Stockton Bankruptcy Judge Rules Public Retiree Pensions can be Broken (deals, road)

[Bulldogdad]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

You could be correct -- we will see. It is also possible that the judge maintains pensions benefits even though he slashed medical premiums, as there are different statutes involved.

Stockton is not going after the pensions in their bankruptcy just the health care costs. However, this ruling does provide a crack in the door, so to speak for future bankuptcies.

[Bulldogdad]

Originally Posted by HereOnMars

Unfortunately, the deals made for these benefits aren't up for voter approval, and never were. This mess (at least with California) was created in the '90's when contracts were negotiated. Little did they know what they were creating when they did that. When I think of all the boomers that will be retiring from government jobs and the benefits they will be paid, it makes me wonder where employers are going to get the money. More taxpayer dollars to pay for people who are no longer working but who have been promised free health care for their rest of their lives? And considering that some of these employees retire as early as 50, with a life expectancy of 80+, it's unsustainable. Cripes, it's ridiculous!

Stockton's problems with thier public employee contracts started back in the 1980's. And if you want to place the ultimate blame there is always Moonbeamer who actually started this mess at the state level in 1976.

[JGC97]

Originally Posted by Bulldogdad

Stockton's problems with thier public employee contracts started back in the 1980's. And if you want to place the ultimate blame there is always Moonbeamer who actually started this mess at the state level in 1976.

Thanks, BDD. I thought it was during the early 90's but I'm sure it was earlier than that. I didn't think he'd win another term as governor but I was wrong about that one, too. Seems he waited for an entire new generation of voters to dupe. He's so entrenched with the unions, it's sickening.

[Malloric]

Originally Posted by Bulldogdad

Stockton's problems with thier public employee contracts started back in the 1980's. And if you want to place the ultimate blame there is always Moonbeamer who actually started this mess at the state level in 1976.

Yes, personal accountability. It's ultimately Moonbeam's fault that Stockton chose not to fund the compensation for its employees.

Voters just aren't that informed. We'll probably elect Johnson again. According to her bio she's quite pleased about Stockton's future city hall that was purchased for $45 million, appraised at $28 million, and never moved into because we didn't have the money to pay the U-Haul bill to actually move into the building at the time it was purchased by the Redevelopment agency she headed. So she overpaid by nearly 100% for a building that we couldn't use that has since been foreclosed upon... and she's proud of it. Sigh. I have no idea why we elect people who are proud of having their real estate speculation deals foreclosed on costing the tax payer tens of millions of dollars, but we do. I suppose we could reelect the previous mayor who borrowed against the pension funds and lost 28% of it on his way out the door.

[Bulldogdad]

Originally Posted by Malloric

Yes, personal accountability. It's ultimately Moonbeam's fault that Stockton chose not to fund the compensation for its employees.

Voters just aren't that informed. We'll probably elect Johnson again. According to her bio she's quite pleased about Stockton's future city hall that was purchased for $45 million, appraised at $28 million, and never moved into because we didn't have the money to pay the U-Haul bill to actually move into the building at the time it was purchased by the Redevelopment agency she headed. So she overpaid by nearly 100% for a building that we couldn't use that has since been foreclosed upon... and she's proud of it. Sigh. I have no idea why we elect people who are proud of having their real estate speculation deals foreclosed on costing the tax payer tens of millions of dollars, but we do. I suppose we could reelect the previous mayor who borrowed against the pension funds and lost 28% of it on his way out the door.

Public employee collective bargining.

You and I already went round and round on the other issues.

Understand that it isn't just the Mayor(s) that is to blame for this mess. This is not a Strong Mayor City Charter.

[Malloric]

Yes, you think ultimate responsibility is on the unions and Moonbeam. It's like negotiating a bad deal on a car purchase and blaming the dealer. The public employees don't have a fiduciary duty to the city. Governments used the pensions instead of higher salaries to attract the employees they wanted, nothing wrong with that. The union doesn't run the city and has no control over it. So yes, they resist making concessions in a negotiation that says that union pensions are to blame and not city policy that for three decades under funded pensions and then took a loan out against the pension funds to lose a quarter of what there was "investing" it. There's really nothing the city can negotiate on. They've backed themselves into a corner and bring nothing to the negotiation table. Collective bargaining is in exchange for a no-strike clause. No collective bargaining, no no-strike clause. Governments want the no-strike clause. Even Walker in Wisconsin wants some collective bargaining.

Bankruptcy was the only option ever. The city refuses to admit any wrong doing. There's been no talk about charter changes that require fully funding pensions going forward or preventing similar creative financing that lost a quarter of what pension there was in creative financing schemes. According to the mayor, who thinks overpaying for a now-foreclosed city hall you can't even afford to move into was a fine accomplishment, the problems are all due to past leadership (many of whom are current leadership) and past policies (which happen to be current policies too). Blame the guy who kicked the can down the road before you as you continue to kick the can down the road.

[JGC97]

This is true. The governor had no involvement with the city's financial problems. The problems fall on the shoulders of the city leaders and the negotiations with the unions. Can't blame the governor for this one. It's okay, though. H has enough problems trying to fix the state.

[1AngryTaxPayer]

Originally Posted by HereOnMars

This is true. The governor had no involvement with the city's financial problems. The problems fall on the shoulders of the city leaders and the negotiations with the unions. Can't blame the governor for this one. It's okay, though. H has enough problems trying to fix the state.

They pulled this video, I'd like to see that one


Hey, California, Public Sector Unions Love You Long Time | Verum Serum

[JGC97]

Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer

They pulled this video, I'd like to see that one


Hey, California, Public Sector Unions Love You Long Time | Verum Serum

Me, too. Good article, though.

[Bulldogdad]

Originally Posted by 1AngryTaxPayer

They pulled this video, I'd like to see that one


Hey, California, Public Sector Unions Love You Long Time | Verum Serum

I believe that was the audio in which Brown and a campaign aide are talking about backroom secret deals to protect public employee pensions and call Meg Whitman a whor.