Comments by JF | San Diego Reader

JF

Time for pension reform in San Diego

Sorry, but I'm not going to go rooting through city documents not available online and provide them to you. You were castigating myself and others earlier for not using our real names. I believe you identified why we don't in post #55. The mayor has a strict policy against release of information. Anything I post here is readily available to you online. The information about FD retirement percentages was obtained at home from city council dockets available to the general public. Let's see -- about your comment about "outdated" actuarial tables... the actuarial section of that same 2006 SDCERS CAFR says that they use the 1994 Uninsured Pensioner tables. This is one of the tables recommended by the American Academy of Actuaries. So sorry... your "clever pro-government" actuary conspiracy theory is not so hot. I believe that these are the same tables that insurance companies use... and they want you to live longer. You also stated in post 54 that I was mistaken in stating that the city takes age of hire into account. Again, you're wrong here. Here's a quote from the fire member brochure available at: http://sdcers.org/images/pdf/fire_safety_member.p… "Member contributions vary and are based on your age at the time you become a member of SDCERS".
— February 13, 2008 8:45 p.m.

Time for pension reform in San Diego

Richard, I'll start with your last comment. The general employee you spoke of would have received that 3% either way. And the city is no longer paying the average 13.65% (for all employees, including safety) into SDCERS. Sorry, but that's a little higher than the 12% I quoted earlier. Don't believe me? Look to the 2006 SDCERS CAFR, page 57. That does create a slightly larger savings if we switched completely to SS. Roughly 7% of payroll. Less if there's a DC plan -- say 7% less? That's in the ballpark for matching 401K contributions. It's interesting to note that the "catch-up" amortization is higher at 14.26%. In other words, had the city made it's payments on time it would be saving about half of it's retirement bill. (Not counting "pick-up", some of which is covered by the higher percentage) Speaking of pick up, yes the city pays some of the employee's part of retirement. It saves the city money over giving a pay raise, so they prefer pick up over a pay raise. I would absolutely love to see the city eliminate pick up and give me an equivalent pay raise. Know why? Note that almost all other cities pay ALL of an employee's contributions while the City of SD only covers about half.
— February 13, 2008 8:30 p.m.

2005 Audit Shows Internal Accounting Weaknesses; Despite Some Headway, Many More Improvements Must Be Made, Says Accounting Firm

I have yet to see you write an article stating that San Diegans need to pay more taxes. That'd be a good City Lights article for you. Review the percentage of taxes that SD gets back from the state and compare the tax rates of San Diego and the other largest cities in CA. Steve Francis' think tank did a bit on the taxes coming back to the city and CPI has their piece. Combine them and let us know where the city stands. Healing SD requires many things. One small part is changing some employee benefits. One larger part is changing corporate welfare. And... one part is bringing in more income.
— February 10, 2008 5:19 p.m.

2005 Audit Shows Internal Accounting Weaknesses; Despite Some Headway, Many More Improvements Must Be Made, Says Accounting Firm

So why do I see you only attacking one small part of the solution?
— February 10, 2008 10:27 a.m.

Time for pension reform in San Diego

Oh, and Richard? You stated that there is no other city that contributes to a DB and a DC plan? Remember? It took a whole five minutes on Google to discover that the City of Escondido contributes to both a DB plan and a 401K for employees.
— February 10, 2008 8:47 a.m.

2005 Audit Shows Internal Accounting Weaknesses; Despite Some Headway, Many More Improvements Must Be Made, Says Accounting Firm

Don, I have made sacrifices. I haven't received a pay raise in almost four years now. I've had the cost of my health care benefits rise $5000 in that time as well. Show me a taxpayer who's made that kind of sacrifice. Sorry Don, no one wants to speak the tax word, but it's going to have to happen. I still haven't seen your analysis of "The Bottom Line" by CPI, though you said it deserved, "looking in to". San Diegans pay much less in taxes, and get less of that back from the state than any other major city.
— February 10, 2008 8:28 a.m.

Time for pension reform in San Diego

In post #46, Richard wrote, "...back in the early 1980s when the DB pension benefits were considerably more modest..." Once again, sorry Richard, but firefighters were able to retire back then at age 50 with 2.5% for each year of work. The factor increased each year to a max of 2.77% at 55. That was changed to 2.5% at 50 and 2.9999% at 55 in 1996. The increase to 3% at 50 came in 2000. That's a whole 20% increase in benefit in almost 30 years. Meanwhile, retirements went from being uncapped to being capped at 90%. Yes, 90% is a lot... but it's less than the 100%+ that many member got previously. It's important to note that the increase to 3% @ 50 was the result of a lawsuit known as the Corbett case. The city lost, obviously. Going back on the Corbett case would likely force the city to 1) Remove the 90% cap, 2) Start including OT in retirement calculations based on the Ventura case. Are you sure you want that? I'll be glad to retire at 55 with a 2.9999% factor and my OT included in my top one year and no cap... I'll sign that tomorrow. Bring it on!
— February 9, 2008 10:13 p.m.

2005 Audit Shows Internal Accounting Weaknesses; Despite Some Headway, Many More Improvements Must Be Made, Says Accounting Firm

See, that's the basic rub here Don. "No longer afforded" There are two side to not being able to afford things. The first is to cut expenses in the form of benefits. That's the quick and short-sighted fix. You and others are advocating things like having firefighters work until 70. You've obviously never done my job. Perhaps you'll go volunteer as a firefighter in your small town in Colorado. You're just over 70, no? You should be fine. According to the 2005 SDCERS CAFR, the average payment to SDCERS (minus SPSP) is about 12%. You're only going to save 6% of salary by switching everyone to SS. You're also going to be completely unable to retain safety workers, but apparently you don't mind paying to train new folks every year. Back to my point, saving 6% of payroll simply isn't going to save this city. That's not going to provide the extra $90 million that the FD needs annually, no less fund the $3 billion in deferred maintenance. Where do you propose finding that extra money? You and others have fallen into the trap of going after employees as the low hanging fruit. Sorry, but our benefits are a very small piece of the pie.
— February 9, 2008 9:55 p.m.

Time for pension reform in San Diego

Richard, You wrote, "Private sector workers are working longer, while public sector workers are retiring earlier. It ain’t right." Turko references aside, it's perfectly right given that city employees pay an average of 12% into their retirement vs. 6.2% for SS. (2005 SDCERS CAFR) The amount paid takes the age of hire and thus the assumed age of retirement into account. You're finally starting to see that DROP is nothing more than a DC plan that gets nothing but the employee's own money. Basically, it's an unmatched 401K style system with a guaranteed return. And yes, the city still makes money on that, though you're obviously willing to give up that $2.5 million. Neither you, nor anyone else has ever explained why DROP is bad for the city financially. That's because you can't. You use terms like "It ain't right" and "double dipping". Sorry, but those are value statements that can't be proven on a spreadsheet. Show me the numbers.
— February 9, 2008 9:47 p.m.

2005 Audit Shows Internal Accounting Weaknesses; Despite Some Headway, Many More Improvements Must Be Made, Says Accounting Firm

I highly doubt that, Don. If you lengthen the term of employment, you reduce the amount that has to be put in each year. Remember, I have never failed to make my retirement payment. The city has.
— February 9, 2008 5:17 p.m.

< Previous Next >

Anchor ads are not supported on this page.

JF

Time for pension reform in San Diego

Time for pension reform in San Diego

2005 Audit Shows Internal Accounting Weaknesses; Despite Some Headway, Many More Improvements Must Be Made, Says Accounting Firm

2005 Audit Shows Internal Accounting Weaknesses; Despite Some Headway, Many More Improvements Must Be Made, Says Accounting Firm

Time for pension reform in San Diego

2005 Audit Shows Internal Accounting Weaknesses; Despite Some Headway, Many More Improvements Must Be Made, Says Accounting Firm

Time for pension reform in San Diego

2005 Audit Shows Internal Accounting Weaknesses; Despite Some Headway, Many More Improvements Must Be Made, Says Accounting Firm

Time for pension reform in San Diego

2005 Audit Shows Internal Accounting Weaknesses; Despite Some Headway, Many More Improvements Must Be Made, Says Accounting Firm

Menu.

Find a story.

Anchor ads are not supported on this page.