As you all know, I have invited my readers to write columns for VotersOpinion.com on just about any timely topic. Since I’m the only regular columnist on this website, you are regularly subjected to only my opinion, for what it’s worth. But I also welcome guest columnists who wish to voice their opinions, whether or not they are contrary to my own. It’s a free country, right?
Damn right it is!
I received an email today from a reader from North Miami Beach who wishes to remain anonymous, and asked if I would publish it. I agreed. It’s unedited. Here it is:
Dear Stephanie,
BEFORE the city takes the drastic step of imposing pension reform they have a legal and a moral duty I think to enact any and all reforms that BOTH sides can agree upon. There were changes to the pension that would have saved the city money and that BOTH sides agreed with. BEFORE you impose changes, those agreed upon changes should have been enacted first. Agreed upon reform would positively impact the actuarial calculations of the pension from the city’s perspective.
Also, the city has a legal and moral duty to enact a two-tier system. Eliminate or change the terms of the pension for new-hires. Creating a two-tier system would also have positively changed the actuarial calculations of the impact of the pension on the city’s financial future.
Remember, and this is important to remember, the mayor’s entire argument in favor of imposed pension reform is predicated upon the financial impact of the CURRENT pension plan and not the hypothetical REFORMED pension plan that BOTH sides could have agreed upon. Had the mayor and union enacted bi-partisan pension reform, had the mayor and council enacted a two-tier pension system then the actuarial numbers that are now being used by the mayor to justify his unilateral and forcibly imposed pension reform would be DRAMATICALLY different. The actuarial numbers would be much BETTER in terms of the city’s financial future and the mayor’s argument would be proportionally WEAKENED.
Making agreed upon reforms and enacting a two-tier system saves the city money WITHOUT violating any contractual obligations prior mayors and councils entered into with pensioners. No lawsuits. No legal challenges. No hard feelings. No disenfranchisement of police officers who see their entire career path turned upside down, dramatically altered by unilateral pension reform. As we all know, officers who thought they had only X years left to work will wake up one morning and find out they now have X + 5 years left….meaning their entire life’s plan has been completely and radically altered. Officers who spent a career thinking they’d have X dollars for retirement are now waking up to find out they’ll have only .6X dollars upon which to retire…meaning they now have to work much longer and later in life than they thought, longer than they were promised by former politicians in NMB.
Would a two-tier pension system that was reformed in bi-partisan fashion actually fashion result in bankruptcy for NMB? I doubt it…but it is incumbent on the mayor and council to enact any and all agreed upon reforms and any all reforms (i.e.: a two-tiered system) that do NOT require imposition on current members and then perform an actuarial calculation of the impact on the city’s financial future and then in reliance upon THAT actuarial calculation we can have a discussion of possible bankruptcy and whether or not imposed reform is necessary.
And I’ve not even mentioned the possible (if not likely) negative impact unilateral pension reform would have on future hiring. I, for one, would be very leery of accepting a job offer from a city with a reputation of promising X, then unilaterally down-the-line changing the promise to .6X as it suits them. That, to me, is NOT good business practice. If the city took any and all steps FIRST to avoid it, that would be one thing…but they are not. Unilateral changes are being used as a first resort, not a last resort.
A Concerned NMB Resident
Concerned Resident, your comments are what we’ve been scratching our heads about for over two years now. We (the police union) offered pension reform nearly two years ago, if not longer, that would have saved the city money, changed a pension for new hires, and would have kept good relations between the officers and the city. But this Mayor & Council didn’t want to hear it and for the past two plus years, nothing has changed and their still complaining about the cost of an unreformed, unchanged pension. You mentioned the word “bankruptcy”. The city has talked about how the pension system can lead to bankruptcy and reform needs to be done ASAP (they’ve rejected reform for 2 years now). Why not file?? A little hard to prove when they’ve built up nearly 20 million in savings for the past two years. They couldn’t even claim financial urgency. When previous city manager L. Bonner mentioned about claiming a “state of financial urgency” to the State of Florida, they quickly backed away from it when they realized they would have to open their financial docs to state auditors. Hmmmmmm…..
If you read Stephanie’s blog about pension reform and our 185 monies, you would see how this Mayor & Council would rather steal our money and spend $$$$ in years of litigation and lawsuits rather than agreeing on fair and responsible pension reform. Could you imagine how quick our economy would collapse if financial agreements between two parties meant nothing and any party can force a change to that financial agreement at any moment without the other party agreeing. Well that’s how this mayor and council think they can operate. I bet after all is said and done, and they spend hundreds of thousands of taxpayer money to fight our pension board, were gonna end up with a reform that’s the same or close to what we offered them two years ago.
There’s so much punitive action taken towards the pd by this mayor and council right now that its laughable. This mayor made it clear before he was elected how he felt about NMB police officers with his outrageous statements at public comment during council meetings. He’s kind of like Obama, in the sense that he’s gonna completely screw shit up, blame previous councils for all the shortfalls, and were just waiting around for his term to end so we can actually move forward with someone who will lead this city to a prosperous and safe community. Pension lawsuits take years and cost $$$$$$$$, so at this point just sit back and watch the show.
Without belaboring the point or beating the already dead horse, as it is said, I agree with all of this. George is a friend and a neighbor. Most of other Council members are friends. The entirety of this pension “reform” and police contract “negotiation” has been and continues to be disastrous. Our Police Department has been stupidly beaten like a street thug caught by a mob. It is pathetic and our city and its residents will be paying the price for this many years into the future. I am angry about it.
I get turned off when sound argument is displaced by inflamed rhetoric. I think the members of our NMB City Council believe they are delivering a more prosperous future for our city with more opportunities for everyone. I respectfully disagree with their current stance with the NMBPD. While I can understand the belief that police pensions have gotten out of hand, I feel we must honor the contract for cops who have 15 or more years. These employees have already made a life choice and it their decision matters. Additionally, I am no fan of the privatization and pension reform movements that driven the public servant bashing of recent years because I have come to believe it serves a darker purpose. In education it has been a way for private corporations and profiteers to insinuate themselves into the public sector where they extract every dime they can of “educational’ tax dollars to line their pockets while claiming a plethora of tax exemptions granted to educational institutions. When they realize they might have to lay out money for teachers and books, they close-up shop and never return the money they have pilfered, leaving our children to find another school .
Public servants don’t get rich but they don’t “job hop” either because they have some guarantees and, contrary to what many people may have you believe, that is a good thing. Knowing that someone is not going to pull your job out from under you or change the rules in the middle of your career gives employees a sense of stability and ownership. Trust me, it is important that police, teachers, firefighters and all public servants know and care about the neighborhood and the people they serve. We trust our homes, our children and our lives to them. The private sector could learn a thing or two about loyalty. Think about it. Who is more likely to stop the guy in the office who is walking away with your laptop, your secretary or the temp you hired this morning? It’s common sense.
i’ve said it before and i’ll say it again, defined benefit pensions are insanity.
no amount of reform can solve that problem, not even shafting all new hires.
Promises of water mean nothing to an empty well. that being said, good luck to the city and officers of NMB.