop will do nothing for city finances and does not even affect current workers, only (yet unhired) new hires and is a fraud.

Folks, this is precisely how the sheeple (in this case, SD voters) got led down that particular garden path. They listened to “credible-sounding” DeMaio, who talked out his a$$ but obviously never gave any consideration as to if the “implementation part” of his lofty agenda was actually “doable.”

The same can be said of some Piggs on this forum. The same handful of posters continually form new threads on the same tired topic (public pensions, for example) and throw in a link or two of a piece from the MSM (from somewhere . . . anywhere) done by ill-informed “reporters” who have absolutely no idea what they’re talking about. It’s done specifically to incite joe6p and Piggs to the trough and give them a platform to moan collectively and endlessly about how unfair life has been for them. Nothing constructive ever gets discussed because no one has been willing to state that they will step up to the plate in attempt to get to the root of the issue . . . that is … in CA, to work on reforming the current laws or induce their representatives to do so.

It’s really neither CAR’s nor my responsibility to continually “police” these threads and attempt to explain and re-explain why things are as they are wtr past or present collective bargaining agreements in place for state and local government workers. I do on occasion because I find it disheartening to read the repeated ignorance of the general public on this topic who in turn gets all their info from the ignorant MSM who is only telling half (or less) of the story.

The VOSD covered DeMaio extensively before, during and after his mayoral campaign. I haven’t read all of their articles but the ones I did read seemed to be fair and accurate depictions of his campaign and of him as a person, IMHO.

http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/government/thehall/article_c54f3c1e-6d77-11e1-893b-0019bb2963f4.html

Why don’t some disenchanted SD resident-Piggs here complain in writing to their councilperson that if City has (presumably qualified) legislative analysts on staff and attorneys versed in same who could waste copious amounts of City time and resources to author the ill-fated “Prop B,” why don’t they deploy them to more productive tasks? Why are all these gubment “professionals” wasting your tax dollars putting together long, drawn-out go-nowhere propositions, all the while KNOWING they won’t go anywhere? Why not have their legislative staff work with your representatives in attempt to reform some of the labor law on CA’s books as it applies to municipal collective bargaining?

THAT is the only solution to the problem. This is not even my opinion. It is a fact.

*********************************************

I think that, in the end, SD voters came to their senses and went with 26+ year “career politician” Filner. At least we can all agree that, unlike DeMaio, he actually DOES understand the “lay of the land” as he’s had PLENTY of practice. In the City of SD, there’s something to be said for not throwing more good money after bad … especially now. Filner is SD’s first Democratic Mayor in 30 years. That’s HUGE and speaks volumes about the electorate, even if it IS a “nonpartisan” office!

And no, I’m not currently a registered Democrat.

Inasmuch as I thought inappropriate a couple of stances Filner took on private citizens’ issues during his 20-year representation of SD South County residents of the 50th and, later, the 51st Congressional District, he was an INFINITELY better candidate for SD mayor than DeMaio.

The same is true of Gov. Brown. He WELL KNOWS the “lay of the land” and actually helped form state legislation back in the day. There was no one more qualified than him to be governor of CA during his campaign.

Sometimes, the election of “charismatic idiots” (ex: Carl DeMaio) can prove to be extremely dangerous to the wellbeing of their constituencies, ESPECIALLY if they sound “semi-credible” to the masses who are told they need CHANGE for change’s sake and they are just the person who can make it all happen! Again, I think SD voters figured it all out in the end.

[bearishgurl]

Well Peeps, here we ARE, five and a half years after the adverse PERB decision against City with this Decision coming across my desk this morning from my monthly retirement “union’s” newsletter.

I haven’t had a chance to peruse the entire decision yet but the case has been reversed and remanded back to the 4th DCA, Div 1 (SD) for “further proceedings to resolve issues beyond the scope of this opinion.” Please wait to load pdf:

http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S242034.PDF

Predictably, Proponents of the measure (Lincoln Club et al?) elected to appeal the aforementioned Feb 2013 (subject of this thread) PERB decision re: illegal placement of Prop B on the 2012 ballot and won at the appellate level. Then the unions appealed that decision to the California Supreme Court which issued its opinion on 8/2/18. Due to the City Attorney’s office’s blatant conflict of interest (their own union was one of the charging parties in the ULP charge which was the subject of the underlying PERB decision which was appealed, lol), the firm of Lounsberry Ferguson Altona and Peak out of Escondido was hired to represent them before the California Supreme Court (partially with YOUR tax dollars, folks). Opposing counsel (for Firefighters Local 145) were among the heaviest-hitting, most well-versed labor law attorneys in the entire state (Smith & Steiner of Smith Steiner Vanderpool and Wax).

Labor & Employment Law

The four attorneys from LFA&P likely cost City several hundred-thousand dollars in fees because the case is still ongoing (City will likely end up being on the hook for the three Respondent unions’ attorney fees) and has undoubtedly proved to be a HUGE FAIL for Team City and a colossal waste of money. (Do any of you still have potholes that have needed filling in your neighborhood for years?)

Municipal Law

We can assume by the Supreme Court’s instructions for remand that the placement of Prop B on the City ballot in 2012 by then Mayor Sanders, et al was found to be illegal due to City’s failure to first meet and confer with all unions representing city employees who would be adversely affected by the passage of Prop B (involuntary reduction in wages, salary, benefits or working conditions). Of course, the city employees most harmed by City’s failure to meet and confer were those employees hired from as far back as FY 05/06 to the present who will or already have been placed on a “401K-style” retirement tier created by Prop B. (The “pensionable pay freeze” that was supposed to be implemented on current employees during the ensuing years pursuant to Prop B never came to pass due to an agreement with the unions over meet & confers on that issue during Mayor Filner’s tenure.)

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/sd-me-pension-ruling-20180802-story.html#

The $64M question here is, will all those affected pensions be subject to recalculation?

Here is the ballot text (including arguments for and against Prop B) – wait to load:

https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/legacy/city-clerk/pdf/pensionbenefits.pdf

It is very likely that more than half of those similarly-situated employees hired in the past ~12 years are already vested. However, city has since removed their “Retirement Plan Summary Booklet” link for General Members from their site re: vesting rules (perhaps since this Decision came down?) See:

https://www.sdcers.org/Member-Benefits/Active/City-of-San-Diego/General-Members.aspx

Well, of course they did, since it appears City will soon be court-ordered to “undo” everything they have done to new hires since the passage of Prop B. Are we surprised?? How much is all this going to cost City taxpayers? Will City need to bring in outside actuaries and other specialists to reverse the big mess they made by jumping the gun to implement all or part of Prop B while still in litigation?? It’s going to be interesting so stay tuned!

Meanwhile, Ex-Mayor Sanders and Ex-Councilman DeMaio et al are both still beyond delusional and eager to waste millions more of your money. See:

San Diego’s Deplorables: Jerry Sanders & Carl DeMaio Want to Sell ‘Son of B’ to Voters

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/columnists/michael-smolens/sd-me-smolens-pension-20180802-story.html#

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/sd-me-pension-ruling-20180802-story.html

State Supreme Court Upends Prop. B, San Diego’s Public Pension Reform

Here’s a recent VOSD article on Ann Smith. She’s a powerhouse!

https://www.voiceofsandiego.org/topics/politics/politics-report-the-woman-who-torpedoed-proposition-b/

I do NOT believe that City’s Petition for Rehearing (filed 8/20) will be granted.

Phaster . . . where ARE you?? You’re a resident of SD. Have you been paying attention to this recent “real-world” occurrence (instead of your usual rant-filled Libertarian blogs)?

The wheels of justice turn slowly . . . . but they DO turn :=D

Happy reading, Piggs!

[PCinSD]

^^^LOL. Biased much? Is that the same Carl DeMaio who got prop 6 on the ballot? And who just busted your buddies at CalTrans?

[FlyerInHi]

I wish Donald Trump were running tha City of San Diego. That should make you happy, bearish

[phaster]

[quote=bearishgurl]

Happy reading, Piggs![/quote]

huh,… constantly repeating alternative facts does not change the simple truth, which is,… we’re up the proverbial creek all because the way the public pension portfolio is setup and operated

in other words the problem(s) were avoidable if nothing more than middle school math concepts were used from the onset,… BUT here we are in the middle of a big blame game AND innocent taxpayers who had no part in creating the financial mess are being positioned to pay for the mismanagement by politicians and public unions who are DISHONEST and DUMB w/ money they were entrusted w/

http://www.TinyURL.com/InvestorWarning

BTW it does not take a genius to see the San Diego public pension portfolio just like the Detroit public pension portfolio, has an optional 13th pension payment feature,… so let’s consider what happened there!

[quote]
13 things to know about Detroit’s ’13th checks’ for pensioners

…Detroit pension funds paid retired and working employees bonus payments, called “13th paychecks.” The payments cost the city’s pension funds billions of dollars and some say they’re part of the reason the city went broke.

…The bonus payment were given with little oversight. Officials still don’t know how much was paid out in bonuses…

…The bonus payments were made quietly, but required the approval of the City Council. Council members apparently believed the funds had enough money, and would continue to have enough money into the future, to afford the bonuses…

https://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2013/10/10_things_to_know_about_detroi.html
[/quote]

[quote]
Supplemental “13th Check” benefit

The supplemental “13th Check” benefit is paid from trust fund assets to eligible retirees in years when the qualification formula specified in the Municipal Code is satisfied. When qualified, SDCERS will calculate and pay the 13th Check to all eligible retirees annually in November…

https://www.sdcers.org/Member-Benefits/Retired/City-of-San-Diego/Supplemental-Benefits/13th-Check.aspx
[/quote]

Bottom line,… if you want someone to blame, look in the mirror because it seems these links outline the root cause of the financial mismanagement which is endangering everyone

http://www.TinyURL.com/DifferentDay

[phaster]

[quote]
San Diego officials divided over accelerating pension debt payoff

…The city’s projected pension debt has increased from $1.2 billion to nearly $2.8 billion since 2007.

Some say the city could be on a path toward repeating underfunding schemes more than a decade ago that caused huge pension payment increases, drastic budget cuts and eventually earned San Diego the nickname “Enron by the Sea.”

…Kalwaraski, the actuary, recommended the board stick with the 30-year policy for debts caused by assumption changes, contending that San Diego already has the most conservative policies in other areas.

That includes a 6.5 percent long-term projection of investment growth, the lowest in the entire state.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/sd-me-pension-debt-20180917-story.html
[/quote]

FWIW responded to a comment,… where I essentially agreeded that bankruptcy is inevitable given debt and other trends, and quoted/hyper-linked the same two facts that I pointed out to bearishgurl,… odd thing is my comment removed (but I have a highlighted PDF copy of what was deleted)

http://www.TinyURL.com/AcceleratingPensionDebt

seems I ran afoul of some part of the five posted guidelines of the UT forum

[quote=sandiegouniontribune.com]
…Be relevant, respectful, honest, discreet and responsible.
[/quote]

or perhaps this is a case of being too “relevant” and “honest”

[phaster]

[quote=sandiegouniontribune.com]
San Diego spending $100K for estimate of how costly pension ruling could be

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/politics/sd-me-pension-crisis-20181003-story.html
[/quote]

other than the headline, seems the reader responses were more informative than the UT news paper article

[quote=UT readers]
…City of San Diego employees {except for hourly employees} have not been in Social Security since September, 1981.

…SD City employees have been out of Social Security since 9/81 and that was done on a promise of lifetime medical care for retirees and a pension better than SS.

…The majority of tax increases in California over the past few years (and those proposed on the ballots all up and down the state now) have been to fund pensions. The politicians, being the devious types that they are, just don’t use pensions as the rationale, they say things like “public safety,” “education,” and “infrastructure.”

…The difference between a 401k and a pension is that with a 401k plan the retiree receives the money that has been placed in their own account which grows based upon the investment returns. They own the account and can transfer it to their next employer.

A city pension plan provides a defined benefit but that is not guaranteed. As the judge ruled in the Stockton bankruptcy a pension can be impaired in bankruptcy.

The risk of both pensions and 401k’s is that they do not make their assumed rate of investment return. Unfortunately, with a pension the risk falls on taxpayers because of the rules pensions operate under.

So there is plenty of risk to go around, especially for plans that are grossly underfunded.

…The longer the City delays the more it will cost to meet the Court’s requirement.

…Once again, the UT fails to provide basic information. Who is the consultant?

[/quote]

[phaster]

[quote]

America is in the midst of a pension crisis: Around half of all states haven’t saved nearly enough money to pay for the benefits they’ve promised to government workers — and the total shortage adds up to trillions of dollars.

Who is responsible — and what is at stake for the country’s teachers, police, firefighters and other public employees?

Those questions are at the heart of The Pension Gamble, a new FRONTLINE investigation that comes to PBS tonight.

In the documentary, producers Marcela Gaviria and Nick Verbitsky and correspondent Martin Smith trace how state governments have withheld pension contributions to cover shortfalls, and waged risky bets on Wall Street.

“This is a story about having your retirement, that you thought was secure, go south — and it’s a story that impacts millions of Americans,” says Smith, who with Gaviria previously investigated another element of retirement in America, the 401(k) industry, in 2013’s The Retirement Gamble.

Now, Smith goes inside the volatile fight over pensions playing out in Kentucky, a state whose once-flush pension system for its police, firefighters, teachers and other public workers is now among the worst-funded in the nation.

It’s a fight with broader consequences for public employees everywhere — and it’s a documentary you won’t want to miss.

The Pension Gamble premieres tonight at 10 p.m. EST/9 p.m. CST on PBS stations (check your local listings) and online at pbs.org/frontline.

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/the-pension-gamble/?utm_source=newsletter
[/quote]

[bearishgurl]

Uhh, phaster?? You’ve been straying off the subject here, as usual. This thread is about SDCERS/Prop B.

Why don’t you create your own Libertarian blog where, as the moderator, you can rant all you want through your ultra-repetitive, cut-and-paste diatribes with ridiculous cartoons which nobody reads?? As an interesting social experiment that YOU’LL be paying for, you will surely be able to gauge how much traffic you generate to your blog over time.

**********************************************************

Now, back to the OP. Of COURSE, the CA Supreme Court denied City’s Petition for Rehearing on 10/10/18. The 4th DCA (Div 1 – SD) issued its remittitur on 10/12/18 and the Supreme Court received its copy of it on 10/22/18.

http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/dockets.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=2198458&doc_no=S242034&request_token=NiIwLSIkXkg%2FW0BNSCNNXENIIDg0UDxTJyI%2BRzlSMCAgCg%3D%3D

How did this happen, you ask? Um, well, because the MMBA (CA Gov Code section 3500 et seq) is well-settled law which has been in place since the 1960’s. DUH! City WELL KNEW all of this but instead arrogantly elected to waste millions of your taxpayer funds on this go-nowhere litigation, including the fees of at least five attorney firms of their opponents that they have now been ordered to pay back PLUS three outside attorney firms for themselves over the years cuz their own “in-house attorneys” had a blatant conflict of interest (the [DCAA] Deputy City Attorney’s Association was one of the charging parties in the underlying ULP charge which had a decision from its [proper] tribunal which became the entire basis for this ill-fated case, lol). In other words, folks, the wheel was invented long ago to address this issue and it’s called “Meet and Confer.”

http://www.caperb.com/2011/03/25/a-little-history-on-the-labor-movement/

After five years and eight months, its GAME OVER for SD. Among other thorny actuarial calculations they will be forced to hire expensive consultants to make, they are now forced to figure out how to UNDO their pension takeaways for their newer employees who were not yet vested in SDCERS as of about June 30, 2012. What a mess! It’s time to put their heads together and come up with a PLAN to make their affected employees whole again. I will surmise that none of your elected or appointed “officials” have any idea how to fix these problems they created without a lot of outside help (more $$$$$ off SD taxpayer’s backs).

Was anyone really expecting a different outcome?

[bearishgurl]

You’ve got Jerry Sanders and his “sidekick” Carl DeMaio to thank for this mess as well as the SDTPA and the Lincoln Club (who acted as “straw” plaintiffs for City) and their ilk.

You SD residents would do well to log all this info in the back of your brain and bring it out when needed as these idiots (who somehow believe they are “movers and shakers” in SD) will likely come up with more harebrained schemes for SD taxpayers to fund.

[phaster]

[quote=bearishgurl]Uhh, phaster?? You’ve been straying off the subject here, as usual. This thread is about SDCERS/Prop B.
[/quote]

[quote=bearishgurl]You’ve got Jerry Sanders and his “sidekick” Carl DeMaio to thank for this mess as well as the SDTPA and the Lincoln Club (who acted as “straw” plaintiffs for City) and their ilk.

You SD residents would do well to log all this info in the back of your brain and bring it out when needed as these idiots (who somehow believe they are “movers and shakers” in SD) will likely come up with more harebrained schemes for SD taxpayers to fund.[/quote]

sigh DDSS,…

(bearishgurl) since you have taken the blue pill – its apparent you believe whatever you want to believe!

for all other(s) who dared take the red pill (and consider the BIG PICTURE like RE investors on this forum), the BOTTOM LINE is,… as long as the “surplus earnings” (aka 13th payment) is siphoned off every holiday season for Gubment-Pensioner(s) (a term bearishgurl used to described herself) INSTEAD OF being used to maintain the pension system designed target return rate, the SD pension system as currently structured/operated AND using nothing more than “honest” common sense and middle school math tells us, that the un-funded DEBT issue will basically ALWAYS grow!

[quote]
Supplemental “13th Check” benefit

The supplemental “13th Check” benefit is paid from trust fund assets to eligible retirees in years when the qualification formula specified in the Municipal Code is satisfied. When qualified, SDCERS will calculate and pay the 13th Check to all eligible retirees annually in November…

https://www.sdcers.org/Member-Benefits/Retired/City-of-San-Diego/Supplemental-Benefits/13th-Check.aspx
[/quote]

http://www.doughroller.net/investing/power-of-compounding-interest/

hence the PROP B debacle in truth is symptomatic of DISHONEST and DUMB money management (i.e. politicians, public employee unions and SDCERS ignoring a middle school math concept from the onset, AND continuing to do so!)

http://www.TinyURL.com/InvestorWarning

BTW since you appear to have resurfaced for election season,… after a long absence,…

https://www.piggington.com/ot_predictions_2016_presidential_election?page=21#comment-273514

not to change the subject off of the idiotic mismanagement of SDCERS/Prop B but have to ask is Trump as POTUS everything ya hoped for?

[quote=Mark 13:22 rsv]

For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.
[/quote]

[phaster]

let’s recap,… PUBLIC PENSION DEBT GROWING!

http://www.TinyURL.com/InvestorWarning

SDCERS’ Board of Administration (Einsteins of portfolio management),… let’s add DEBT to the EXISTING DEBT

[quote=SDCERS Board]
SDCERS Board Approves 13th Check and Corbett Benefits for 2018

At its November 9, 2018 meeting, the SDCERS’ Board of Administration approved the payment of the “13th Check” supplemental benefit and the Corbett settlement benefit for eligible retirees. Eligible retirees will receive the payment as part of their November 2018 monthly retirement benefit.

The “13th Check” and Corbett settlement benefits are paid in years when the realized investment earnings of the fund are sufficient to pay them.

https://www.sdcers.org/News.aspx?tagname=13th+Check+and+Corbett&groupid=9

[/quote]

[phaster]

Different Day Same $hit

[quote]
Audit: city omits $52M from compensation reports

The city of San Diego failed to report to state officials some $52 million in employee pension contributions last year, according to an audit released last week.

The 21-page audit report,…

https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/19-010_compensation_reports.pdf

says the city omits critical information in each report: the contribution toward each employee’s pension, which is estimated at about $7,900 for each pension-eligible worker.

…According to auditors, not including the information has its consequences. First, the city is not fully complying with state reporting standards and understating employee compensation obscures public transparency.

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/watchdog/sd-me-pension-audit-20181120-story.html
[/quote]

PS WRT SDCERS/Prop B here’s an apropo piece of advice,…

[quote=bearishgurl]
You SD residents would do well to log all this info in the back of your brain and bring it out when needed as these idiots (who somehow believe they are “movers and shakers” in SD) will likely come up with more harebrained schemes for SD taxpayers to fund.
[/quote]

[phaster]

there was a UT article about yet another annual 13th public pension check (which appeared on the front page a few days ago)

https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/data-watch/sd-me-13thcheck-sdcers-20190117-story.html

so passed it along to an actuary for analysis/thoughts on the topic

[quote]
…SAN DIEGO CITY ERS PENSION NOT IN A GOOD PLACE

I am going to walk you through the San Diego City ERS plan info.

Let me start with the required contributions. Brace yourself. This is the “required contribution” – that is, the part that covers the new benefits accrued (i.e. retirement benefits earned due to work done in that fiscal year) plus a portion of the unfunded liability (i.e., paying off a bit of the benefits that were earned years before, but weren’t sufficiently contributed for.)

You ready?

58% of payroll.

Holy shit.

That’s insane.

Even Police & Fire pensions, which tend to have high contribution rates (for a variety of reasons) tend to have rates far below that.

See that yellow line waaaaay below the blue bars? That’s the average ARC as a percentage of payroll, and nationally, it’s about 15% for peer pension groups. 58% is insanely high.

So… why is the ARC so high? …

http://stump.marypat.org/article/1132/san-diego-city-ers-has-no-business-giving-out-13th-checks
[/quote]

FYI the local political bureaucracy recognized long ago that “the concept of Surplus Earnings” (and associated w/ the 13th pension check) was acknowledged as being NOT math kosher

[quote]

‘…in 2008, by ordinance, the Council eliminated “the concept of Surplus Earnings” because it was not consistent with sound actuarial principles and because it was being used for certain payments, which were not consistent with federal tax law or state law requirements to assure the competency of the assets of SDCERS. SDMC § 24.1501.’

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B66GMOho0KtxblFnc193UzZiUTh2M041UUZROWgySUlIZ0o0

[/quote]

yet the local political bureaucracy (who also benefit in various ways from the status quo) allows piling debt on top of existing debt year after year? and they expect the taxpayers to pick up the billions in clean up cost$ for their bad math mistakes??

[Author]

Posts