Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
California Is in Such a Financial Quagmire That There Could Be Municipal Bankruptcies
Justice, So what you're saying is that SDCERS is performing well to sustain such benefits? (I'm guessing you'll argue the opposite, no?) Remember that about half of the pension's annual bill is amortization alone. That's court ordered and will eventually go away, leaving a much smaller payment. I don't know when. You're correct that I wasn't taking age at retirement into account. Either way, SDCERS performs better for the amount put in. The fund is currently better than 80% funded. I'm willing to bet that once the fund hits 90%, politicians will begin spin about how 90% is good enough and back off payments again. Much like your mortgage, that UAAL isn't due tomorrow. Unlike your mortgage, SDCERS makes interest on the money deposited into it -- with a 10 year average of 10%.— April 9, 2008 11:46 a.m.
California Is in Such a Financial Quagmire That There Could Be Municipal Bankruptcies
Justice, That's from the SDCERS 2006 CAFR, available at: http://sdcers.org/images/pdf/2006_CAFR_financial_… Look at the chart on page 57. The weighted average of all city employee contributions is 13.65%. Obviously, it's higher for safety employees. Frankly, I never figured out what my exact rate is. Note that as I mentioned earlier the amortization for past non-payment is more than the actual payment. That amortization will eventually go away. I've seen elsewhere on the SS website that SS replaces about 40% of one's salary. SDCERS replaces roughly double that, as not everyone stays until 90%. The city pays roughly double in percentages for a retirement instead of a 'supplement'. Imagine what SS would cost if the US gov't had to pay the amortization for SS.— April 8, 2008 7:49 p.m.
California Is in Such a Financial Quagmire That There Could Be Municipal Bankruptcies
Justice, When was that article posted? It would help if you posted the actual link, rather than just quoting it. Last I saw, the offset for us was 1%. Remember, it costs the city a lot less to provide us offset instead of pay increases. I'd be glad to take an additional pay increase to replace any offset that is still left. Any day of the week, I'd vote for that. The city won't do it. What goes to the pension from my check is immaterial in that everyone's contribution is different -- unless you can find another safety employee with my birthday. The average is a good benchmark.— April 8, 2008 3:09 p.m.
California Is in Such a Financial Quagmire That There Could Be Municipal Bankruptcies
Justice, City employees pay a percentage depending on their age at hire. The older your are at hire, the more you pay since you're closer to retirement. The last I saw from the auditor, they claimed that the employee and employer pay an equal share. I haven't been able to verify that with a link. That means that, on average, city employees pay 13.2%. How much do you pay into SS? That's right... 6.2%. Here's the issue. You're trying to compare SS to a city retirement. Social Security was never intended to be a full retirement. It's "supplemental". It's supposed to augment other savings. Meanwhile, the city retirement was intended to be the full retirement. The city pays more for that and the employees pay more for that. Private industry workers pay into SS for their whole lives... if they work. But you only need 40 quarters, or 10 years work to qualify, no? And if your spouse doesn't work, they still get a benefit of 50% of the working spouse's benefit, no? I'd sure like for my spouse to get 50% of my benefit for doing nothing. No wonder SS is going broke.— April 8, 2008 12:48 p.m.
SEC Charges Five Former City Officials with Fraud for Roles in False Municipal Bond Filings
"This will close the books on the city's frauds*" * - pertaining to this particular disclosure about this particular bond offering— April 8, 2008 9:31 a.m.
California Is in Such a Financial Quagmire That There Could Be Municipal Bankruptcies
Johnny, Once again, you're ignorant of the situation. First off, if you read the MOUs with the various unions up there, they all mention a "Golden Handshake". That likely could've included a cash payout. Vallejo was trying to get rid of highly paid folks. That happens all the time, both in public and private sectors. I can't speak to the deals that police officers have. We have no cap on the amount of annual leave that we can accumulate. Before you get in a tizzy, take a deep breath and think about it. Whenever a firefighter takes a day off, another firefighter works OT - 150%. Meanwhile, the city only pays off 50% on annual leave when they leave. That's a huge savings for the city, if people cash out their annual leave rather than use it. That would also equal a big cash payout. Both of those together could easily make up a big payout for top ranking officers. I think what you're really immune to is having an open mind and realizing that not everything is a big conspiracy to screw you.— April 8, 2008 8:46 a.m.
SEC Charges Five Former City Officials with Fraud for Roles in False Municipal Bond Filings
Actually, Johnny, it was the other way around. McGrory, Uberuaga, et al needed more money, so they came to the unions and begged for some kind of relief. Some kind of deal. So we gave them one. It was good for us and good for them. They, however, failed in their duty to disclose the ramifications of that deal.— April 7, 2008 8:34 p.m.
California Is in Such a Financial Quagmire That There Could Be Municipal Bankruptcies
(Big sigh) Here are the numbers from Bureau of Labor Statistics article entitled, "Retirement Age Declines". Table 1, entitled, "Estimated average age at retirement for men and women" has two columns. The first is Social Security data, defined as "Age of first receiving benefits". The second is Work Force data, defined as "Age leaving the work force", or retirement. Social Security data for men is 62.6, women 62.5 Work Force data for men is 62.0, women 61.4 Whether we're talking "retirement" or "SS retirement", the age is about the same. The article is at http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2001/10/art2full.pdf if you don't believe me. Johnny, every number I quote has a reference. You might not like my opinions, but my data is solid. Sorry.— April 7, 2008 8:27 p.m.
California Is in Such a Financial Quagmire That There Could Be Municipal Bankruptcies
Ponzi, the mayor doesn't have to find a way to pay for his $100 million/year salary like so many CEO's. Do you really think that DC plans are "good" for the taxpayer? Or is that just what they were forced into by greedy CEO's who had a side deal with the investment companies employees were steered into? Again, add up the required contribution for SS (6.2%) and the city match amount in a DC plan (pick your number here) and then compare it to the 13.7% average payment that the city puts into the DB plan. The numbers are awfully close.— April 7, 2008 6:51 p.m.
SEC Charges Five Former City Officials with Fraud for Roles in False Municipal Bond Filings
So does this tell us anything that we didn't know? Or are the Feds just piling on? I think it's fairly common knowledge that the city didn't have the money to pay for the RNC, the ballpark, the Faberge eggs, etc. Folks like Uberuaga, McGrory, etc. were charged by elected officials to "find the money". So they did.— April 7, 2008 6:48 p.m.