I don’t think anything would make me happier at this particular moment than to never hear the word “pension” again. Or “reform.” Especially in the same sentence. While I’m certainly no rocket scientist, I consider myself to be a fairly intelligent person. But when it comes to trying to understand pensions and pension reform, I gotta tell ya, it’s enough to make my head explode.
In my attempts to decipher all the information about the negotiations between the City of North Miami Beach and the International Union of Police Associations (IUPA), I’ve come to the realization that I know even less than I thought I did when I first started paying attention. After hearing both sides of the story from the city and the union representatives, and picking the brains of many knowledgeable individuals who have no pony in the race, I’m still confused. However, I will attempt to sort it out for you as best I can and, hopefully, you can come to your own conclusion. If you have a clue, I’d be more than happy to buy one.
On Tuesday, September 17, 2013, I attended the Special Council Meeting, a/k/a Impasse Hearing, at City Hall, which was supposed to start at 5:00 p.m. For some inexplicable reason, the council wasn’t ready to begin until 5:24 p.m., and even then it was announced that councilweasel Frantz Pierre had still not arrived. (I guess that was the reason.) The attorney for IUPA rightly requested that the hearing not begin until all seven council members were present. Everyone agreed to wait, and the meeting was held up for another ten minutes or so.
Where L’il Frantzie P is concerned, late is almost as bad as never. According to Frantz Pierre’s Meeting Attendance record, which was prepared by the totally awesome Adrian Thomas in the city clerk’s office (and who deserves a shout out!), The P Man missed 10 out of 43 city meetings in 2012 and 7 out of 24 meetings in 2013 through August 15, 2013. Out of a total of 67 regular council meetings, special meetings, pension meetings, CRA meetings, budget workshops and budget hearings in 20 months, Frantzie couldn’t be bothered to attend 25% of them. That’s not even including executive sessions, which absolutely no one at City Hall can tell me how many he actually attended.
Not that Frantzie’s presence amounts to anything anyway, but you can bet he’ll be up to his old dirty tricks in 2015 when his seat is up for grabs and he will do anything to make sure he keeps it for the purpose of having his health insurance paid for life, courtesy of North Miami Beach taxpayers. (But that’s a topic for another column, so I’ll stop digressing now.)
In any event, Frantz eventually breezed in at 5:45 pm and the meeting started. City Attorney Darcee Siegel explained that the police union contract expired on September 30, 2011 and that despite ongoing negotiations, the parties arrived at an impasse. A special magistrate had to be called in to make a recommendation, which was issued on September 6, 2013. Each side was present to plead its case before the council.
I took notes, some of which I can actually read, so here’s the narrative as best as I can sum up:
The city’s attorney, Robert Norton, threw out a bunch of numbers about the budget and said that due to the cost of the police pensions the city can expect a $2.865 million shortfall in the 2013-2014 fiscal year. He also stated that the management employees haven’t had a raise in eight years, their multiplier went from 3% to 2%, they lost their five year DROP and couldn’t retire until age 67.
Mr. Norton then claimed that the police pension had unfunded liabilities in excess of $50 million, or 844% of the entire payroll, and that our city has “the worst numbers in the state.” He added that the $5.9 million/year pension fund is unsustainable. In addition, he said that 24 police employees are in the DROP, and that if they all remained for the full eight years, it would cost the city an average of $700,000.00 per employee.
The attorney also stated that police employees are allowed to accrue 96 unused hours a year of sick time, for which they can be paid upon retirement, and furthermore, that there is presently $20 to $50 thousand dollars of unfunded liabilities for unused sick leave. I believe the new proposal cuts that allowable unused sick leave in half, but since I don’t have the actual proposal, don’t quote me exactly. Mr. Norton did say that the new proposal calls for a three year contract, with no wage increase in the first year, but that wage increases would “reopen” in years two and three.
In conclusion, Mr. Norton reiterated that the pension deficit is “staggering,” that the city’s proposal is “more sustainable and still generous,” and will increase the employee contributions for insurance. He also exclaimed that the union’s proposal does not address “costs and unfunded liabilities.” He urged the council to approve the Special Magistrate’s recommendations.
We were next introduced to Richard Weiner, Esq., the attorney for IUPA, who wasted no time introducing Sergeant Richard Rand, the president of the union’s Local 6005. Sgt. Rand then wasted no time telling the council that he had a PowerPoint presentation for them and attempted to hook up his laptop to the video screens, to no avail. It seemed like everyone in the room tried to help him get hooked up, but nothing worked. Nearly 45 minutes later, after he couldn’t get the screens working, the council was delivered printed copies of the presentation, which really messed up Sgt. Rand’s stride. What a freaking bummer! (I would tell you the reason for this screw up, which I only found out yesterday, but that would be so way off topic. Another time, perhaps.)
Even without the visuals, Rich Rand did a great job explaining in detail what concessions the union has offered in an attempt to reach an agreement with the city. Luckily, I was able to obtain a copy of the PowerPoint, which you can access by clicking here: PowerPoint.
Cool, huh?
I would also like to tell you how far apart the demands by the city and the concessions by the union are from each other, but as I already noted, I haven’t been able to get my hands on a copy of the city’s proposal since it’s not yet posted on the website. Once I do get a copy I will post it.
According to a discussion I had with Sgt. Rand, most of the city’s terms are acceptable to the union, with the exception of two major issues.
The first one is the Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for retirees. Presently, retires are entitled to an annual 2-1/2% increase in their benefits, and the new proposal reduces that benefit down to .75% per year.
An even bigger bone of contention that neither side was willing to negotiate on is the current requirement that a 60% vote, or a super majority, of the active participants is needed in order to amend the pension plan. The city is intent on removing that requirement and the union is intent on keeping it. Neither are budging.
The union claims this vote is an absolute right and the city says otherwise.
Depending on who you talk to, you’ll get a different opinion. Luckily, you can review the only two opinions that matter so far for yourself. These two legal opinions were issued by two highly respected Florida law firms, whose attorneys are well versed in state and constitutional law. They are both also posted on the city’s website.
In the Opinion Letter of Bruce S. Rogow, Esq., dated August 5, 2010, he makes reference to and rebuts an earlier Opinion Letter by James W. Linn and Glenn E. Thomas of the law firm of Lewis Longman & Walker, P.A., dated June 28, 2010, regarding the question of whether or not the city council has the right to remove the 60% voting right from the union members. (Those letters also reference an opinion that was rendered, and rebutted, on a collective bargaining issue that was on the table at the time.)
The original Opinion Letter issued by the lawyers for the city, which is not posted on the website, apparently asserted that the provision requiring approval of amendments by members of the retirement plan “is an improper delegation of the City Council’s legislative authority.”
Mr. Rogow, who was hired by the police union, rebuts that assertion, and also rebuts the claim that a super majority voting requirement is unconstitutional.
Rebutting that rebuttal is a Rebuttal Opinion Letter of Lewis Longman & Walker, P.A., joined by the city’s labor attorneys, James C. Crosland and David C. Miller of the law firm of Bryant Miller & Olive, dated August 13, 2010, wherein the lawyers acknowledge Mr. Rogow’s claims, and assert their own collective opinion as to why they believe their original declaration of unconstitutionality was correct. This Rebuttal Opinion Letter also includes a restatement of their initial opinion.
Did you get all that?
Both opinion letters cite case law after case law to back up their respective claims. In my opinion, each side makes a good argument. Since I’m fortunately not a judge, I can’t tell you which side is “right.” That’s why we have courts and judges. The law, especially statutory law, is not always in black and white. Personally, I find both these opinion letters to be fascinating and I suggest you read them. If you’re into that sort of thing, of course. Just saying.
In any event, the impasse between the City of North Miami Beach and the Local 6005 Chapter of the International Union of Police Associations went before a special magistrate, whose recommendations were mostly in favor of the city. It was then up to the council to vote on whether or not to accept those recommendations, which it did. Not surprisingly.
At the impasse hearing on Tuesday night, I got the feeling that everyone in the room knew it was a done deal, and that perhaps the meeting was just a formality in order to make the council’s approval official. I also know that the mayor and council as a whole are pleased with what they believe will help stop the draining of the city’s revenues for what is most likely an unsustainable and continuing liability.
The intangible, however, is the fact that the police officers believe that the mayor and council have destroyed what little morale they had left, not to mention slashed certain benefits that they expected to contractually receive when they were first hired.
Both sides do have valid points.
On the one hand, the current (and future) unfunded pension liabilities are beyond staggering. Continued at this rate, the city will never in a million years be able to pay off that debt. This is surely “kicking the can down the road.”
On the other hand, though, I also believe that the police officers who were employed prior to these “pension reforms” have a reasonable right to expect to receive the benefits that were promised when they chose to come here. Their argument that they are contractually entitled to those benefits seems reasonable to me.
However, as I said, I am not a judge. If the union follows through on its threat to sue the city over this decision, it will eventually come down to a judicial decree.
In the meantime, I’ve laid out the facts of this issue as best as I understand them. As always, if I got something wrong or if I misunderstood any information given to me, I am more than happy to be corrected. This is an ongoing learning process for me, and I hope for you as well. I also welcome your comments.
But, more importantly, let your government know how you feel. Did the city do the right thing or not? You be the judge.
Stephanie Kienzle
“Spreading the Wealth”
The only comment I have is this: 1) you don’t negotiate with terrorists; 2) you don’t give in to your young children when they’re having tantrums; 3) when you call a meeting for a certain time, you start on time, as long as you have a quorum. If you don’t let one irresponsible Councilman modify your behavior, you will modify his.
“The intangible, however, is the fact that the police officers believe that the mayor and council have destroyed what little morale they had left, not to mention slashed certain benefits that they expected to contractually receive when they were first hired.”
The PD is approximately half the city’s work force. Over the last several years, the other half have been slashed benefits that were promised when they were first hired. The general employees’ pension was modified by the council even though the electorate voted overwhelmingly against the modifications. Invoking the bargaining process was an out and out lie, as the general employees’ pension was never a part of the AFSCME contract, and there are many members of the pension who are not governed by the union contract. Employment “contracts” for many of these individuals have been deemed null and void with the stroke of a pen. It seems no one is very concerned with the devastating morale effect of such measures. I suppose because when we turn on the tap, the water still comes out, and when we throw out the garbage, someone still picks it up. I’m honestly not sure why the PD gets so much attention with these matters. I for one need garbage collection and water a lot more than I need the cops.
So true. When the management pension was battered and raped, nobody said a word. While these “elected” people literally pay (or get paid) to get in, and are then on board for less than ten years, they destroy the lives of employees that worked hard and took exams to get in, and have selflessly served the public for decades. While some of these “elected” people barely have a high school diploma, most in management have post-graduate degrees, years of continuing education credits, and so much more to offer if given the proper tools and rewards. They will tell you that they are carrying out the “will of the people,” but how many people exercised their will in the last election, a couple of hundred? And worse yet, how many of these people voted out of spite, anger and envy? Or even voted legally? This is just a lynching, and calling it anything else is a distraction that only those with barely a high school diploma can believe.
Trying to compare sanitation workers to upper management to police officers to public works to the meter readers is ridiculous. Every one of these employees deserve fair compensation when compared to what that particular position pays.
The pd makes up most of any cities budget, why you may ask, it runs 24/7 365 days a year, i know that most people don’t understand that, but then again this city isn’t coral gables (educated residents) if you know what i mean. If you want that to end, tell your elected officials to make it a 9-5 operation and let the county handle the remaining 16 hrs. Or for that matter, just have the county take over police services. This city appears to not want a pd anymore anyways so i say let the county take over.
I guess I know what you mean, Trying. You are suggesting because I live in NMB and not Coral Gables than I am an uneducated moron. Or as your colleagues are wont to say, a “low-information” resident. Well, you are wrong. I have an education, and having worked for the city for almost ten years, I have a bit of information. Our Solid Waste division works seven days a week. Our water plant also operates 24/7, 365 days a year. I’m guessing you don’t live here like I do, so these things don’t really concern you. Someone else picks up your garbage and provides your water, and I don’t suppose you give it a thought, because some lowly public works employee provides that service without your having to think about it. So perhaps the comparison seems ridiculous to you. And thereby you made my point for me. You are better than the rest of us. Hope you sleep better at night.
Trying doesn’t seem like he’s better, he does however seem more educated on this topic than you and “resident”. How many employees are working at the water plant during the day, evening, and midnight hours? If you know this so well then please tell. I can tell you I don’t live in this city. Why would I? Don’t blame me for picking a neighborhood free of drive-by shotings, A+ schools, and city leaders that value, respect and provide their employees with good financial backing. Don’t blame me for not living in a city that cries broke, year after year after year, while the city saves millions and the city has looked the same for the past 20 years (like shit!!). Wake up and look around you. I can’t give you common sense, that’s a value your gonna have to get on your own.
I agree with your assessment that the city has looked like shit for the last 20 years, which is actually THE problem, and which is why we have all the others. Because of the small but vociferous anti-development group, we have not had any growth in decades. This has contributed to our money problems. You said that the city saves millions, however, it will take way more than a few million dollars to bring NMB into the 21st century, and certainly way more than that to fulfill all its financial obligations. Without a substantial amount of new revenue producing development, there will not be enough income to take care of all the employees and beautify the city. I agree with you that NMB is hardly an ideal place to live, but the blame does lie in the lack of vision of all the former administrations who didn’t have the foresight to plan for the future. The one thing I can commend the current administration for is its willingness and ability to bring in new development. Unfortunately, it takes so long to get these things built, and it will be a very long time before we see the revenue come in. We also have to deal with the idiotic lawsuits filed in an attempt to stop the development, and that could delay the progress even longer.
None of this, of course, helps our current mess with the pension and contract issues. I see both sides of the battle clearly, yet I have absolutely no idea how, or even if, it can be fixed. In the meantime, I’m planning my escape. Davie’s starting to look real good to me.
When you give all the power of change to one entity you no longer have the checks and balances that sustains integrity. If this is the type of government you seek, move to Cuba. If not, don’t allow this mayor and council to continue their tyrany.
I can only applaud this council for moving in the right direction with pension reforms. Its a good beginning. We need to live within our means. For too long we have allowed the tail to wag the dog. ALL needs to be reformed irrespective who you be. We have been overly generous with every one, every level and is looking to become Detroit pretty soon if we do not make these baby steps.
I want to applaud the sanitation and water department for delivering an A+ service. They have never discriminated in their service delivery.
For the IUPA president to suggest we should have continued to outsource Sanitation so they can have the savings for the police department is another display of arrogance. Why did the police officers not take a cut to keep the 17 officers laid off and show some “brotherly love” for each other? Instead we heard from the lawyer representing the city at impasse, four officers from DROP will be leaving with an average of $700,000.00 EACH.
Some officers have accrued 1000 hours (25 weeks) of “SICK LEAVE”
another set accrued 500 hours of SICK LEAVE.
So much for brotherly love and taking a cut to save your brother’s job.
If we hire 17 officers, might as well we hired 34, because we have to put aside over 99% of their salaries for pensions, the lawyer told us.
For every dollar the police officer contributes to his/her pension, the NMB taxpayer have to match it with TWO dollars.
We need to move in the direction of high tech video surveillance. Airports, shopping malls, stores, cinemas and other private and public buildings have moved in this direction to improve on security. This have deterred allot of crime, brought more accountability to the community and saved cities against frivolous lawsuits.
Resident, I know you were told it was 24 officers in the DROP, not 4. You were also told that the figure of $700,000 per officer is incorrect. I plan to write a column in the next few days explaining how the DROP works and exactly where the money comes from, but in the meantime, I know that the figure the lawyer threw out was completely erroneous. Obviously, his spin worked, though, because you believed it.
Resident aka Village Idiot, you stated “If we hire 17 officers, might as well we hired 34, because we have to put aside over 99% of their salaries for pensions, THE LAWYER TOLD US.” Really?!?!?! The Lawyer told us?!?!?!?! Well the IUPA lawyer has a different side to that one Kazhan, but all the officers should beleive the IUPA attorney because “the lawyer told us”, right!! RRR!!!!! Wrong!!! Unlike the city, IUPA had Sgt. Richard Rand do the presentation because all that information is factual according to the NMB’s financial documents and they didn’t rely on a union attorney, they did their own research. If the city shows 14 million in savings on their books and IUPA says the city has 14 million in savings according to those books, can the city say it’s working at a loss and their in financial turmoil when every financial planner and auditor they hire say the city is in great financial standing. If you think thats being truthful, trying pulling a stunt like that on your tax return and see how quick you get audited.
You had a great suggestion and the city has taken your advice, they’ve invested in 6 more red light cameras which will also act as surveillance at those intersections. But hold on, you actually need people to review those cameras and litigate the court proceedings. The city had to hire more pd personnel and a group of court hearing officers. Damnit!!! Were back in the same situation.
Thanks for this blog Steph. You know when a lawyer is lying? Their lips are moving 😉
(This city attorney, R. Newton, must love this city, he’s been negotiating a contract with the cops for over 2 years and it’s still not over)
Resident,
First of all, it is ridiculous to compare our city to Detroit. According to the Council, we have more than $11 million in reserve not to mention a Waterplant worth more than $1 billion. Numerous South Florida cities have declared financial urgency, not North Miami Beach. Not once. And the city will not declare financial urgency, because they know they would have to open their books to the state of Florida. In any event, if the city would like to reduce the pension benefits of future hires that is their prerogative. They are talking about reducing the pension benefits of current members, and that is outrageous considering they are contractually obligated. They agreed to this amount at the time these people were hired, and these officers made life altering decisions based upon that contractual obligation. To change the agreed-upon amount in the middle of their careers is extremely unfair. Also, going forward, it will make it much more difficult to hire well-qualified police recruits. Who in their right mind would want to take a job in the city of North Miami Beach knowing that five years from now the city could possibly tear up and rewrite their entire contract based on a whim? Were I as malicious and ruthless as you, I would wish the same thing what happened to you one day. Maybe if the same thing happened to you, maybe if one day you walked into work and found out that your boss had taken it upon himself to tear up your work contract and cut your retirement in half, maybe you would be a little more empathetic and less hateful. This city must stand by its contract or it’s word means nothing. This city needs to honor its obligations. This city was able to attract well-qualified, professional police officers based on the pay and benefits it promised. If, 10 or 20 years ago, this city had offered lousy pay and benefits like it is now, then it would’ve gotten lousy police recruits. It didn’t, so it has already reaped the benefits of those contracts. Now it is time for the city of North Miami Beach to hold up it’s end of the bargain and pay what it promised to pay and not a penny less!
And one more thing, Resident, prior to the layoffs we officers did in fact offer concessions to the city to try and save their jobs. Despite the fact we had a signed and legally enforceable contract, we agreed to return to the city nearly 9% of our pay and benefits in order to avoid the pending layoffs. The mayor and council wanted 15%. For whatever reason, they decided to refuse our offer and chose to lay off the 17 police officers. Since they could not get everything they wanted, they decided they would take nothing instead. What they did was to essentially cut off your nose to spite your face. Had they chosen to accept the 9% concessions we offered, then they would have only had to lay off eight or nine police officers instead of 17. And the officers who remained would have continued working for you at a savings of 9%. Looking back over the last two years, you could’ve had a larger more robust Police Department at a more efficient rate of pay and your savings ultimately would’ve been the same. The mayor and council made a stupid decision driven entirely by ego. If you are the head of your household and you need to tighten the budget then you clip coupons and shop for buy one get one free specials. You find a way to buy 100% of your groceries at 85% of the cost. You don’t make your family eat 15% less groceries and pat yourself on the back for being a great money manager. That is essentially what your mayor and council have done, they cut the size of your police department by 15%, the remaining 85% continued to work at full pay and benefits, then they told you they had saved you money when in fact you were eating 15% less food. And you are apparently too ignorant to know the difference. With all due respect, of course.
Stephanie,
I think your readers should also be aware of the following: ordinarily pension benefits are negotiated between the city and its members and each party has its own attorney representing them. As this present situation clearly illustrates, each party has severely different interests thus they require separate representation. This is how it is done in every entity in South Florida, however, that wasn’t the case in North Miami Beach. In North Miami Beach, the officers pension was represented by the city attorney of North Miami Beach, Howard Lenard. Many officers including myself were very upset by that, we thought it was a terrible conflict of interest. How could the city’s attorney also represent the police officers on pension issues considering our interests are diametrically opposed? That would be like getting a divorce and having your soon-to-be ex-wife’s divorce attorney represent you pro bono. As crazy as that sounds, that is precisely what happened in this case. Each and every pension benefit we receive, the city was represented more than adequately every step of the way; they knew exactly what they were getting. So we were represented by our ex-wife’s divorce attorney and now years later our ex-wife is coming back and saying that she got screwed in the divorce? Ridiculous!
The residents certainly did not promise a cop can accumulate 1000 hours (25 weeks) of sick leave, nor 500 hours either. Nor did they promise the egregious pensions and salaries you presently obtain. One person in the DROP will be leaving with one million bucks almost when he retire this year end. Who promised him that? But we now know how it worked. It was addressed at council meetings these pension board meetings will be held in the morning hours when it would be impossible for us working residents to show up, and we were told we do NOT HAVE TO COME. It will NOT COST US A PENNY. It certainly is costing us an arm and a leg now. Then we had on the FIVE member pension board, 3 or 4 police and firefighters. One can only visualize a blank check book was handed over and the farm given away. Who promised for every dollar the cop give towards their pensions, we taxpayers have to match it with 2 (TWO) dollars? But that is what we are paying. Then you did not mention of the underfunded police pensions short by $50 MILLION. Not to be outdone, we heard the IUPA president Sgt Rand telling us the DROP will NOT COST TAXPAYERS ANYTHING. Excuse me. Then this should not be in the budget since the 4 people leaving us this year SHOULD NOT COST US ANYTHING!!. And as per the 9% “NMB Cop” said they were willing to give up? Total fabrication! Public records will show clearly at NO TIME, such was ever offered. It was a rape, pillage and plunder of our coffers. Slowly but surely we started to wake up. In the past a budget hearing lasted 5 minutes compared to the months of agonizing line by line item we currently endure. What we are unearthing, Denmark smell is pale in comparison. We can only thank this council for donating their time to right the wrong that was done to its residents.
WOW!!! Looks like you drank the KoolAid “concerned”. Last time I checked I never negotiated any part of my benfit package with residents. It was city adminsitrators that were hired to take care of that. I also didn’t see a city employee job announcement endorsed by or given to me by a city resident. It was given to me at city hall by another city employee with the benefits and salary given for that position. Give everyone your phone number “concerned” so next time an employee calls out sick, he can call you so you can document it and you can start making phone calls to get his spot covered for the day. WOW!!! Not much to say about all the other mis-information you wrote, you must have gotten that from “resident”.
Glad you finally got the memo officer. The last time I checked, our 7 elected officials are finally reflecting the will of the residents. This is just the beginning of the reforms.
So the will of the residents, as reflected from your elected peeps, is to get rid of the gang unit, traffic unit, community patrol, crime suppression unit and several detectives from the detective bureau. Meanwhile shootings and homicides have tripled this past year. Traffic homicides have trippled this past year. You have less cops in the city and the city leaders aren’t affected by this because they have an officer 24/7 at their guard gate and they all live east of the tracks (except for one). Yup!!! Sounds like you got a great deal “concerned”. Thank god I live in Broward!! Just make sure you don’t stop paying your taxes “concerned”, when the general employees and police officers win the lawsuit, besides the 2-3 years of litigating attorney fees to cover, your gonna have to make every and all employees/officers whole again along with their pension plans. Eeewww!!!! I’d hate to see the price tag on that one. Thank god I chose to live in Broward 🙂
If you want to make the remark that all but one lives east of the tracks, you are wrong. Frantz Pierre lives in Sunray East, Anthony DeFillipo lives in Sunray West, and Marlen Martell lives in Windward. Please get your facts straight.
TC your so testy with the whereabouts of our elected d-bags. Who cares where they live, Martel is a air head that was FIRED from this city, Frantzie us always a step away from another IA, and DeFelipo is new and still learning the ropes. The remaining 4 do live in ES. But of course you wanna set the record straight on non-important details. Your a moron just like them.
Sorry, no moron here. It just shows the inaccuracy of C’mon Really who wants us to believe everything (s)he says. Slick, there is no reason to call people names if you don’t agree with them, just make your point and move on. If you want people to believe your “facts,” then be accurate in everything you post.
Concerned,
Your comments are so factually inaccurate that I hardly know where to begin in responding to them. In fact, you exhibit such an obvious bias that it most certainly would be a waste of my time to try and reason with you.
Rather than waste my time with you, I shall instead address the others who may be reading your ignorant drivel.
Ask yourself this, given the deep deep cuts to the police department, how is it possible that this city is still in a state of fiscal crisis? When the city first claimed poverty there were 113 police officers on the force, they all had take-home cars and there were no restrictions on overtime spending. Now, two years later, there are only 89 police officers, they no longer have take-home cars and discretionary overtime spending has been all but eliminated. And yet, the mayor and council still claim to be operating at a deficit?? Honestly, how could that even be possible? How could they have 24 fewer police officers, 24 fewer salaries to pay, 24 fewer pension funds to support, 113 fewer take-home cars to fuel and almost no overtime and yet still be broke? This mayor and council loves to throw jabs and insults the way of prior legislators in the city, but it seems to me the prior legislators were financial geniuses compared to this crew who can’t even manage to fund an 89 man Police Department with no-frills or benefits. There were 103 police officers in the city when I started here more than 20 years ago and prior mayors and counsel people managed to fund their Police Department just fine. Only this crew of inept leaders seems incapable of making ends meet, so one has to wonder who the real problem is, us, them or prior governments in this city? The problems only seem to begin once this crew got elected. For two decades prior, everything worked just fine.
And don’t forget the dozens fewer employees throughout every department in the city. Every building looks like a ghost town, dozens of empty desks with unused computers, wasted a/c and lighting. This is not much different from those who are willing to de-fund the entire government, just to prove a point.
Don’t waste your time explaining NMB Cop, it’s like trying to put a square through a circle.
It seems our mayor and council have taken a page from Rahm Emmanuelle’s playbook, which is, never let a crisis go to waste. They seem intent on using this economy as an excuse to absolutely eviscerate the police department. As Stephanie could well attest, I am at my heart a fiscal conservative but police protection is one of the few services I think government has a duty and responsibility to provide. I don’t fault the mayor and council for trying to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse. Lord knows government has plenty of that! My fault for the mayor and council lies in their decision to save money by firing police officers. Any idiot can save 15% cost by firing 15% of their police officers. If they were truly looking out for the residents and taxpayers of North Miami Beach, they would have found a way to keep 100% of their police force intact while at the same time eliminating the waste, fraud and abuse. Firing police officers, to me, is just as inexcusable as firing soldiers in the military. Without security, nothing else matters.
Going forward, mark my words, this Mayor and Council have done irreparable harm to your Police Department. When a mayor and council take these kinds of drastic steps, firing police officers and attempting to unilaterally change their pension benefits, word gets around. This city is going to have a very difficult time attracting well-qualified police recruits in the future. No doubt, police recruits in the Academy are being warned to steer clear of this city. We are all familiar with surrounding police agencies that have a less than stellar reputation. Police abuse, misconduct and unprofessionalism is par for the course in these cities. North Miami Beach could soon join the ranks of the cities and if/when that happens the citizens will suffer greatly.
Two years ago the mayor and council asked for and received a written proposal from the Dade County police department on how much they would charge our city to take over police services for them. I presume, since they chose not to hire the county, it was cheaper for them to remain with their own police department. If North Miami Beach police officers were already working more cheaply then County officers, why is the mayor and council attempting to impose massive pay and benefit cuts on its officers now?
Someone is not being truthful and honest.
When the Mayor and Council imposed a 2% multiplier on the police (high risk employees) and then they turn around and give a 2.5% multiplier to a meter reader, the writing on the wall is clear. This is personal to the Mayor and Council. I feel sorry for them. They envy us and are jealous of us. They go home at the end of the night, look in the mirror and say to themselves “i did great job today at trying to destroy the financial future of my city employees, and we have 21 million in savings on their backs”
Cops should bail out.
Residents should move out.
That just about sums it up
Sunrise PD just put out an announcement that their hiring (certified & uncertified), hmmm lets compare.
NMB
-Salary: 52k-72k per year
-Take Home Car: NO
-Pension: 50% after 25 years (55 y/o age requirement), officer contributes 11.1% to pension plan
-No DROP
SUNRISE
-Salary: 57k-82k per year
-Take Home Car: YES
-Pension: 70% after 20 years (no age requirement), officer contributes 9.84% to pension plan
-6 year DROP
Hmmmm, thats funny, the city attorney, Robert Nortman, stated last Tuesday that in his 40 years of negotiating with police agencies, he’s never seen a pension plan as profitable as ours. Maybe he’s never worked outside the limits of North Miami Beach because our pension plan was not even close to most agencies in Dade/Broward counties BEFORE pension reform.
This is just a small comparison, if I got more detailed on their benefits compared to ours I think i’d throw up thinking of the mistake I made coming to NMBPD. It’s obvious the Mayor & Council have taken steps so far beyond what any other municipality has taken that they either want to not have a police department anymore or they want this police agency to be like Sweetwater or Opa Locka, and we all know the problems they have.
I often wonder, does the mayor or council ever stop and ask themselves how a city like Opa Locka became Opa Locka in the first place?
Talent, like water, always finds its own level. This mayor and council seem to operate under the misconception that they alone, without regard for surrounding agencies, can set Fair-market value for police services. They think police officers should make X number of dollars, therefore, they intend to pay only X. But, the trouble begins when other agencies are paying 2X or 3X. When other cities are offering better pay and benefits for the same job, eventually the talent migrates to the other cities leaving North Miami Beach behind. Less qualified police officers results in more acts of brutality, misconduct that creates increased liability to the taxpayer as well as diminished property values in the city. In other words, you get what you pay for.
This mayor fancies himself a free market capitalist, yet he shows an amazing ignorance when it comes to the actual operation of the business model. He also demonstrates an amazing blindness as he watches cities like Hollywood struggle to regain their footing after making some of the exact same moves he is making right at this very moment.
Coming soon… Billboards along the highway begging anyone and everyone to come apply for a job with the North Miami Beach Police Department.
The constant comparison to other agencies in support of NMBPDs need for more $$ is a red-herring. There are other ways to cultivate good law enforcement other than offering the most money and benefits. I bet some people even join the force because they want to help communities…but obviously most care about the bottom line$.
This whole process is disingenuous to the citizens of NMB, and at no point do I read anyone talking about what’s best for them.
There are security guards working in high-risk situations getting paid less than NMB cops, I’m sure somewhere out there, hell maybe even within the city limits, we could find honest, hard-working people to work for a wage which compared to other work with similar licensing requirements is not bad.
In fact, at 46k a year NMB police get paid significantly more than the 31k median income within the city.
How much could NMB save over time by training new police from within the community at a wage comparable to what it takes to actually live within this community?
How much crime could NMB tackle by progressively addressing crime as opposed to being shackled by National, State, and County norms/expectations of how policing should be done, and instead try to find grass roots, creative solutions?
Maybe I’m totally off base suggesting that in a crappy economy we may be able to find cheaper and more community oriented ways to solve these problems. Maybe Americans are unwilling to work FOR their community instead of working their community’s money.
I know that in some countries police are paid pittances, and being a police officer is like having a target on your head at all times.
I mean no disrespect for the risks police take in their jobs, but if we’re going to start comparisons, how much do cops in third world countries get paid? yeah, you guys have it so bad.