City employees Rich and Kong are like foxes who have taken up residence in the hen house. City Attorney Quinn, Fire Chief Diaz and Police Chief Bosel and all the other city employees bringing in $200,000+ salaries are no better. They are picking off the chickens one by one and when they are all gone they will expect the taxpayers to keep up a steady supply of chickens. These unfunded pensions are the heist of the century

Local governments only getter bigger and more costly. Most government pensions are even more under-funded. No wonder the City wants to bring in more and more development and money - regardless of the impact on current residents.

The Boomer generation that will be the major recipient of this grossly over-promised pension is, by far, the most selfish and damaging cohort to have ever graced the state of California. They enacted Prop 13 to keep their taxes low while building a generation of community-subsidized equity without paying anywhere near their fair share. Now their outrageous pensions are coming due, clearly over-promised from the beginning with no one thinking twice about it. And you want to strip us of much needed community programs like our already starving affordable housing?

Abe-Koga is perfectly happy to further bankrupt the future to pay for the sins of the past. To that I say, Hell No. Let CalPERS go bankrupt, and scale down the benefits to something far more reasonable. The future of our communities cannot handle another crippling blow to shore up this generation of takers.

PERS will never go bankrupt since most of its retirees are state workers and the state will guarantee paymets. It's city and county workers who should be concerned. If city or county governments go bankrupt PERS will adjust the retirement benefits and tell the cities they have to contribute more money to stay afloat.

"state will guarantee paymets"

With what money?

The state will not guarantee payments. Where do you get your facts?

Here's a crazy thought.. fund your obligations at 100% now.

Or maybe I'll just pay 80% of my mortgage.. that's all I'm comfortable paying right now.

The deficit spending is what will kill this country.

"...funding for a city child-care center and accounts set up for Mountain View to quickly buy land for affordable housing projects and open-space."

Maybe Mountain View doesn't have the money to purchase these things if the pension funding is below where it should be?

And 7% is crazy optimistic for CalPERS. For cities that try to exit the fund (e.g. Villa Park), CalPERS uses about 3% as the safe expected return.

I agree with Otto, fund the pensions. Then examine current salaries and benefits. Sunnyvale pensions are underfunded and they gave City executives (themselves)below market rate interest loans for 45 years. It is costing each resident in lost opportunities. Yet, the City is raising garbage and sewer fees over $12.00 per month per home.
Constantly operating at a deficit is a sure way to bankruptcy. The pie in the sky estimated 7% return on investments is misguided. When was the last time that was achieved?

Guess the source of the following quote:

"All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service, It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management.

The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations,"


....no using Google...especially you Google haters...

I know who said that, but both parties are so different today than they were back then, that you can't really compare Democrats of that era with those of today.

Pensions hardly exist in private industry anymore, simply because private businesses can not tax others, they must compete for money, and the cost of pensions made their products uncompetitive with companies who did not offer them. Defined benefit plans are also completely unsustainable (and unfair), so the private sector has moved to defined-contribution retirement plans, which can't have this kind of financial reckoning due to underfunding.

Overpriced pensions have only remained in government because the government has the power to take money by force from everyone else. Pension liabilities are growing exponentially far faster than revenues and it won't take that long to reach a level where even a 100% income tax won't pay those liabilities. So, the outcome is simple - after a lot of public screaming to the contrary, the state will default on the pensions, there is no other possible outcome. If you're the recipient of a public pension, make contingency plans.

Sigh. The big problem in a socialistic State is when you run out of other peoples money.
This problem always happens throughout history; we even have a word from the early 20th Century that sums it up TANSTAAFL: THERE AIN'T NO SUCH THING AS A FREE LUNCH! No, Heinlein didn't create the expression, like a good writer, he " borrowed " the word, he filed off the serial numbers and reused the word. Are people ready to start lynching government employees yet? That is what usually happens when OPM runs out.

There will be rainy days!
Then you wished you saved away some money.
Reminds me of year 2000.

This shows a lack of financial understanding on Council. A 7% return? You're buying that? You'd sweep incremental $ out of reserves because of that "promise"? Rosenberg should know better...doesn't he do family investments with Morgan Stanley?

The reason the pension obligations are increasing is precisely because the funds HAVE NOT been averaging a 7% return. Maybe someone can dig up the annual returns the past bunch of years...I believe it was below 1% last year? (could be wrong).

Sure, move a bit from other funds if $ can be found. And maybe a bit from reserves (for an element of diversification). But don't largely deplete the reserve (without a plan to get back to 25%) in search of winning the lottery. If the full pension amount is needed before being fully funding, then that would qualify as an emergency that could pull from reserves.

By the way, I applaud the city for being as close as it is. In the meantime, don't make decisions that increase the liability (like spiking salaries).

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?