Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
2. Sell to whom? A private for-profit water company such as American Water? Many municipalities thought it would be a great idea to sell.. and raise cash. However, things didn't quite turn out they way they'd anticipated. And some of these communities are now trying to take back their water supplies from these For-Profits who are gouging end users with exorbitant pricing structures.
How much do you pay for water currently?
Do you have any specific examples of this, where the rates jumped significantly after privatization? Wouldn't it be regulated like any utility? It would be up to the city/state to slap on whatever protections to the ratepayers as a condition for the sale.
1. Are the hundreds or thousands of city pensioners who contributed & were promised retirements responsible for the abusive actions of others? Forced renegotiation typically comes after bankruptcy, not before.
I don't think anyone wants to give city workers no pension. However, city workers were promised very generous pensions relative to the ability of the taxpayers to pay.
Maybe it's the legislators and former elected officials who should be sued for bad decisions???? Maybe they're the ones who should be bankrupted? Why should I, as a Providence resident, pay for the misdeeds of elected officials including making promises and signing contracts that could not be fulfilled?
Surely the employee contributions, at minimum, plus some interest would form the basis for a sustainable pension.
Do you have any specific examples of this, where the rates jumped significantly after privatization? Wouldn't it be regulated like any utility? It would be up to the city/state to slap on whatever protections to the ratepayers as a condition for the sale.
Several communities on Long Island are fighting American Water as speak. They aren't the only ones.
The various State PUC's just roll over and play dead.
I don't think anyone wants to give city workers no pension. However, city workers were promised very generous pensions relative to the ability of the taxpayers to pay.
Maybe it's the legislators and former elected officials who should be sued for bad decisions???? Maybe they're the ones who should be bankrupted? Why should I, as a Providence resident, pay for the misdeeds of elected officials including making promises and signing contracts that could not be fulfilled?
Surely the employee contributions, at minimum, plus some interest would form the basis for a sustainable pension.
Whatever your opinion is of what pension benefit anybody else receives, a defined benefit has been promised. And an employee contribution is required to receive that benefit upon retirement. The only thing I can see changing that equation is bankruptcy; casting the pensioners as unsecured creditors like anybody owed money by the city.
I was mocked for suggesting a 3% city tax, yet it seems to clearly be the best option.
People aren't going to leave the city to save 3%. People aren't going to stop coming in to the city because of 3%. And there is no way Providence residents will stop making online purchases (Amazon et al.) because of 3%.
Screwing people out of their pensions shouldn't even be an option.
Selling the water supply is a terrible idea (and may not even be possible).
So, what else is there? Raising property taxes?
Paying a city tax is a choice. There is no choice with increased water bills and/or increased property taxes.
“This surplus was achieved primarily through realistic budgeting practices, a steady increase in tax collections, a hiring freeze on non-essential employees, better departmental revenue and reduced operational expenses,” according to a Dec. 31 letter to the Providence City Council from Mayor Jorge Elorza’s chief of staff, Nicole Pollock.
IM, I take your point that pension benefits have been promised and are part of a legal contract. And I know that contracts are rarely negotiated without bankruptcy, but on the other hand, you can't get blood from a stone. We're on the hook for people who retired after 20 years vested with 5-6% a year COLAS. Arguably a better deal than the feds or the military. From what I've read these agreements are a big part of what is bankrupting the city pension system. They need to find a way to re-negotiate.
Fra better than adding another layer of taxes, such as a city tax, which would only add another layer of admin. and make moving to the city less desirable.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,962,945 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hollytree
Fra better than adding another layer of taxes, such as a city tax, which would only add another layer of admin. and make moving to the city less desirable.
Even better would be, I dunno, crazy talk. Growing the economy with modern jobs?
Here's an article on how the state did it "fair and reasonable"
It wasn't "fair and reasonable" to state employees who saw decades of pension contributions taken away from them.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
