Hundreds of law enforcement officers & firefighters throughout CoCo County, including the Concord Police Association, the Contra Costa Deputy Sheriff’s Association, the Martinez Police Association, the Walnut Creek Police Association & Firefighters IAFF Local 1230 are calling for a boycott and urging members to cancel their subscription to the Contra Costa Times.
Here’s their message, taken directly from their facebook page….
Join us in Boycotting the Contra Costa Times! For too long the Times has been spewing their propaganda against police officers and fire fighters.
Editorial writers like Daniel Borenstein have thrown journalistic standards and integrity out the window for the purpose of demonizing public safety workers.
Borenstein has become an expert at twisting facts and using dubious statistics to promote his personal crusade against pensions. Enough is enough. We are asking all who join this page to cancel their Contra Costa Times subscription.
When we get enough followers we will also contact companies that advertise in the Contra Costa Times and ask them to take their advertising dollars elsewhere.
The Bay Area News Group can allow papers like the Times to print whatever they want. We do not however have to subsidize their duplicity when there are so many other good options for local reporting.
Please suggest this page to friends and family that support the hardworking men and woman of law enforcement and the fire service.
Jim Bickert is the President of the Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriff’s Association, he says they believe the Times has an “axe to grind” regarding public employees….
It is true, we are advocating a boycott of the Contra Costa Times. The CC Times, specifically Dan Borenstein, has an axe to grind regarding public employees.
The paper is attempting to sway public opinion against public employees with incessant, biased, slanted reporting on pensions that aim not to educate their readers, but to promote their own specific agenda. There is more to the story that Mr. Borenstein chooses not to print.
We have joined with IAFF Local 1230 (Contra Costa Firefighters). I have sent a letter to the leaders of all of the police associations in the Bay Area that are members of the Bay Area Chapter of PORAC, asking them to pass it on to their members who may live in Contra Costa County.
The Contra Costa Times was contacted by CLAYCORD.com regarding this story, but their Executive Editor, Kevin Keane, failed to respond.
{ 226 comments }
Oh what crap! Whose brainstorm was this?Borenstein has exposed a bunch of high ranking Chiefs etc. that have ripped the system off big time. The Deputies and Firemen need to be concerned with keeping the system solvent.
Let them provide an example of what Borenstein says is not true.
They are probably bad mouthing the one reporter who may help save their retirement. The money that has gone into some peoples retirement for life has been based on a bunch of allowances granted to deliberately spike pensions.
If the employees want to do something about keeping positions they ought to get rid of the stupid helicopters the Sherrif keeps his ego inflated with. Maybe save some positions that way.
Im telling everyone to subscribe to the times.
Let’s see how those guys would feel about the public SERVANTS that save lives every day if it was their house on fire, their family member in a car accident, their house getting burglarized or them a victim of a violent crime? I bet they would be touting the praises of these folks. Anyone who fights or speaks out against the fire fighters or those that protect the community ie: police and sheriffs, they don’t deserve the protection they provide. Shame on the CC Times.
I am under the impression that the retirement money is way to much and is breaking the bank;
I never agreed to getting the paper delivered. When the person from CCTimes called, wanting me to take the Sunday paper, I said I DO NOT WANT the Sunday paper. I wouldn’t mind getting some other day but NOT THE SUNDAY PAPER! They have been delivering it ever since!
I have not read it. I hate all the advertising. I have called multiple times and asked them to cancel delivery. I have returned the bills, saying I never wanted it, they are delivering without my permission, and I won’t pay it.
The last time I called, they told me it was cancelled as of the beginning of October. THEY ARE STILL DELIVERING IT!!!
My neighbor is a cop, and I don’t want it on my driveway, because I support the cops. PLEASE CCTIMES – QUIT DELIVERING IT!!!
Maybe I will start sending the CCTimes bills for trash removal!
The new motto of the CC Times should be “Yesterdays News – Tomorrow!”
…and “Only The News We Want You To See”.
For far too long, Mr. Borenstein has written “hit” pieces which have polarized the community, and have been wholly unfair to police and fire. The Deputy Sheriff’s traditionally have been one of the lowest paid agencies, AND they paid 24% of THEIR share monthly into the retirement system. That is far more than your “private” sector.
Due to his biased reporting, I have been personally attacked by people who claim “You don’t deserve” your retirement! Really? Well, I don’t know about the top people, but as a “rank and file” person, if something on my paycheck was taxed as income for 30 years, then it should be counted as my “final compensation”. I never saw the “overly generous” benefits, the ad-ons, or the “spiking”. Certainly did not happen for me…gee, did I miss something? I don’t think so.
I think Mr. Borenstein is an angry little man who spews vitriolic hit piecees heavily slanted against the hard working police and fire in our county.
So instead of making a reasonable reply to the information in Mr. Borenstein’s articles about pension abuse and padding by Police and Firefighters in Contra Costa County, they just decide to boycott the paper. Reminds me of the Teabaggers, If there’s no substance to your argument, yell louder.
While I agree that you should not continually bash public servants like the police and fire, with bogus statistics, a reality check is in order
It is true (and I know from close friends) that some firefighters and police will work extra overtime the last two years before they retire, because their retirement salaires are based on that time
I also know for a fact that the pensions of public officials are killing the State and we cannot pay for it.
A friend’s uncle retired from a major airline, and after a few years, due to the economy, they cut their pensions..done, no questions
Why is the private sector allowed to cut pensions, lower salaries, give pay cuts, etc to stay in business, but if the Govt does it, theirs a big uproar??
We are in despearate times and I think that everyone needs to give a little.
I also know of a retired police chief who got a big pension….after a few years of retirement, he joined another police force as their chief, retired, and now getting a pension/retirement from that police force – why is this double dipping allowed?
Why can’t police/fire retirement salaries be based on their last 10 years of pay history, rather than the last two?
I appreciate the service of the police/fire, but the bloating, pension abuse, etc is ridiculous
Police and firefighters unions complaining about CC Times reporting of pensions huh? Although I also support boycotting the CC Times for many other reasons, I also support a Constitutional Convention to lead California through Bankruptcy, which would bust these powerful unions and their control over California taxpayers. Nurses unions, Prison Guard unions, Police unions, Firefighters unions, SEIU-they only want to rape taxpayers. Unfortunately, the people of California, in their good judgment (/s) have just elected Jerry Brown, Gavin Newsome and Willy Brown’s concubine to our highest state offices. Let that sink in for a moment.
I have asked the CC Times to put me on their “Do Not Call List”. They keep calling.
I have asked the CC Times to stop soliciting by postal mail. They keep sending offers.
I have canceled the Times twenty times, but they keep sending more papers, and more bills.
The CC Times is Medusa: Cut off one of their heads and five sprout back to take the place of one.
A nightmare, on Elm Street.
When I read this my fist concern was the First Amendment. The paragraph below takes that into consideration.
The Bay Area News Group can allow papers like the Times to print whatever they want. We do not however have to subsidize their duplicity when there are so many other good options for local reporting.
As there have been no law suites by the police associations so far, I can only guess that what is printed has not reached the point of slander or an absolute lie. In this case a the paper can print what it wants and others can boycott.
The greatest problem with pensions is that once they had been agreed to by the elected Representatives of the people, these same elected representatives failed to take any steps to fund the pensions.
Are the pensions too much money? That is a matter for debate but considering the service probably not. Had the boneheads who agreed to these pensions and funded them appropriately done their job this would be somewhat less of an issue.
The bottom line for blame is us, the citizens. We elected the self serving *$#^$&#*#^%^$&$** who got us into this mess and we keep electing the same people or at least the same kind of people. We have no one to blame but ourselves for our own complacency, at least those of us who keep voting these …….. people into office and approving tax increases.
I’ve noticed the Times biase against law enforcement for some time now. Whenever there is a police shooting or anything the Times tries to make it seem uncalled for so they can sensationalize it. I know they also recently fired one of their columnists for writing a pro-police column in support of the Concord officers that shot the guy that pointed the fake gun at them a few weeks ago. The Times has absolutely no integrity and will do anything to create controversy to increase readership. Because of excellent reporting by Claycord and other blogs, they are going bankrupt and are so desperate they have lost all the little journalistic integrity that they once had. Dean Lesher would be ashamed.
#3, they did the same thing to me and I called them numerous times telling them to stop. Then they sent me a bill for the papers that I didn’t want. When I refused to pay, they kept harassing me and even tried to pretend they were a collection agency on the phone but I researched the number they called from and it came back to the Times. They finally stopped the harassment when I threatened to report them and call CBS 5 on your side.
This actually makes me want to run out and buy a subscription to the Contra Costa Times. Folks, we’re broke. Although I’d love for firefighters and police officers to get six-figure pensions and free health coverage for life when they retire, the State of California and its cities and counties simply can no longer afford to pay for it all. Vallejo is already bankrupt. San Carlos was forced to do away with its police department. Half Moon Bay is next (albeit not entirely because of pensions). Antioch is nearly broke, too.
San Francisco is talking about charging drivers $3 every time they enter or leave the city via the peninsula. The need for revenue to fund pensions is the reason for this proposal. It has nothing to do with traffic congestion. The voters recently passed a sales tax in Concord so that city workers wouldn’t be laid off. Now, we have one of the highest sales taxes in the nation at 9.75 percent. Where do you think people will go to buy big-ticket taxable items? That’s right — the Internet.
California instituted these guaranteed pensions that are totally or substantially funded by the taxpayers at a time of great prosperity. The economic downturn exposed the folly of such an act. When the bottom dropped out of the housing market, property values fell. Property tax collections naturally followed. People started losing jobs, so they quit buying as many goods. Sales tax revenue fell. Many folks brought home lower wages, so down went income tax collections. It is doubtful that California will see any of these revenue sources return to pre-recession levels in the near term. Where, then, do the firefighters and police expect the money to come from?
I have never had a job that makes a pension. I’m under 30 and have a college degree. Why, when officers/firefighters make over 90k a year, are they not able to start saving for retirement? Sorry, but they make toooooooooo much. And cities are going bankrupt, not to mention the state. CUT their pensions back …. and don’t forget to cut ADMINISTRATOR salaries back while you’re at it!
And to #5: Pensions went the way of the dodo bird DECADES ago in the private sector! What is this joke about a 25% ( 3:1 match )?? Are you kidding? Unless you are a filthy CEO robbing investors and your employees, you don’t get anything of that nature.
This is directed at DrDuran….please tell me you are not so naive as to believe that time and time again well articulated arguments and facts have been given time and time again to the Contra Costa Times only to have them conveniently left out???? Please “DrDuran”, you think if Mr. Borenstein was shown to be a liar and fact twister they would be able to peddle their garbage newspaper?? I think you need to take a step back and think about your comment thoroughly before making baseless comments…sounds like a job at the Times would be well suited for you.
I subscribe to the CC Times (Sunday only) because newspapers are handy for wrapping stuff, starting the fireplace or bbq, cleaning windows, stuffing for packages, table tops for crab feeds and seafood boils. I get my news from the internet. Because the CC Times are against the good public servants of this state, I plan to cancel my subscription and find another newspaper to use for handy stuff.
Ten years ago, the Times was an EXCELLENT paper. No more. Like many others have stated, I cannot get rid of them. Have tried to cancel, to no avail.
My feeling is that yes, there are pension abuses, but we only hear about the real egregious abuses. Most public servants are not getting these huge pensions, and shouldn’t be punished for what a few people are getting away with. Reform is definitely needed, but somehow I doubt that if/when it comes, it will really take care of the problem. Ah… I’ve gotten cynical in my old age… or is that just the ability to see reality?
It’s time for me to subscribe to the CC Times again. Sounds like they have reporters and editors who represent our best interests and who bring pressing issues to their readers!
Support your local Firefighters, they are part of the fabric that holds our society together.
Thank you Con Fire, we support you 100%!
First of all, this isn’t “just” about “pensions.” When I decided upon a career in public safety, many years ago, I made a conscious decision that I may be laying my life on the line for any one of you. I realized my dreams and my family’s dreams could be taken away in the blink of an eye. No one has ever signed up for “public safety” service to get rich. When I signed up, people were getting rich off the stock market, dot coms, in real estate or brokering loans. No one wanted a career in law enforcement because of the low pay, compared to other “jobs” that were available. Besides the sheer satisfaction of helping people and making a difference in society, is that my family will be taken care of, financially, in the event of my death, and I will have a pension to rely upon once I retire from my service.
It is time we stop subjecting Public Safety to be the root of all financial evil and economic demise. What is lost is the fact they (CC Times) forget those in Public Safety put their lives on the line every day. Please be reminded of the number of CA officers and firefighters killed in the line of duty and know that their children will never see their fathers or mothers again.
There is MUCH mismanagement, political corruption and irresponsible “giveaways” to those who take advantage of California’s free spending and generosity, which have pushed California over the edge.
The Contra Costa Times has routinely published biased and irresponsible stories about local law enforcement, not just about their one-sided views of our pensions. The CC Times will sensationalize stories (without checking facts), just to make a buck. Enough is enough!
I am proud to serve my community, but when I retire, I am done. I am well aware that, statistically, I will have outlived my life expectancy if I see my 55th birthday. PERS, our retirement system, bets on that as well. How many other retirement systems make this kind of bet that one will not live long enough to enjoy their retirement?
The amount of money made by newspapers off subscriptions and retail sales is a minimal portion of their revenue. The big money comes from Auto Dealers, Realtors and Big Retail. This is where you focus your boycott……but, don’t expect much cooperation.
Absolutley disgusting!!! Who here thinks with all the internet news now that the CCT doesn’t alredy have a problem? Good job “Law eforcement and firefighters” lets take more jobs away from people in this county in this f!#%&* up economy. Who pays for law enforcment and firefighters? Screw it im sure we can afford to pay all those employed or contracted by the CCT unemployment.
Got a “renewal” from CC Times for the amount of $48 for 24 weeks, close to $100 for the year. I have been a long time customer, twenty plus years. Called and complained about the rate, and low and behold, they then offered a year of 7 day delivery for $54.23. I asked why the big difference and was told that marketing has the choice of offering it at different rates. Nice, huh? Same paper, different rates to different people, those that don’t call and complain will just pay the high rate. Being part of the San Jose Mercury newsgroup, my sister called and asked what my rate was, she had just received a renewal for $150 for the year. After I told her to call and complain, she got a 59.95 for the year. What a complete scam.
I am now contemplating canceling because all the paper has become is slanted articles between the massive amount of ads.
I agree with the public safety personnel’s choice in boycotting the Contra Costa Times. I was a student at Mt. Diabo High a while back when someone from the CCT decided to write an article without interviewing Mrs. Hansen (Retired) first. The stated that Mt. Diablo had uniformed security guards and metal detectors. My point is, the CCT will do whatever to get a story out, Fact or not.
Police Officers and Firefighters DERERVE EVERY CENT THEY EARN. and YES, they EARN their pay and their pensions, if they live long enough to see it.
If you would like a career helping people and you are physically fit, emotionally sound, educated, pass a litany of tests to determine your suitability, are willing to sacrifice holidays, children’s birthdays, weekends and enjoy an abnormal work schedule (whatever normal is), strain your marriage, learn how to manage stress at regular intervals, enjoy working long hours, sometimes in very undesirable and adverse weather conditions, see and deal with people and society at their very worst, learn how to manage sleep deprivation, while still making split second life and death decisions and realize any call could be your last, realize that this career WILL take a toll on you and shorten your life, come on down to your local police or fire department and fill out an application!
Enough of the bitching and whining about Police Officers and Firefighters already!
Anon-hole at #15 The only information I have to go on about this boycott is the information that they put on their Facebook page, there is nothing there to explain away Mr. Borenstein’s articles about pension padding. As for my comment being “baseless” I didn’t make an accusation, they did, their accusation might be baseless, it might not, but calling for a boycott without giving your side of the story is worthless. Boycotting the paper just because you “support” the police and firefighters is just like not trusting scientists because “science has been wrong before.” It’s a knee jerk reaction with no thought involved, just like your reply to my comment.
Hey Mr. Mayor. I think it is great how SFgate.com picked up on your story. I don’t know how blogs work but think it is great Claycord.com is all over the place on there.
Maybe you’ll bring a little sense to those loonies.
Thanks, Melliemom. I actually blog for SFgate.com, too, so all my stories show up on their site.
Mayor
Borensteins articles are lopsided, biased and irresponsible. He needs to go!
How many posters here are either a cop, firefighter, or close relative (wife, etc.)? You are the ones doing the ill-received whining. You are the ones who should prove what Dan reports isn’t true–if in fact it isn’t? Produce documents that show otherwise. It is time (overdue, actually) to reduce the gold packages you receive–lifetime–from tax-payers, period. We ALL need to sacrifice whether you accept it or not. Dan is exposing areas of concern All should be aware of, and where change IS necessary.
*One example of many that pertain .. A public servant I know very well hurt 2 fingers while on the job. He was out on FULL PAY for two full months. Now that’s absurd. Could he not stay in the office and answer the damn phone? Community support? Move papers? Seriously. I fully support Dan and all of his efforts. Tax-payers should be thankful for his in-depth reporting. I know I am. Thank you, Dan.. Keep up the good work!
To add to Lee White’s post, consider this:
In the three weeks since my last tally, I’ve learned about another 14 companies that have left California completely or re-directed capital to build facilities out of state. The names of the 14 and justifications for listing them appear below. Today’s entry builds upon the Sept. 21 entry 144 Companies Shrink from Calif. This Year – Three Times the Total for All of 2009.
The first post:
http://thebusinessrelocationcoach.blogspot.com/2010/09/part-iii-county-by-county-losses-for.html
Public employee unions should never have been allowed. Since when should a party be allowed to negotiate with itself?
For a much better explanation of why this is so detrimental, read this letter from a former mayor in Ohio – by the way, he is a Democrat.
http://wallstcheatsheet.com/breaking-news/letter-to-the-editor-public-employee-unions-must-be-banned-from-endorsing-politicians-who-negotiate-their-contracts.html
Wake up, folks. Money does not grow on trees, contrary to what some Californians think. And the rest of the country does not want to bail out our sorry rear ends when we’ve been so fiscally irresponsible and they should not have to.
Isn’t it great that there are alternatives to the CC Times? If you want to boycott it and go to their competitors,it’s not a problem.
Sadly, those calling for the boycott offer no such ability for their captive customers. The firefights and police have monopoly control of their services and no boycott of them would be effective as it would have no effect on their bottom line. If they provide less than adequate service, it is the consumer who suffers. If they charge far more than what they produce, it is the taxpayer who suffers.
If the police and firefighter businesses were opened up to competition, then their customers could boycott them for high pensions, or pay the increased costs voluntarily. For now they hide behind their powerful monopoly and throw stones at those who have to actually satisfy customers to stay in business.
@ #25 – as a firefighters wife, I believe you hit all the notes about a career in the fire service…I am grateful that my husband has survived 24 years in the fire service, and am obviously hopeful that he survives the remaining years until retirement. I’ve seen the stress he is under because of all those things you mentioned. And I don’t care about his pension, I just want to spend the rest of my life with him.
I dare anyone to walk in the shoes of a police officer for one week and see how fast your opinion changes about how overpaid we are. Like any profession we have people who are an embarassment to the job. But the overriding majority of us give way more to the job and our health by the time we retire than what we are compensated in salary.
To Concord Public Servant – While I totally support and want the best for our first defenders, please don’t use false information about life expectancy.
From CalPers own statistics:
“CalPERS of course has to figure out actuarily how long their employees are expected to live in order to calculate retirement formulas and how much and for how long they will have to pay to retirees. Their findings pretty much debunk this myth once and for all as they find absolutely no difference in the life expectancy of miscellaneous members versus public safety officials.”
http://davisvanguard.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2977:calpers-debunks-myth-of-shorter-life-expectancy-for-safety-employees&Itemid=79
My gripe is not with the rank and file. They should get a good pension. But the abuses are what is driving public opinion. The spiking of pension plans is rampant and the salaries and pensions of the management people is ridiculous. I know of a local fire chief in a small CCC town who retired at age 50 on over $95,000/year and then was hired back as a “consultant” for close to the same amount of money. Sorry, that’s just not right. I retired from my private sector job and I could have gone back to work on call for them but they would have reduced my pension according to how much I was making on call.
I’ll be sure to cancel my internet service too, because this is where 90% of where people get written news now a days. I haven’t had the times sent to my house since 1999. Though I really do not see where this boy cotting is going to solve. They arn’t the only news source that talks crap. So the police have all this time to boycott but not do actual police work. But they have time to be racist to my Chinese gf and Chinese friend for teaching my gf to drive a manual on a ca at night away from people and houses.
Duran, you want one of Borenstein’s facts? he quoted a retired police Captain, did not check the facts which were wrong, and failed to report that his own source (said Captain) spiked his own pay prior to retirement.
Them’s the facts partna!
“When I decided upon a career in public safety, many years ago, I made a conscious decision that I may be laying my life on the line for any one of you. I realized my dreams and my family’s dreams could be taken away in the blink of an eye.”
————————————-
Actually law enforcement/firefighters are not even one of the top 10 most dangerous occupations: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/20/the-most-dangerous-jobs-in-america/. It’s much more dangerous to be a roofer, a fisherman, and several other things.
Cops and fireman have done a very good P.R. job of misleading the public about this fact.
I would rather pay public safety officer’s nice pension’s for protecting me and my children than pay for the millions of people in California on welfare and housing because they are too damn lazy to go out and get a job. I know a 26 year old woman who is almost 400 pounds and if she were to lose 13 pounds she could get the weight loss surgery for free. She won’t lose the weight so the State gave her $10,000 plus attorney fees for SSI and she still receives welfare, medical, housing and daycare. Why don’t we worry about cutting crap like this before worrying about cutting police officer’s pensions.
Concord Public Servant
Ive got some good news: The old “public safety officers live ten years less then the average citizen” is not true. Its made up. Yes you deserve a good pension and yes you do valuable work and yes you deal with scummy people, but the point of the boycott is that Borenstein is biased.
How?
. He has written a ton of stories about mostly high ranking people who have ripped the pension system off with ridiculous add-ons.
Its easy to say someone is biased (ever had that thrown at you? ) Someone needs to show how Borenstein lied.
In the meantime I’ll keep lining my bird cage with the Times and use it to start fires, except on no burn days.
Not only does the CC Times twist law enforcement stories, but they are doing a great job twisting the school closure information also!!!!!! The most recent article about school closures had quite a bit of mis information!!!! It certainly sent this parent into a scramble until I spoke to an actual committee member. I also work for law enforcement and sometimes I read the articles they print about the bad/good/dead vicitims/suspects and man, they are almost always off on their facts. Just don’t believe everthing you read folks. They are still trying to make money and sell papers.
Where would we be without a free press?
Not only has the Contra Costa Time exposed many of the abuses in the pension system, but they have given a openness to the entire state of California by suing to finally have all public employee salaries OPEN and clear.
This new openness and freedom is part of what led to the exposure of places like Bell California. Everyone is now looking hard at what our local governments are doing.
Finally pension reform is taking place all over the state.
Almost every state worker will have their pension plans adjusted for all future workers. We are bankrupt.
But what I find especially disturbing in these comments are the continuing distortion by writers who appear to be police and fire employees.
Twice in the comments we have seen a complete lie put forth again.
The big lie, that police and fire organizations continue to spread, is that police officers don’t live long enough after retirement.
Over and over and over, despite the facts, they foist this falsehood on a unsuspecting public.
They will tell you the average police officer lives far fewer years after retirement and thus deserves to retire early at large pensions.
This is a lie. They know it is a lie. They continue to spread this lie.
CalPERS, which is the system that pays the pensions for the cities, has the most extensive records available on all their pension members.
They have repeatedly and publicly revealed that police and fire employees live to almost precisely the same age as ALL OTHER retirees.
Got it? NO DIFFERENCE in their age of death. Thus they, the police, who retire early, collect their large pensions for 5 to 10 years longer than other public employees.
This “shorter life” distortion has to be a deliberate attempt on the part of police unions to mislead the public, because the true facts have been out their for years. CalPERS has all the facts and they have no reason to lie about those facts. The police and fire unions do have a reason to distort the facts on this critical matter.
I repeat, according to CalPERS, there is no difference between police, fire or any other public servants in the age to which they will live.
Male police officer retires at age 55, will live to about 82.5
Male building inspector retires at age 55, will live to about 82.5
Females about 3 years longer in both cases.
Lets do away with all media we don’t like. FOX MSNBC CNN The Times whatever and make it state run. That way the bureaucrats can control the news.
Then we can start burning books.
Call Borenstein whatever you like, but the guy is pretty exhaustive in his research. It shouldn’t be news to anyone that he is biased, he’s an editorial writer and an investigative journalist. If he’s a liar, then there won’t be much weight behind his claims, and no one receiving a fire or police or UC pension needs to lose any sleep. Seems to me, though, that the people who set these pension systems up have created a substantial bubble of unfunded liabilities that the broke-ass public is not going to want to pay for.
I agree with many others… this “call to action” on Facebook and other avenues is a load of crap if I ever saw one!
Daniel Borenstein should be given a BONUS for what he does, not be brow beat by the minority of public employees that grossly game the public pension system. It’s a total gravy train for many of these top fire and police chiefs (especially fire) especially.
Something has to be done to reign in public pension costs, especially in Contra Costa County which has some of the most severe and debilitating public pension obligations anywhere in the country.
If anyone is distorting the facts, it’s some of the public employees feasting at the public trough of excess at the expense of critically important public services that are now being cut, and it’ll just get worse into the future if some substantial changes are not made.
Some may blame the economy… and to some extent, that’s true. But really, all that has done is to highlight the heavy (and unsustainable) burden over-generous public pensions are causing us. The downturn has ONLY been a catalyst for an eventuality anyway, because, again, these pensions are wholly unsustainable unmodified.
AND, keep in mind, this is coming from a hardcore Democrat. One who’s been following this issue, and am very depressed about this enormous problem we are faced with.
UNIONS!….duh brainless blind obedient duds…..corruption is corruption, lying and cheating is lying and cheating, There is a reason the government doesn’t allow these unionized professions to monitor themselves..(like the ABA) …because they are unwilling to take responsibility and the inability to remove trash.
I have never had a subscription to the CCT. Just got off the phone with them… Should get my first paper tomorrow!
walnut creek walt……. articles???? links??? websites??? reference for your presumed factual statements??? anybody can throw “CalPERS says this” back up your arguments. because i would love to see where your information is coming from.
First of all, unless you work for local government you shouldn’t even attempt to try to write about what benefits we have. #30 WOW are you misinformed! There is no way an employee could receive full salary unless they used their own sick leave accruals to do so, so this isn’t a perk as every employee earns 8 hours of sickleave a month as do most employees working for a private company. Even if it was a Workers Comp case they would only get, I believe 75% of their salary. So, to all of you that are blogging on this subject, stop writing like the CC Times and be sure you have the full facts and not heresay. One last thing, 95% of us are not getting rich by working for government. Yes, there are some that have taken advantage and that’s why there should be a cap on pension earnings. Don’t put us all into the same category of the 5% that abuse the system!
Claycordians, I believe that you have missed the key issue with pensions. The reciplients of the pensions do not, in most cases, live in the cities that they work in. In order for them to work, they should all, without exception live in the community that they work in. County folks just have to live in the county, but city folks need to live in the city that they work in. If they work in an unincorporated area, they need to live there. Otherwise they should not be allowed to work for the City or the County. The resulting openings would help ease the unemployment situation in the City and County.
I’m disgusted by some of these posts.
If you were to walk a day in the shoes of a police officer, you would be more compassionate about what they deal with and do for our communities. For example: Being called to the death of a 2 yo who shot themselves in the head, a domestic abuse situation where a man has beaten a women and he now has a gun pointed at you, or your family has been threatened because of a case you’re working on. Our police officers deal with these types of things every day!
The CCT is biased. The police are made out to be the bad guys in their articles. I’ve written to them about it and have received no response.
I plan to cancel today. I have also passed this article along to my aunt, sister and dad, all of whom plan to cancel today too.
So long CC Times, you idiots!
Let me start off by saying that I am pro law enforcement and even for our friends in the big red fire engines but public employee pensions ARE unsustainable.
I will not cancel my subscription to the Times because I enjoy reading the sports pages and other miscellaneous stories while on the head.
Yes for current news I check other sites and claycord.com for the local stuff but asking folks to cancel because certain interest groups don’t like being exposed…that is ridiculous.
anonymous… If you doubt what I have said regarding the longevity of retired police officers (as well as fire fighters)…
I could give you various sites. Some are biased. Some are not. But they are all based on the same CalPERS study. So why not call and ask CalPERS themself.
Take the time to do your homework. If you aren’t willing to do that, then just continue to believe the false myth that police and fire personnel die earlier than other public employees that CalPERS serves.
CalPERS has the true facts. CALL THEM. A free call.
CalPERS Customer Contact Center 1-888 CalPERS ( 1-888-225-7377)
I called them and they verified the following facts.
Here is the CalPERS life expectancy data for public safety members (police and fire, which are grouped together by the pension fund):
– If the current age is 55, the retiree is expected to live to be 81.4 if male, and 85 if female.
– If the current age is 60, the retiree is expected to live to be age 82 if male, and 85.5 if female.
– If the current age is 65, the retiree is expected to live to be age 82.9 if male, and 86.1 if female.
Here are the CalPERS life expectancy data for miscellaneous members:
– If the current age is 55, the retiree is expected to live to be 81.4 if male, and 85 if female.
– If the current age is 60, the retiree is expected to live to be age 82 if male, and 85.5 if female.
– If the current age is 65, the retiree is expected to live to be age 82.9 if male, and 86.1 if female.
Simply put, police and fire personnel live almost exactly to the same age as all other CalPERS retirees. The only difference is they retire earlier, thus getting even longer pension collection times.
But every time this issue comes up, you can expect two or three attempts to spread the myth again. At some point it has to be called what it is, a complete distortion of the truth, a outright lie.
I like your point.
This is especially true for peace officers. Therre is a certain amount of implied ownership if you are protecting the city you live in.
I have called no less than 5 times to cancel the Contra Costa Times! Every time I call they say well you called to re-instate this… Total bullshit! The guy who drives to our area to deliver the papers has the loudest car I’ve heard. Contra Costa Times should be banned period. I haven’t paid a cent but they keep sending the damn thing. I think we should have a Claycord.com investigation into this type of practice!
I have never seen any of this, however freedom of speech is allowed and both sides should be reported fairly.
The paper is already dwindling away thanks to the internet and the creepy people they hire to give away free papers and then won’t leave you alone when you won’t sign up. That’s why I won’t subscribe.
I don’t buy it anymore, because it is too expensive at the newsstand and they machines never work and I lose money.
My wife saves more lives working at John Muir in a week than most cities police and fire departments do in a year, and all with no pension. Don’t B.S. people with made up statistics about how dangerous it is being a cop or fireman, they are not even close to the most dangerous jobs out there, but I’d be willing to bet their probably the only ones that get a pension. Their also the only ones that have over a 2 year waiting list to work in certain areas. The state of California is broke and everyone is feeling the pinch, hopefully including the sometimes over glorified P.D. & F.D.
I see Anon-hole is back at #37 with nothing more than his conjecture. If you want to convince anyone that you’re in the right, provide links to some sort of proof. Simply railing on just proves that you haven’t a leg to stand on.
Let me start with a disclaimer: I just got these figures off the internet, they appear to be from accurate sources but if someone has better figures feel free to correct them. Also, I have been a Bay Area police officer for about a decade.
California spends around $34 billion dollars a year on public pensions, of which the police are only a part. California spends $49 billion dollars a year on welfare programs. Why are people trying to fault the police/fire when there are a load of other public employees with far less stressful jobs that get similar benefits and a whole bunch of deadbeat on welfare that do nothing and cost more?
As far as the average life expectancy of a police officer, I’m finding figures anywhere between 53-66 years old. Most studies seem to peg it around 57-59 years old or about 14-16 years less than the average American. Someone else posted some figures from CalPers regarding the life expectancy of public safety members. I would think that would not include those that never made it to retirement, nor is it restricted to police officers. As this quote from an anti-public pension website indicates, “public safety members” includes far more than police officers:
“In the 1960s, just one out of every 20 California state workers received “public safety” pensions. Now, one out of three state workers receives the lavish public safety benefits originally intended for the firefighters and police officers who put themselves in harm’s way.”
As far as being a police officer not being a dangerous job, I can only tell you what I know. I was just able to think of 11 co-workers off the top of my head that were shot and/or killed in the time I’ve been with my department. I can think of 3 from outside agencies that were shot and/or killed while working inside my jurisdiction. This does not include the numerous co-worker’s that have been maimed in a variety of other kinds of accidents or assaults.
During my career, I myself have been injured to the point of being hospitalized with life-threatening injuries. Its very stressful for your family to be told by doctors that they need to be prepared for their husband/father/son to die. Much to the dismay of some on here, I managed to pull through. But I’ll tell you this, its going to be very difficult for you to convince me that my job is not dangerous or that I get paid too much.
I’m actually considering leaving this profession and I’m not the only one I know of. The benefits are not as lavish as reported and the constant danger, liability, and attacks from the public/media are getting old. Why risk your life and family-life for people who hate you? I’m educated and have other options. I’m not one of the “problem officers” that you hear about on here sometimes (i.e. not very good at the job and suing the dept.) I’ve had a distinguished career and am well respected in a community that generally is not considered “police-friendly”. Maybe Walnut Creek Walt can take my spot if I leave, but frankly I don’t think he’s got the “stones”.
The times has no integrity whatsoever. I am a great supporter of this boycott.
@ Walnut Creek Walt in particular,
Regardless of your “statistics” I can say that the mere nature of the job, takes a much larger toll on police and firefighters than one realizes.
Consider a police officer must carry around 25-30 lbs of extra weight each shift (gun belt, ballistic vest, etc). More and more police officers are going out on permanent disability due to back and other injuries because of the increased amount of equipment Police officers are now required to carry and the increasing violence and police officers are facing.
Police officers routinely go from a sedentary position (rest, driving) to complete exertion (fighting with suspects, foot pursuits, etc) at a minute’s notice. Police officers fight drunks, sometimes at twice their body weight, climb fences chasing after criminals and a host of other physical activities, which are detrimental to their health. Let’s not forget about the toll stress, prolonged and continual sleep deprivation and altered sleep patterns takes on the human body. It layman’s terms, it weakens the body, makes the body more susceptible to illness and disease and shortens one’s lifespan.
Let’s talk about the extra weight and exertion firefighters must assume in their roles. Ever though about the damage occurring to a human body when inhaling the toxic materials from a house or car fire or a drug lab? How about the physical exertions of a firefighter when battling a fire or extricating a victim from a car wreck.
Here’s a big investigative story Borenstein could do. Why doesn’t he investigate how many stories the Times and its associated papers steal stories from Claycord and other blog each week without giving proper credit? If anyone did this to them, they would have their lawyers after them in a heartbeat. How about it Times?
I am a wife of a retired Captain for the FD and personally Police officers and Firefighters don’t get paid enough. I know the public think they are well paid- well I’m here to say ” that’s not true”. The whole time he was serving all y’all I had to also work full time. I missed time with my children because I had to work. My husband worked most holidays so you could be safe. But my children didn’t have their dad on those holidays. I know many Firefighters who gave their lives for protecting this county. I know several guys who retired then within a few months died. I have known several guys who have been injured fighting fires to save your houses or at car accidents to help save your love ones or have come to your homes to help revieve a family member. So don’t talk to me about retirement /pension checks for these Heros cuz they will never be repaid enough. Be thankful they are willing to do their jobs so well to keep you safe.
Fire Fighters and Deputies.
Point 1 The CCT Times is a POS. Thats a given. Its a liberal rag.Claycord is days ahead in coverage.
Point 2 If you think the pension spiking isn’t hurting you, you are living in a fantasy world.
If you are Deputy rolling on the ground on Poinsetta or a firefighter deciding if you should go into a burning building because there is a trapped kid, what do you want to hear?
Answer: Sirens. Lots of them. Because you know help is close.
There is a finite amount of money to support you and your retirement system. Spiking pensions with ridiculous benefits takes from the pool of money to support you. That means less help on the ground for you.
Are you with me so far?
What does the County do? They hire helicopters,which are great for big egos, allow spiking by big shots, and cut into the money to support the first line defenders-you.
What has Borenstein (not a very likable person by-the-by) done?
He has exposed this crap. The end result is to put pressure on the Board. Moderating the pension system is going to free up money for hiring an adequate number of Deputies and Fire Fighters. Is that a bad thing?
Think carefully before you make Borenstein a bad guy. He may be saving your ass.
I think some people have taken the question of pensions and the reasonableness of some features and used that as a litmus test for the”do you support public safety”folks- Bad analogy. Virtually everyone knows that the SO and Firefighters risk their lives daily, are honest folks and do their jobs well. Please dont start whining that any questioning of retirements makes the questioner a Berkeley-radical-George Miller- PETA commie. It doesn’t
Yet another poster, “Police officer”, spreading the myth ever onward.
The poster “Police officer” must take the public for fools.
He/She posts the following.
————————————————————————–
“As far as the average life expectancy of a police officer, I’m finding figures anywhere between 53-66 years old. Most studies seem to peg it around 57-59 years old or about 14-16 years less than the average American.”
—————————————————————————
I see, “Police officer”, most of your excellent studies suggest that the average life expectancy of a police officer is between 57 and 59 years old.
Gee, given that the average police officer, in Oakland for example, retires at age 57, that would mean, using your study averages, they’d only be collecting a pension for 1 to 2 years before dying.
OK folks, there you have it. Yet another reputable poster “Police officer” giving you the straight facts.
Forget what CalPERS has in their state wide statistical data bank, collected from decades of history. Instead you should believe the preposterous statements put forth by “Police officer” right here.
Now, is CalPERS treating you like a fool, or is our poster “Police officer” trying to foist a whopper on you?
Or you could use your common sense. Think of police officers you personally know. My brother is a 30 year retired police sergeant and just had his 66th birthday. I guess all those fellow retired officers at his party were the rare exceptions to the 57-59 average.
“Police officer” do you even realize how foolish and absurd your “facts” appear. Yet, with a straight face, you continue to spread the myth.
Its rather a embarassing picture you paint to any reader who can do basic math. 57-59 average….Oh yeah, sounds about right!
I only read the times for the Frys ad and the funnies. The rest of it isn’t fit to line a birdcage.
As for Borestink telling the truth………it’s more like 1/8 true.
Very few Public Employees have “generous pensions”. If I retire at 58 with 33 years of public service I will get 70% of my salary. From that 70% will be deducted health care and taxes. Can I live on that….Well yes as I will be leaving California. But I certainly can’t live on that in California. I have a other investments to supplement my retirement, I’ve been lucky enough to be able to squirrel away money, one way was to buy in Concorc vs PH or WC…….And I may not think much of CPD as they haven’t done much with our neighborhood issues but every peace officer and firefighter puts his/her life on the line for us and they have earned their pension
I have tried to speak to Mr Borestink and that twit Kris Hunt from the Tax Payers Assoc, tried to give them info on “double dipping” but they are not interested. The only want to sensationalize and fan the flames of public fire are are able to fan the flames by appealing to the ignorant of the public.
For those that think Public Safety is over paid well the next time you need them ask yourself that question, or better yet don’t call them, deal with the crime of fire yourselves
Abuse on pensions, yes. at some levels. USA being unprepared for the downturn, yes..same with state, county and cities. Unions representing their people to be expected…additional people forget these members are citizens and taxpayers, too.
what worries me is stopping free speech, the rights of the press. It is one thing to boycott a business by employees. but we’re talking about the press….that is scary. Another area that scares me…Police Assoc. influence in our city elections…..
People appreciate the police and firepeople and to use that trust to influence elections and now trying to stop the press…is very scary.
A Doctor’s Perspective
“Regardless of your “statistics” I can say that the mere nature of the job, takes a much larger toll on police and firefighters than one realizes.”
————————————————————————————————-
My dear Doctor, you read medical text books, so you must have the intelligence to understand actuarial data.
Regardless of all the issues you point out, it is CalPERS who pays the pensions to retired police officers.
The issue here is how long they live. It is not about some potential for some disability specific to police work. It is NOT about stress.
It is simply about that age to which the average office lives in retirement.
For retirement systems such as CalPERS this is the most important statistic they deal with. They HAVE to get this piece of data correct.
CalPERS works with hundreds of thousands of retirees. They cover most of the police officers in California.
All the other incidental issues you speak about involving stress, injuries, and the like have NOTHING to do with the actual facts that CalPERS has collected as to the average age of police officers at the time of death.
You are muddying the waters. CalPERS is not lying about their data.
Why would they?
They report that police and firemen live to almost the same precise age as do all the employees they cover.
If you can’t understand simple straight forward actuarial data, then one wonders how you ever got through medical school.
Why would CalPERS lie? I got my figures from them, not from some doctor or some police officer who wishes the actuarial data were other than what it really is.
Emotional feelings have zero to do with the actuarial facts.
How long do police officers live…That is the only issue here.
Stop with the obfuscation. Stop promoting and extending the myth.
I had to laugh when I saw the supposed life expectancy for a retired cop as posted by #60. I guess I should let the ones know who frequent my business in Danville that their all living on borrowed time.
This story is about boycotting the CCT Times because Borenstein has written slanted stories about Public safety pensions.
Several posters have tried to turn it into a referendum on the job public safety employees do and how they should be rewarded with pensions.
Apples and oranges
I doubt there isn’t one fireman or Deputy who can’t point to a retiree who has ripped off the system. Instead of being offended that their future money is being fleeced, they want to attack the guy who has pointed it out.
Makes sense to me, especially if you can’t think ahead.
@ Walnut Creek Walt,
Congratulations on your brother’s retirement. It sounds as if he had a successful career. I’m sure your brother is enjoying his retirement and his well deserved pension. I’m sure your brother would be quite proud of the fact you don’t believe he deserves his pension or acquired benefits.
With all this attempted vilifying of police and firefighters, no one brings up the BILLIONS of dollars pissed away to illegals and welfare fraud. Where is all the talk about reforming these issues. THIS is what pushed California over the brink. Anyone care to weigh in on the obscene amount of money the illegal immigrants are costing us taxpayers with medical expenses? Walnut Creek Walt, Babs? Hmmmmmm?
Borenstein reports half-truths. I admit, some of the different agencies that are able to “outrageously spike” their retirement need to be addressed. However, Borenstein fails to report that most of these agencies that “spike” their retirement pay little into the fund, while other’s pay 22% (highest in state/probably nation)of their salary into the pension fund.
I would like Borenstein to report how much certain departments pay into the fund, he selectively fails to report these numbers. When people want to argue with me about my retirement, I easily end the conversation by letting them know how much I pay into it willingly. They usually looked shocked and say, “I didn’t know”. My next sentence is if you want to retire comfortable do the same.
Here are some interesting articles on Police Officer job stress, life expectancy, police suicide, etc
http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Aveni/Shift-Survival.htm
http://www.reachingcops.com/OurBurden.html
http://badgeoflife.com/faqs.php
http://911abc.com/copkiller.pdf
http://www.cophealth.com/
The fact that public safety pensions are being disputed is just ridiculous.
I didn’t try and manipulate any figures or lie to anybody. I just did a Google search that anyone else can do. There were a variety of studies that came back all over the place. The upper 50′s seems to the conclusion of many. I don’t have the definitive answer, but I don’t think the CalPers estimate of a “public safety employee” is a good estimate of a police officer because it includes many other types of employees. I can tell you that I’ve seen quite a few people die right before or right after retirement. Depending on what survivor options they elected to pay CalPers for, that could be the end of the pension right there. If its such a lucrative scam Walt, why don’t you go try it then and get back to me? Heck, if its such a great gig, why did departments, up until about a year or two ago, have to spend so much money on recruiting, signing bonuses, and the like to find any qualified applicants? While I appreciate your brother’s service, every senior officer I know also agrees that this job has gotten progressively more and more stressful in the last 10 or so years, from a variety of factors including increased liability and public/media vilification of the police. I understand that it varies from department to department, but from my perspective and first-hand experience, its getting very questionable whether the benefits outweigh the problems. I’ve gotten away from the newspaper issue of this post, so I’ll drop it. To end on a positive note, I personally appreciate the majority of folks on Claycord who are very supportive of the police. I think if more people supported and cooperated with the police then everyone would get a lot more bang for their buck.
Wow some of you people on here make me sick… this isn’t only about pensions here. For those of you who complain about how firefighters and officers of the law are making a big problem for everyone because of their retirement pension shame on you! I bet half the people on here who are complaining get to sit in a nice office chair on their ass all day doing nothing and have never had their house catch on fire,or a relative have a heart attack, perhaps been in an auto accident, or needed police to help or protect them. The employees of public service work their asses off! Rain or shine, holidays, they don’t always get to see their families or may not even get to come home one day because they are risking their lives for the community. If you were out their breaking your back for pulling fat people out of a burning building or getting shot at just because your trying to uphold the law wouldn’t you want to earn a good paycheck and pension to take care of your family if you ever got hurt or worse, killed on the job?
Amen Funny….AMEN……..
Yes every year the County is “broke” yet we find 1-2 million in the budget to fund basic health care for “immigrants” (aka illegals)……..Employees have to “furlough” but the BOS found $$$$ for health care for illegals……And that is just at the county hospital level. Service paid for by us tax payers to illegals is a HUGE problem in California…..
Like I said most public servants DO NOT GET A GENEROUS PENSION……Get over it already
Its amazing, people wanting to run away from what I post, slamming me for posting the true facts.
I guess I know a little bit of how Borenstein feels.
I see, according to you, now I don’t want my brother to get his police officers pension because I post about the absurdity of suggestions that the average police officer only lives to from 57 to 59 on average.
Oh OK….. you win. Most police officer die before the age of 60.
Are you happy now? No need for CalPERS or Walnut Creek, or Concord to worry about funding their pensions, because all those men in blue will die long before they can collect much money.
Yes you caught me for being so foolish. Imagine believing what the CalPERS actuaries publish as their facts.
Better to believe what someone writes in a blog.
Hey, try this. Next time you see a officer, ask him how long he expects to live. Try this with some of the older officers. Say a sergeant who is about 55.
Ask him if he is expecting to die in the next couple years?
Hope he didn’t save any money for the long term.
Meanwhile, I’d better get over to my 66 year old brother’s house and check his pulse. Oh wait, he’s sitting on a beach in Hawaii.
Oh God, he’s gonna drop dead right there on the beach. Any minute!
@ FUNNY You are absolutely right! Why aren’t these people looking at the non-taxpayers & asking why they receive all the benefits they do. I state for a fact that there are many (too many) grant programs out there that are only for the low-income households, where are all these programs when we middle-class, taxpayers need a helping hand? Stop berating all the lowly civil service employees and instead stop voting for all the a**hole incumbents that make the laws. Just read about all the perks your elected politicians get and you continue to vote for them. Stop beating up the messengers!
Police Officer says:
“As far as being a police officer not being a dangerous job, I can only tell you what I know.”
——————–
If you are, in fact, “educated” as your post claims, then you would know that personal anecdotes don’t mean diddly when compared with impartial statistics.
I linked to a source noting that police officers/firefighters are not even in the top ten when it comes to dangerous occupations.
Why is it that loggers/fisherman/etc. who have much more dangerous jobs than cops/firefighters don’t seem to spend a lot of time online whining about how dangerous their jobs are or how tough they are? I’ve never seen a post like that.
On the other hand, I’ve seen lots of cry baby posts from cops/firefighters (lying) about how they have the most dangerous jobs in the world.
You close your post by implying that others don’t have the “stones” to do your job. If by “stones” you mean people who whine about how tough they have it, then, yes, you have massive stones..
THANK YOU to all outstanding firefighters and law enforcement officers who risk their lives on a daily basis, and who give their all during difficult, sometimes exhausting situations. Without knowing every detail and/or fact, I hope your compensation is reasonable and you live long, mentally and physically healthy lives.
THANK YOU, Dan, for exposing so many important issues. Your effort is appreciated by many. Hopefully your compensation as well is worth the stress you’re under on the job.
Live long and prosper!
What a bunch of whine ass babies. Keep the heat on CCC Times. Ain’t nobody so precious, they’re above scrutiny and criticism, even our beloved first responders. And trying to smother the 1st amendment with a childish boycott? A pox on you! Think I’m gonna ignore the next few police association donation appeals when they call. And they always call once you’ve written them a fat check.
I can hear the chopping sound loud and clear, so get ready, the ax is coming.
I repeat myself….let the thread get back to the real story…boycutting the press…….talk about the pensions on another thread….basic idea ..is it ok to boycutt the press because an organization doesn’t like the reporting. Trying to make a newspaper only report what you agree with or maybe go out of business????????????
Sounds like some foreign countries.
After reading the postings here and sharing them with my family and friends, we now have 11 subscriptions that will be canceled.
My blessings to Public Safety for all they do.
Here is another way to look at it….would we boycott the Mayor if we didn’t like a certain poster. Espc. if he did not refuse to post his comments. Of couse not. Day after day we see people post if you don’t like what you read then don’t read it BUT we never ask the Mayor to get rid of that person or ask the Mayor to stop his blog because we don’t like the way he runs it.
Shoot I hate FOX network but wouldn’t even think about asking it be taken off the air. That is what the US stands for freedom to express yourself.
CCTimes has awful customer service…esp. the delivery dept sucks big time….but I have the choice to stop using them and I wouldn’t recommend them for a delivery newspaper…..but it’s a whole different matter to say don’t say something……Nobody should tell someone not to say (write) something just because they don’t believe it or agree with it.
The Truth about California Peace Officer Pensions
Taken from PORAC website
http://www.porac.org/pension_truths.html
* California Employees Are Not To Blame For California’s Current Financial Crisis. We Are Experiencing The Worst Economy In Our Lifetime – 80 Years. Wall Street Is To Blame For California’s Current Economic Emergency.
o Public employees, including public safety, are working together to find sustainable solutions. The country is recovering from the worst economic decline since the Great Depression. It is important that we don’t employ a knee-jerk reaction that will cause undue harm to the pension system. We need to work together at the bargaining table to find a manageable resolution.
* Even If The Governor Could Fire Every State Employee Under His Control – Roughly 230,000 workers– This Still Would Not Balance California’s Budget. Roughly 70% Of The State General Fund Flows Out To Local Government And Schools.
* A One Size Fits All Approach Will Not Work To Solve California’s Budget Problem.
o Our defined benefit pension systems were designed to be flexible and to evolve over time.
Each local employer and each pension system evolves through negotiations between the employers and their employees at the local bargaining table – we need to respect the give and take.
* Retirement Issues Should Be Addressed Through Collective Bargaining, Not By A State-Imposed Mandate.
* Being A Peace Officer In California Is A Tough Job. A Secure Retirement Is Critical to California’s Ability To Recruit And Retain Peace Officers.
+ Last year four Oakland peace officers were killed during a routine traffic stop, this is unfortunately becoming all too common.
o California peace officers wear bullet-proof vests, carry Tasers and must be armed every day on the job. Law enforcement is not a profession for the faint-hearted.
o Remember, because of the everyday dangers of the job, it is difficult to recruit peace officers.
o It is not easy to become a peace officer.
+ Entrance into the police academy requires passing written exams for qualifications, being grilled by an interview panel, a polygraph, and an extensive background check. Not just anyone can meet this criteria.
+ The police academy includes intense physical training, similar to that of military boot camp, encompassing all aspects of the job, including physical, mental, legal and tactical skills. Cadets must also pass a rigorous physical exam before graduating.
+ The academy training is 26 weeks, filled with pop quizzes and exams, quarter exams and final exams. Exams cover California law, stress management, defensive tactics and much more.
+ If you pass the academy, you are assigned to a duty station and 12 weeks of field training. Officers must go through an extensive probationary period, lasting 18 months. If you fail this you lose your job.
* Peace Officers Repeatedly Give Up Higher Wages For Secure Retirement Benefits.
o Most peace officers do not receive Social Security. Many California peace officers pay into Social Security, as well as pensions, but since they receive a government pension they automatically lose part of that Social Security benefit. Therefore, some officers are contributors to Social Security, though in many cases not recipients. The other officers simply do not receive Social Security benefits upon retirement, leaving them to depend solely on their pensions.
o According to CalPERS:
§ The average monthly retirement allowance of all CalPERS public employee retirees is $2,101.
§ 78% of all CalPERS public employee retirees receive less than $36,000 per year. This by no means can be considered lavish.
* PORAC Believes That Abuses In The System Should Be Curbed Without Attacking The Retirement Security Of The Majority Of Hard-Working Peace Officers.
o Less than 1 percent of all public employees receive retirements that are $100,000 or more.
PORAC believes that abuses in the system should be stopped.
I support Firefighters and Police Officers . I will join this Boycott and tell all my Co-workers Monday Morning
I am happy to boycott. Always hated my automatic renewal anyway. People here only spew at teachers. Some of them may need that. Though I pay not attention to the religious or elitist types who spew because THEY think only private schools are any good. Boycott it is!
Sometimes reading the things written on blogs, from the safety of computers where your face doesn’t have to be seen makes me sick. It also makes me ashamed to be part of a society that is so eager to continually throw their first responders under the bus.
Every cop I’ve ever known had some chronic physical issue related to the job. From bad knees to bad backs, there was/is always something. Every cop I’ve ever known put in OT without being asked if they would like it. They’ve all missed out on holidays, birthdays, anniversaries, graduations, things other people take for granted with regular office jobs. Forget the sleep issues or stress associated with shift work, and that covers ALL jobs- first responders or not that have shift hours that make it challenging to get proper sleep.
Every day there are thousands of cops out there, and absolutely they may not encounter dangerous situations- but it’s the POTENTIAL of encountering one that wears people down over the course of a career. How many ‘normal’ people go to work to get literally pooped on, peed on, puked on, bled on, or have to wrestle idiots on the ground? Really. Yet a bunch of you think they don’t deserve pensions, let alone the pay they currently earn.
I’ve known way too many cops for it to be a coincidence, and surprise- not one of them was rich, or making extravagant plans for their retirement. INSANE to expect them to want to be paid to do what they do! Let alone be able to retire and be able to afford back surgeries, knee or hip replacements, or just spend time with their families- perhaps to make up for all those other times they missed.
Quit blaming cops for problems they didn’t create. We are lucky to have as many as we do.
Once again, go ask and do some investigation of your own. I said last month, the fire fighters pay a mandotry 25% of their salery to their retirement every month. I am retired and wish I did this all those years. You people should try to get into one of these professions. Remember when the county government gave themselves a 60% raise? We elected them, quit blamming fire and police.
@ Atticus Thraxx #84,
While I rarely agree with you, I do enjoy your (usually) comic wit and pragmatism…and your post is one of the 2% of times I agree with you a full 100%.
Yes. My brother is a former cop. Everything from the nerves to the back is affected. You can’t just do it like squatting behind some bank desk every day. If we are broke, we better teach the rich guys to pay their fair share of the taxes. They have had a five-fold increase in their income for the last 20 years. Hmm. How did that happen? Should we extend their tax cuts to help them create jobs, like they have done for the last ten years? Hah!
LEO supporter. You are refuting an argument that practically no one is making.,
The reason for the boycott is that Berstein of the Times has written stories about huge spiking on some pension plans. An example? How about an administrator working holidays his last year and collecting an increase on his pension for the rest of his life? Think thats a story? I do.
The Unions are too dumb to understand that abusive pension practices are bankrupting their system and they are going to end up screwed…
If they think its smart to pick a fight with the CCTimes, thats up to them. Call me stupid , but I think their strategy is self defeating…
PS I hate the Times
Sorry, I don’t genuflect just because someone is a cop or firefighter. I personally know quite a few, and frankly, they’re some of the biggest a-holes I know.
Does that mean I think that way of all “first responders”? No, absolutely not. But the point is, I don’t snap-to just because of your chosen profession. While I can appreciate the work you do, the fact of the matter is people like Daniel Borenstein have raised some important issues that I’ve yet to see be thoroughly and factually debunked by those in his crosshairs.
i’m curious what department you work for, not many departments have 11 officers shot or killed, especially that you would of known? i think you could list your city, not calling you liar, just curious
I thought I was the only one that hates this Borenstein jerk off. I told everyone at my job to cancel their CCT paper. Say goodbye to at least 30 more subscribers. Nobody reads newspapers anymore anyways.I hope you have a good retirement package Borenstein. NEWSPAPERS WILL BE GONE IN 5 YEARS..
CC Times – stop calling me to take your lame-ass paper – I cancelled a long time ago. The only thing I would use it for is to wipe my ass…… and that’s too good for it!!!!
It seems to me that the police and firefighters have become bullies. They bullied the mayor of Richmond and the public stood up to them. During the election in Concord, a candidate sponsored by the police association insinuated that other candidates were stealing his campaign signs. I was surprised the Police Association sponsored this candidate.
I took a very slanted phone survey just this week. Someone is working to determine if taxpayers would vote for a parcel tax in support of firefighters and police.
I’m getting tired of this.
Canceled my subscription to the Contra Communist Times a long time ago.
There are about 100 posts here. Lots of support for police and fire, lots of hatred for the CCT and very few people defending pension rip offs. If I were the head of the DSA or the Firefighters Union I would ask a question:
1. Did we stir up something we should have left alone?
Clue- The correct answer is yes.
Its simple to explain, the problem isnt Pensions or “Spiking” its the Federal Govt, Large Corporations, Wall Street, State Govt, And Local Govt. Its not Cops or Firemen wasting the Hundred of BILLIONS of dollars for handouts to Coporations, illegals, and Corupt Politicians at every level of Govt. You blame Cops and Firemen for getting paid a decent salary for doing what most of you wouldnt dare do. You hide behind these blogs and critize, head hunt, and blame Cops and Firemen for what the above mentioned have done to ruin our State and Country, all the while Cops are dealing with scumbags day in and day out. While Firemen respond to calls at welfare Jacks house 4X a week, who has more money in TV’s, Cars, Rims, and Jordans than the Cop or Fireman makes in a year. (Thanks to our great Welfare System!!) Yet you use them as a scapegoat for the problems in this State and Country. Your should be stoned for verbally beating Cops and Firemen for all they do for each of us. Regardless of what they make now and when they Retire. You put 25% of your paycheck each month into an investment account (while trying to provide for your wife and kid, and being an absent Parent and Husband for 15 days out of the month because you have to work 5 extra days to make ends meet.) and see how well you will be in 30 years.
I understand the topic is about Boycotting the Times but maybe if the Times spent more energy on the real problems in this County like the BOS and padding their Slush Funds with no oversight (ie Baypoint Dump, Glover!) and the special projects each one throw millions into each year, then boycotting wouldnt be necessay. Since Upper Mangement and BOS eventually cross paths you dont dare bite the hand that feeds you..
Dont Judge What You Dont Know
Pappers and News Outlets Are Lying more than they are Truthfull.
Put down the Papper, turn off the TV and open your eyes the REAL
TRUTH is right in front of you..
Just My .02 cents
Regards,
Concerned Tax Payer
Everyone considering to cancel are all blind to the fact that we are in a recession and need more jobs now than ever before. Nothing has changed this is what the media does.
CCT CLOSES 200 TO 300 HUNDRED PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTY WITHOUT JOBS LESS MONEY TO COLLECT FOR ARE BELOVED PUBLIC SAFETY AND MORE MONEY TO PAYOUT IN UNEMPLOYMENT AND SEC 8 WHEN SOME ARE FORCED TO RETHINK THERE JOBS AND DECIDE TO GO BACK TO SCHOOL. Am i the only one that sees that this could lead to hurting verry inocent people? And only further the recession the foreclosures and all the other bs that comes along with.
Hey Diablo since your wife works in a hospital I would hope she saves more lives than firefighters or cops! Oh and how do these “lives saved” stay alive before arriving at the hospital? Surely they all don’t drive themselves to John Muir. I’m sure your wife would love a pension if offered one but John muir scares their employees not to unionize! Ask her how much she contributes to her 401k, is it at least 25% of her monthly paycheck? Probably not.
While I understand the frustration with the budget and some of the abuses of the public trust, I don’t share the the general resentment displayed in some of these posts for our police and firefighters. I don’t remember anyone complaining during the .com or real estate booms about public employee salaries and benefits. In fact, I specifically remember hearing people criticize people thinking of going into public service because, “your not going to make any money.” I think some of the posters are simply envious of a decision they did not make, to enter public service many years ago. Most of those in public service made a decision in the late nineties or earlier this decade, when those careers were hardly seen as moneymakers. The selling point for government service has always been, 1) the higher moral calling 2.) job security and 3) a nice benefits package. No one sought this when they were pulling in stock options by the thousands or pulling tens of thousands out of their skyrocketing house value.
We can break the age old appeal of government service, we can cut pensions, furlough, reduce pay, and cut benefits. We can make it clear that when everyone else is hurting, the government employee is going to hurt too. The older employees are unlikely to leave, the young employees might, but there will be plenty of people to take their jobs–at least as long as things are bad. But what about in three or four years, when the economy has turned around. Who is going to sign up to educate our children, protect our homes, and administer the services that everyone seems to want. No one will buy the security argument anymore, the salaries will be paltry, the retirement self-financed, the benefits non-existent. I don’t think the moral calling can feed kids. Lots of countries have gone this route, and the result has always been the same: endemic police and government corruption, government abuse of the populace, and even more fear and resentment of government authorities. I hate to see what life in Claycord, or in California, is going to look like at the end of this story!
Is there anyone here who wouldn’t take adavantage of a retirement plan offered to them?
The employees have done nothing wrong, blame the bureaucrats- they set up the system and approved it.
If someone illegally cheats the system they should be blamed and prosecuted, if someone collects what they’re allowed, good for them.
Be honest, wouldn’t you collect all the retirement you could?
2 things that I have never read in the CCTimes, but are true facts about Public Servants that receive a pension:
1) Most are not allowed Social Security benefits whatsoever because of their pension.
2) The reason that these pensions benefits are “so large” is that in the early to mid 90′s the Stock Market was so strong that many local governments where not required to make pension payments and quite a few actually recieved large payments back from CalPERS because of actuary assumptions. These governments negotiated increases in pension benefits rather than salary increases becasue at that time the pension benefits had a very low cost to local communities. And since the benefit formula is based upon salary (no being held lower through negotiations), this savings as compounded.
To anon submitted at 10:11.
I too am a college graduate from a elite university. I chose to be a police officer. I was a college athlete and stay in great shape. For 15 years I have fought with scum on the streets to keep everyone safe. I’ve been punched in the face more times than I can remember and stabbed with a knife. When I put my hands on criminals, they regret their poor choices. I love my job. I love to scare the sh!t out of the bad guys. I have earned my salary and benefits. I do contribute to a secondary retirement so that I can afford to send my children to Stanford. And if my son chooses to take his Stanford education to a police department to keep our cities safe then he should be compensated accordingly. Minimum standards for law enforcement in most agencies is a high school education. I can tell you that is not the norm. When 500 people test for 5 positions, PDs are not taking anyone without a college education. Theajority of us could work for a fortune 500 company. Just because we may have a desire to protect those that cannot protect themselves does not mean we are undeserving. The world is dangerous. Law enforcement is not cheap people. Despite many wanting to take away my benefits and ability to send my kids to college I will still chase down every Murderer, rapist, robber, et cetera whether they are trying to kill me or not. You are welcome.
Dear “College graduate from an elite university:”
‘Who wants to take away your benefits? Who?
Did they teach you to read at your elite university?
The post is about a boycott of the Times because they had the temerity to write about pension abuses. While you are busy catching murders and rapists have you read the newspapers?
Heres a hint- Read about pension spiking, something which has a direct, negative impact on your future pension. Or would you rather no one knew about it?
Good luck catching “et ceteras” today.
PS Three cops read your post and they laughed their asses off. Careful about impersonating a policeman…
I too am a college graduate from a elite university.
-
I, too, am a college graduate from an elite university.
anonymous #11 said: “I know they also recently fired one of their columnists for writing a pro-police column in support of the Concord officers.”
Please provide the name of the columnists.
Step back a minute and look what’s playing out there.
What better time to stir up negative sentiment to taxpayer supported salaries than during the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. People are hurting. Jobs and homes being lost and along comes a reporter with a hit piece giving his readers a targeted outlet for their anger.
Borenstein recognizes the economic reality and is exploiting it. What’s the difference between this and yelling fire in a crowded theater? A: One is illegal.
People are angry and don’t fully understand the “why” on how we got here. So along comes Mr. Borenstein with a scapegoat suggestion and in Pavlovian fashion people jump all over it. Ten years ago when these pensions and contracts were being negotiated you didn’t hear a peep, because it wouldn’t attract readers. But now, like a crack dealer on a street corner, Borenstein is filling a demand. A convenient punching bag is served up by just selectively presenting the facts to suit his agenda. Safe to say you’ll never be reading articles focusing public debate on reporter’s salaries at the Times.
The difference between Borenstein and an ambulance chasing attorney? A: One is more fact based, but doesn’t have a readership of tens of thousands.
People have short memories and have forgotten how public service at one time didn’t pay anything near what was offered in the private sector. The pot had to be “sweetened”, if you will, to attract qualified people. Did you read any Borenstein articles back then saying there should be efforts to raise those compensation packages in order to attract talent? Of course not. It’s much easier to frame and sell the idea that someone has picked your pocket for a taxpayer dollar and is using it in less than a desirable manner while you’re angry. If the economy miraculously turned tomorrow, this conversation dies as quickly as it was raised. Further proof of the exploitive efforts of the Times.
Now that we’re in tough times, Borenstein says we should reneg on an earlier agreed to deal. Is that the level of integrity we have stooped to? There are other ways to more responsibly address this problem. Obviously never want to be in negotiations with a guy like that in a business deal.
Fire is a current event topic because of the funding issues with ConFire and ECCFPD. Both are almost exclusively funded through property taxes. The percentages of those tax dollars that go to fire were locked in some 30 years ago. So we’re effectively paying 1970s prices for 2010 fire services. Who reading this blog thinks that is appropriate besides Mr. Borenstein?
I attend lots of public meetings on some of these very issues. I don’t recall seeing Mr. Borenstein attending even one. I have seen other reporters. If that is one’s idea of “investigative reporting”, then your bar is set much lower than mine. Seems to me he likes to mail it in, perhaps with little more than a records request or two for a passing fact to quote. Any hack can selectively cite statistics. Give me a reporter that looks at the full picture, educates the reader on all the angles and then let’s the reader decide. Borenstein instead selectively presents, then suggests you should be angry. In my mind that’s only half a step away from inciting a riot.
Irresponsible journalism. How is that a public service on the paper’s part?
Co Co nuts.
You rip Borenstein for yelling fire in a crowded theater? Come on , grow up. He writes newspaper stories. He finds out things that embarass politicians. Maybe you would be happier if we just got rid of the first amendment..You might want to look that one up
Heres is a challenge,- Name one thing Borenstein got wrong. One.
Hell, I dont even like the guy, but he can report.
Anon Police Officer #110
Our post is about the dumbest I have read by a Police Officer and I can only hope that you are just pretending to be a member of law enforcement. You seem to think that job of a Police Officer is to chase down murderers, rapists, robbers and other criminals, as well as make them regret their poor choices and they love to scare the sh!t out of them. Do you understand that whether you like it or not our system is set up that only a judge or a jury can convict a suspect for a crime. It is not your job to convict the bad guys.You have neither the necessary facts nor do you have the power to do so. It is your job to apprehend suspects and to secure the evidence. In order to do so we the people entrust you with the right to use reasonable force and of course you have the right and the duty to use necessary force to protect your own life as well as the life of others at the scene. It is also not your job to make suspects regret their poor choices or to scare the sh!t out of them, that is the job of the penal system in our society.
Police officers who don’t understand how our system is set up but believe that somebody has given them the right to judge people as scum are simply not fit for a job in law enforcement.
No-no,
Borenstein writes with 1 part fact and about 4 parts opinion. Difference between him and any other opinion is the audience reach. I’m not suggesting he be censored. I’m saying recognize it for what it is.
First amendment is what allows me to post here. How do you come to the ridiculous conclusion I’m against it?
You care to address any of the facts in my earlier post? ie. a deal is a deal or the price we’re paying for emergency services?
He offers no solutions, just builds the gallows and hands you the rope. I fail to understand the socially redeeming quality in that or how it sets us on any path to resolving the issue long term. He’s all about blame and little else.
This is a guy who, if you try to challenge him on his articles via a phone call, will immediately hang up on you. That’s not conviction or backbone in my book. That’s the mark of a bomb throwing coward.
Coco nuts
I give you a C-. You can throw out Pavlovian, gallows and a bunch of other trite stuff. You have only your opinions, no facts, which you broadcast about-just like Borenstein.
In fact I have been told you are Borenstein, trying to gin up circulation..
Do you deny it sir?
Do you deny it?
We at Contra Costa Open Carry support this ban on the Times. We support the Firefighters and the Police. They have a very hard and thankless job.
The Times do not report the news, they try to rewrite it. They give you their opinion on what the news is instead of just writing what it IS.
To many articles have left off important FACTS just so the ‘reporter’ can have his opinion printed.
#101 Totally agree.
If in fact Borenstein is such a great “hot shot” investigative reporter…why did he not report the fact that one of the biggest violators of retirement padding (a height challenged former CPD Captain) when it was reported to him? I guess it’s hard to throw someone you are quoting in your article under the bus eh Borenstein?
Let’s see Stu, an extra $17,000.00 in holiday pay in your last year of employment equals how much in extra money during the course of your retirement? Inquiring minds want to know……..
Everything the Captain did was with the permission of Chief Livingston and was authorized in the MOU. Get over it
JUST STICKING WITH THE FACTS.
3% PER YEAR AT AGE 50 FOR RETIREMENT FAR EXCEEDS STANDARD PENSIONS OF PRIVATE COMPANY EMPLOYEES.
Sgt. Friday – I do think that Borenstein did, in fact, report about the former Captain’s abuse of the holiday pay issue. The problem, as I see it, is that the cops don’t want the public to know how ludicrous their retirement packages are, such as being able to retire at age 50, at 80+% of their ending salary, and medical for life. Where in the private sector do you see that?
Where in the private sector can you make $1000/day for working a holiday; granted this is most likely for the cops who have been around for a while, and who make more money. And let me tell you, they like to flaunt that in the faces of the non-sworn people.
As shown by the power of the POA in getting Leone and Grayson elected, and now by trying to influence the public to again follow like sheep, the police and fire employees are activing like bullies in order to bring people around to their way of thinking. They don’t want people to see the true picture that Borenstein has tried to show in regard to pensions and lawsuits.
I doubt if anyone would complain about the salaries of our safety people; it’s the way that they spike their pensions that people are upset about. Why should they be making equal to, if not more, after they retire?
This is not only about pensions. It is about the powers that be throwing up ‘smoke screens’ while they scheme to find new and improved ways to give us less for more.
Police Officers/Firefighters are in a highly visible professions, thereby making them easy targets.
Unfortunate, but it is, what it is.
Do any of you honestly believe that if they take away some of the money from Police/Firefighters that they will put that money to good use? LOL
It doesn’t matter what profession you are in ..if you are middle class, you are going to pay what the poor can’t, and the rich won’t.
I’m not a Times subscriber, although I do purchase the Sunday edition at a local coffee place, because I like to review the weekly ads and read the business section on investing. I do read some of the news in the paper, but I get most of my news online.
That being said, I’m not in favor of a boycott of the paper because of an article or articles written about police/firemen. I can make my own judgements based on whatever I read, and I’d like to think others do the same.
Here I’m reading about some inaccurancy, but I’m not told specifically what and then asked to boycott the paper because of it. Please. What are we sheep? What’s the exact issue? Write a letter to the editor. What’s the point of losing the last paper we have? Is the thought so that there’s NO paper reporting in the future? What happens when you disagree with Channel 5 reporting? They have some inaccurate stories….
I think people need multiple sources of information…. paper, TV, and online, and then use whatever or all tools available to them to make informed decisions.
justme,
You will wait in vain for the union bosses to respond with anything but the most vague allegations. They have no facts, and the potential to do themselves more harm. Neither Union President has had guts enough to respond to any posting challenging their logic.
Im not sure these guys are as brave as I’d like, but then maybe the Union Presidents are office guys instead of rank and file warriors.
To the “Posers” (you know who you are),
While your intentions might be to ‘help’ the cause of the police and their pensions..Please refrain.
Officers might privately think some of those thoughts, but I can’t imagine any of them publicly expressing them.
#127 Well said. Touche
The loyal and true-blue police and fire fighters are being intimidated by union thugs that are actually a minority of their organizations. Even though these fine public service employees are totally dedicated to the community they serve, they have to make sure their backs are protected in emergencies. Based upon evidence I have gathered, there is outrageous intimidation of our finest public safety employees by these union thugs.
How is an entire union membership of several hundred members intimidated by one or two union leaders (or as you call them “thugs”)
And 123, the MOU does not allow Captain Midget to do that. Especially AFTER making all other Lt’s and non-patrol people take the day off. That’s the hypocrisy in his actions. Just like it is hypocritical for Borenstein to not report all the facts, even ones about his own source.
Since you seem to know so much about the MOU, let’s assume you are a PD employee. Come on down and let’s debate the issue in person as I am always willing to hear intelligent arguments. Or come to a Union meeting and let’s get you on record.
131
You purport to be a cop;
I doubt it.
If you are, heres a little lesson in dealing with informants:
Dont burn them.
Works that way for reporters, works that way for real cops.
Still waiting to hear from the union bosses, and waiting, and waiting.
The end
Anon-Hole at 131
It’s easy to say “Come on down and let’s debate the issue in person” when you don’t have the guts to say who you are. I am a government employee covered by CalPERS, but not a public safety employee and every one of the retirees that have spiked or padded their pensions are jeopardizing my retirement. If CalPERS goes bankrupt, nobody will get their retirement pay, nobody will get medical benefits, nobody will get the benefits that we deserve for working many years in (relatively) low paying jobs with no recognition for our contributions to society.
I have been reading these posts. One theme is that the Union bosses, who called for a boycott of the CC Times, have yet to tell us anything more then that the Times coverage is slanted. Im sure that they have prepared a position paper illustrating this.
Why dont they come out and tell us what they mean?
I’ll gladly debate the issues with you. Although my original post eimply stated that the Captain who spiked his pay was wrong, both per the MOU and morally. The fact is that only “patrol” people (and a few other “essential” emergency employees) are required to work holidays. Said Captain is not one of those and not ASSIGNED to patrol. Claiming he is on patrol is like saying because Obama is the “Commander in Chief” he is in every branch of the service.
And nowhere in my post did I disagree that pension spiking isn’t a problem. If fact, if you re-read my posting at #131, I pointed out the spiking. Spike has become a problem, and so has the fact that many cities have not put into funds to pay retirements and medical (GASB 45).
As far as not posting my name, looks like we both are forced to not reveal ourselves.
I don’t know much about the issue being discussed, but I do know this: the CoCo Times just isn’t what it used to be. The quality of this paper has really gone downhill over the past few years. Why worry about ANYTHING they say? Personally, I find newspapers irrelevant – print media has been replaced by the Internet, and that’s where I get most of my news now.
If you subscribe to this paper, be prepared: unsubscribing can be a nightmare. If you cancel the paper, they will call you incessantly asking you to re-subscribe. Asking them to put you on the do not call list won’t do any good. I finally had to report them to the Better Business Bureau to get them to stop calling me.
Cruddy paper, cruddy journalism. Don’t read it.
annie2u,
the columnist was Dr Robert Hallstrom. He’s a veterinarian that wrote a weekly column for the Times. There was an email going around that had his copies of the column that he was fired for and the notes from his editor. In the column, he said he was tired of reading about police officers killed by guns or being vilified if they shot someone who turned out to have a realistic looking fake gun. He also wrote that he supported two Concord officers who shot a robbery suspect who pointed a realistic looking fake gun at them.
This did not go along with the Times liberal stance of making martyrs out of thugs, so they fired him. Yet they printed many columns from people making a hero out of Oscar Grant and also Lovell Mixon, who killed four officers in cold blood. I am sick and tired of the Times attacking our police and fire personnel. Why don’t they write stories about all the billions of dollars wasted each year by people abusing welfare and housing? Because they are a liberal rag, that’s why!
Anon-Hole at #135
You don’t mention pension spiking in your post at 131, if that is your post, there is no way to know because those posts have two different handles associated with them.
As for your “earlier post” how am I supposed to know which post you are referring to?
4 seconds with google and looking at my web page and you can find out exactly who I am, what my e-mail address is and probably my address and phone number. There is no information about you in your posts at all, except that you’re an ass.
If you are being paid by my tax dollars, then I have every right to question your pay and benefits. Tax payers also have a right to ask questions like “How much time to fire fighters actually spend fighting fires?” The answer to that question in San Jose was 5%.
did someone say ‘MACAW’?
what kind and what’s his name?
DrDuran you might want to relax or take a valium.
CalPERS made a return last year of 11.80% on their investments. That would be $46 Billion. They have more than $406 Billion in total assets. Considering the economy as a whole they have done very very well. Imagine what they do when the economy is rolling along.
CalPERS 20-year investment return remains steady at 7.75 percent – the assumed rate of return necessary to pay future member pension benefits.
Source: CalPERS Sees Strong Investment Gains in 2009 press release
http://www.calpers.ca.gov/index.jsp?bc=/about/press/pr-2010/jan/strong-invest-gains-2009.xml
Being upset that a former administrator spiked his retirement is one thing, being chicken little and saying the sky is falling is another.
Laura
Fighting fires fortunately is a small part of what Firefighters actually do. The majority of their time is taken up doing the non-glamorous medical aid calls. I’ve never kept track but 2 and 5 Engines in Pleasant Hill averages 3 to 5 calls per night each (1800 to 0600 hrs) and I know they’re not the busiest stations in the central county.
Just because you don’t read about it in the paper (pun intended) doesn’t mean they’re just sleeping at night.
Not a Firefighter or a Concord Police Officer
Seems to me Borenstein has hit a nerve by exposing a subject that the FF & PD would rather not debate. Truth is the current pension commitments to state employees is unsustainable in the long term. Everyone is having to cut back and the FF & PD shouldn’t be excepted. MDUSD is closing facilities and cutting staff, but try cutting back on FF or PD benefits and all hell breaks out. I agree with post 101, FF & PD have had their way for far too long and they don’t like anyone exposing their biased operations and self centered points of view. FF & PO chose these careers and they should have to deal with the economy and its harsh realities just like the rest of us.
Buy a scanner. You would be shocked at how many fire engines in the county are driving the streets at one time all hours of the night. Concord and Antioch alone are shocking. As for puting something in print, maybe they have tried and the times won’t print it. I still suport the people that come when you call them for any problems you are having. When the bars close down for the night in W.C the police get very busy keeping us safe. Bars everywhere for that matter. I whish these blue coller servants all the best because the hatred I am reading here is shocking.
Simply statements are made and simple questions are asked, and Dr Duran resorts to name calling. Classy.
And Annon, maybe your Union people are on here. We know midgets and homicidal admin leave people are too. I’m scared.
Couldn’t find you on Google. I’m just not that smart.
The Firefighters of Contra Costa County, from El Cerrito, Kennsington, City of Pinole, Rodeo Hercule Fire District, Moraga Orinda Fire District, Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, and the East Contra Costa County Fire Protection District have cancelled our subscriptions for the following reasons: We feel that the Contra Costa Times has been on a smear campaign against those who serve the public. They have been doing this by spreading misinformation. One example is the stories done about the Chiefs in Moraga Orinda, and in San Ramon. They have been misleading. There are only a handful of Fire Chiefs in every department and they are not represented by the labor unions. They are considered management in the Fire Service. There are over 500 rank and file firefighters in this county who do not have the ability to “spike” their retirements in this way. That point was left out. We have all been lumped into that group by the “times”. 2) We have sent in Op-eds to clarify these points, but they are not printed. The “times” has the ability to prevent the facts from being presented. If you are a non-biased organization you would encourage a different perspective or clarification. The “times” has failed to allow their readers to hear the other side.
All Police and Fire agencies do not have the same contribution rates to their health or retirement benefits. It is all negotiable and it varies from department/ district. Many of us pay more in retirement contributions then our employers do. Reporters of the “times” are aware of this but they do not report on the breakdown. They lump us all into one. More facts: All of the Fire Districts are funded by property taxes, while city departments are funded by the general funds of their perspective cities. Property Taxes have taken a significant hit due to the housing market and economic downturn. This is why the Fire Districts are hurting for money at this time. There has been no pay increases or new benefits to cause this. Con Fire lost over 12 Million dollars. Pension cost have been approximately 6% of Con Fires budget. This is for over 300 employees, from support staff, mechanics, administration, and firefighters. How many employers who have a retirement plan for their employees only pay 6% of their budget on this? Con Fire is a 100 million dollar organization by the way. 3) The times has written about many non-pension firefighter related issues and has been one-sided when reporting on them as well. This is the primary reason we have cancelled our subscriptions and have encouraged others to do the same. I have spent hours on the phone with reporters giving them the full story, only to have them still print their biased view. The paper is nothing more then a “hit piece” on our profession. Why should we pay to support this. They choose not to take their position as one of the largest pieces of common information for this community seriously. They do not inform the public. They provide misleading facts, that will lead to destroying public safety as we know it in this community. They are working to destroy the publics trust in those who have sworn to keep their communities safe. This leads to closed fire stations and less police officers patroling the streets. Is this responsible reporting? The importance of help arriving as soon as possible for those who call 911 is lost based on this misrepresentation. The paper fails to inform the public as to what it would mean to close a fire station or have less cops on the street. They don’t explain the reason a complexed 911 system was put in place. This was to get help to those who call as soon as possible.
We are not cancelling subscriptions because Daniel Borenstein is writing articles on pensions. It is because he and other “times” reporters fail to write the whole story. With them being in control of what is printed in their paper, they choose to not print the other side or the important details that apply locally. Subscribing to the Contra Costa Times is like being a member of a club that represents attacking public employees. They use the fact that they are the county paper as a “bully pulpit” by spreading misinformation deliberately and controlling the opposing responses.
What’s next after Firefighter and Police Officer bashing…….we gonna go after the U.S. servicemen? When will all the B.S stop. Before you go substituting your own judgement and opinion for fact why don’t you get the facts. Try that on for size and see how it works. Just my opinion.
Just did some web searching and found some useful info about our local firefighters. Interesting stuff. Check it out.
http://iafflocal1230.org/index.cfm?section=29&pagenum=330
Vince, I think the general public understands the problems with the pensions. If you do not like the CCT reports then go to another paper. Or do a mailing. You spent enough money on the elections now spend it on getting your views out. I have a problem with you trying to stop the freedom of the press. The average person is smart enough to figure the issues out by themselves. We understand the different pay structures between mgt. and union.
did someone say ‘Valium’?
I don’t subscribe to CC Times, so I have no comment for that, but as someone who has had their home broken into and been in a (not at fault) car accident where emergency personnel have responded, I am GLAD that these people are paid well for their services. Yes, I am frustrated because I will probably never have their pension or overtime opportunities and our government is in shambles, but they are paid well because their jobs are IMPORTANT. Maybe some of you should go on a ‘ride along’ down Monument Blvd. and see how you might feel about risking your own a** to potentially help some idiot who has been busy bad-mouthing you for your retirement plan or how much money you make. Or we can see how you feel about this subject if you’re ever in a serious car accident and that extra firefighter — working overtime — was able to help respond and pry you out of your car and get you to the hospital faster. You might change your mind about how you feel.
If you want to bash anyone, take a walk through the back offices of any goverment office building and count how many Engineers, Recreation Managers, and Planners are surfing Facebook or playing online poker, all while earning upwards of $100k in your tax dollars each year. You’ll feel silly for bagging on the police officers and firefighters whose jobs could potentially save your life someday.
Quit complaining and take your opinions to the polls, where you have the opportunity to VOTE and transfer the positions of people who choose which way our government will choose to allocate it’s money. The whole state is in terrible shape and it is NOT singularly due to police officer’s/firefighter’s pensions.
That dirt bag Borenstein bashed everybody again today. The Times better put a leash on that dude before he ends up costing them tens of thousands of dollars in advertising with dropped subscribers.
From our friend’s at the Walnut Creek Police Association:
The Walnut Creek Police Association is joining with other law enforcement and fire service organizations in boycotting the Contra Costa Times. An article in the Times yesterday by reporter Lisa Vorderbrueggen stated, “The unions cannot cite a single factual error… in Borenstein’s columns about public employee pensions. They just don’t like the conclusions”. Really? We have said many times that pension abuses like spiking need to be curbed and there are several pieces of legislation working their way through the system to do just that. We also agree that all public employees need to do their part in these tough economic times. Our disagreement rests largely with the one-sided campaign of disinformation that the Times, led by Borenstein, have waged against public safety workers. It is clearly personal for Mr. Borenstein. He goes beyond the issue of pensions by insinuating police work really isn’t all that dangerous and cops and firefighters are simply all greedy public employees.
The most troubling behavior displayed by the Times however was their attempt to stifle the opinions of those they disagreed with. Of course Ms. Vorderbrueggen’s article does not broach this subject so we’ll give her a little background. During the election for Walnut Creek City Council, the Times Editorial Page (written by Borenstein) endorsed the candidate the Police Association was opposing. Mr. Borenstein ignored every other issue in the campaign and chose instead to label police officers greedy for simply pointing out why they disagreed with the incumbent. He used statistics that were FACTUALLY IN ERROR and never retracted them (covered in depth on our website). Another local editor called the editorial one of the strangest she had ever read describing it as “rant like”. Members of our association and others began sending the Times letters to the editor disagreeing with Mr. Borenstein and his conclusions. Weeks and weeks went by and none of the letters were printed in the Times (a few letters sent directly to the Walnut Creek Journal were printed by a different Editor). Meanwhile, letters written by those supporting Borenstein’s opinions or attacking us got prime placement on the Editorial page. After we posted here that our letters weren’t being printed we were contacted by other Walnut Creek residents who described similar experiences of sending in “pro-police” letters that met the Times criteria for publication but went missing in action. After several more weeks the pieces finally fell into place. We learned the person at the Times responsible for organizing placement of letters to the editor was…..you guessed it, Dan Borenstein. Toward the end of the election we even tried contacting Mr. Borenstein directly. The mother of a fallen Pittsburg Police Officer and a 40 year Walnut Creek resident both tried and failed to get their letters published. Our messages pleading with Mr. Borenstein to publish the letters went unanswered.
Ms. Vorderbrueggen touts the importance of freedom of the press in her article and we agree with her. Freedom of speech is also in the Constitution and any honest journalist should not be limiting it for the purpose of strengthening their argument.
Finally some facts/ 146 and 153 made good points. I think I’m with them on this boycott- Wasn’t before but real facts , instead of their crappy press release, are hard to overlook.
If you read letters to the editor they are horribily slanted to the left. When the reporters write crime stories they usually refuse to identify the subjects race, because , as one reporter told me, “Its not relevent”.
They are chumps at the Times.
Sorry Borenstein, you just lost a defender.
Bring on the boycott.
Babs,
I can only assume you are like so many others here who are just plain jealous. You had the same opportunity as me and other “public” employees to take the entrance exams to be hired by a public entity. That is right there are exams to pass in order to be hired. You don’t just walk in with a resume, fill out an app and bingo you are to be hired. And a person has to take an exam for ever promotion they get. And you can die on the list It’s not like private sector where with time and knowledge you get promoted you have to pass an exam and get on a promotion list.
As for firefighters I know first hand what it takes for them to pass not only the written exam but the physical exam as well. And every single call they go on take a toll on them not just physically but emotionally as well. It is a very tough job.
So to all of you that piss and moan about Public Employee retirement get off your butts and take the entrance exams for hiring. Then come work for below marked wages, be cursed at and some times spit on (common at DCSS, Health Services and Social Services) etc by the wonderful public (most of you) and tell me how good we have it. The trade has always been “put up with the lousy wages and abuse for the benefits”
#153 explains just what the issue here really is. It’s not free speech when the message is manipulated to promote an agenda as Borenstein has repeatedly done.
Vorderbruggen’s article was weird. We’re supposed to have sympathy for the person with the megaphone(Borenstein) while the counter argument is silenced?
Why is the paper complaining about people objecting with what is clearly a campaign on their part? Boycotting is a “bad idea” according to Vorderbrueggen? So we’re supposed to swallow whatever they serve up and just “like it”?
I don’t think so.
I live in Antioch. I watched as Firefighters tried to help that poor child that was shot. I saw first hand the tears in their eyes. I would rather live in a dumpster than ever have to see that up close. I can’t even imagine living with that burned into my memory. They earn every penny just having to respond to one call like that. All you people out there that write or talk just to be heard, go tell one of those fire fighters or police officers to their face they are over payed and I hope they would punch you and Mr. Borenstein in the mouth. Myself and 8 other neighbors just canceled our subscription. First and last time I will leave a comment.
Myself and a dozen others have renewed our subscriptions to the Times.
Just came back to this thread after the weekend.
On one particular aspect of this discussion…
Bottom line is as follows
Police officers on average, who retire after age 55, live past the age of 80.
More like 82.5, on average, with female officer adding on yet another 3 years to that figure.
NOT the preposterous claims made by some here, that they only live to their late 50′s or early 60′s.
That is just absurd, ignorant, and the stuff of internet myths.
CalPERS has tens of thousands of police officers in their system and many tens of thousands of more in their past history.
Why in the world would they tell lies about the longevity of retired police officers? How would it benefit CalPERS to tell lies.
IF they ever did lie, it would benefit them to give a lower age, not higher.
A lower age of death would make their system seem more sound and not underfunded.
Lots of math dead posters here. Believing everything they read on the internet.
I have 6 public safety employees in my family including my own brother who is a retired police sergeant.
Of the six, 4 over age 65 and living, including one age 88, 2 others dead at age 81 and age 90.
The average of the six, will be well over age 80, just as CalPERS data suggests.
Borenstein, and the Times, have failed the readership by printing only “half the story” as it relates to public safety pensions. The times controls what rebuttals, if any, are printed. Not once, has Dan Borenstein attempted to contact us regarding our side of the picture. We want the public to be informed properly. Very simply: Public safety pensions are being tried in the press. Borenstein and the times are acting as the prosecution and Judge. The readership is the Jury, and public safety is the defendant. It is time to let the defense paint the other half of the picture to the jury…
WC Walt,
Did you take and fail the extrance exam to be a cop or firefighter because you are one bitter ignorant a-hole. Ain’t jealousy a terrible thing?????????You are probably one of the penny pinchy tight wad Rossmoorites that most of public safety hates….Yeah you want the service but don’t want pay for it. Please tell who ever lives in your home with you not to call 911 if it is on fire, robbed or you have a heart attack/stroke. I would really hate to see our dedicated public servants waste thier time on a butt head like you.
Oh and please tell the 911 rescue workers and other safety personnel who are dying from various cancers because of exposure to God know what how great they have it and they should be grateful they had a job. People like you and your pathetic jealous whining make me sick.
Now go finish your generic scotch butt head as you are nothing more than a major piece of white crap
Regardless of the past, all the whining and he said/she said.. It’s time for EVERYONE to “give,” including public servants, like it or not.
Thank you, Dan, for informing tax-payers of the critical issues that affect us all. Your efforts are truly appreciated by the overwhelming majority of concerned citizens. We can’t thank you enough. Keep up the great reporting!
Laura #139 You’re a Genius!
Put some of that salary into an IRA, like everyone else. A huge supporter of local police, I am sick and tired of listening to griping from politico cops. This just should NOT happen, where our Posturing Police are taking a stand against certain of our law-abiding residents.
@ Unin Leaders 1:51
The Union does not control the pension funds. Public Employees are either CalPers or in the case of the local Fire Districts and Deputy Sheriffs CCERA. The money is invested in various types of growth funds. And in the past CCERA has bailed the county out of financial binds by not only buying County Bldgs (651 Pine St in Mtz) but also giving them cash.
The average Firefighter and Deputy Sheriff has $1,400 per month come out of there check and placed into the CCERA Retirement Fund.
So most of you need to do some research before you shoot of your mouths as you have no idea what you are speaking about.
Like I said before jealousy is a terrible thing and most of you have it really bad.
Union guys;
You have picked a big fight. Until the last few postings your press release didn’t speak to the subject in any depth. Slanted doesn’t mean much. A suggestion: Why dont you set up a web site and clearly articulate Borensteins and the Times biased reporting? Actually you should have done that before in my opinion.
Posters 146 and 153 laid it out pretty well.
If you are the firefighters, you should probably let the cops do this as investigations are what they do. No offense.
PS Borensteing is a bit of a jerk to talk to- Very imperial in bearing, but watch you ass- he is smart.
I’d consider a trash run on his house from time to time.
The salaries of the police and fire unions are negotiated with the City Council and County Board of Supervisors and State representatives of the the people. If you don’t like the salaries and or pensions, go after the elected nut jobs that approved the contracts and then did nothing to insure they could be meet the contractual obligations they agreed to.
The lack of responsible and accountable people elected to represent our best interests are the people to who have created this financial mess. Not the unions or the dedicated men and women who risk their lives to protect us.
@Walnut Creek Walt,
I have to agree. You seem to be one ignorant, misinformed, crusty, penny-pinching, ungrateful WC resident! Your brother must be so proud of you!
Vorderbrueggen’s article in the Times this weekend was plain weird. She just didn’t do a very good job of getting her point across. It appears she gave the FB cause more press as their numbers are growing quickly
You folks are amazing. Mustang Sally and Feckin Irish Mouse.
My posts are almost entirely about the age at which police and fire workers die after retiring.
That is NOT something that inherently says anything other than what the actual facts are.
Its a statistical grouping of data. CalPERS gives it out to the public in their press releases.
If you call them, their public information officer (office) will give you the precise facts I gave here.
What is it with you folks that you don’t want the truth to be told about how old, or how long police and firefighters live to?
What purpose does it serve for you to continue to live with some mythical low numbers? Averages like 57-59 or low sixties.
Do you somehow deny that the figures I received from CalPERS are true?
Please state such if that is the case.
Why do the true numbers appear to you as “anti” police and fire.
Good gosh, if one states the true actuarial numbers, given by CalPERS you go off your nut and accuse a person of “hating” police, being ungrateful, “hating” firemen.
Why not carry your need for falsehoods to everything. Should the public not know any of the true facts?
But to you, anyone stating the actual facts is just some bitter old scotch drinking fool.
BTW, from the time I was born, the most common occupation at all family events was policeman and fireman.
My grandfather, two of my uncles, all 30 year firemen, as is my cousin. Another uncle, another cousin, and my only brother, 30 year police officers.
I guess I must hate them all…. Why else would I state the facts, the true facts, about the real average age to which they live?
You folks are just plain nuts to take every revealing of the truth as being anti police or anti fireman.
No, instead, you prefer to live with simply silly myths….
Instead, wishing to believe police officers average age of death, as one poster stated, is only between 57 and 59 years old.
Its just so plain laughable to someone who has Thanksgiving dinner with these retired safety personnel every year. By what is said here, they should all be dead.
So, reveal my lies, my distortions, my fabrications.
Call CalPERS. Let them give you the true facts.
If they differ from what I have posted, then call me a liar.
A bitter old liar.
But if you get the identical facts that I have posted, then have the courage to come back here and tell the truth.
Unless you just want to create falsehoods.
Feckin Irish Mouse
Please don’t tell me you really wrote the following…
“Then come work for below marked wages”, —– The trade has always been “put up with the lousy wages and abuse for the benefits”
I think you meant below market wages….
At any rate, are you serious? No, I mean are you really serious?
Firefighters earing “lousy wages”…”below market wages”
Good God man, which department in Contra Costa County are you talking about? Lousy wages compared to who? The NFL?
OK… tell me the department that has “lousy wages”…
You can find all the wages on the Contra Costa Times data bank.
Every single officer is listed there for each department.
You go find one, or find a department that is paying firefighters lousy wages.
Now don’t run away. Its easy to find. Come back and report your findings.
BTW, you can find the data bank for all these positions under “news” then go down to “data bank” and click.
It will take you to any department you care to look at.
Go ahead, I dare you to find the lousy wages you speak about.
@ Walnut Creek Walt (aka Dan Borenstein),
Instead of beating up the folks who spend their lives protecting and saving yours, why don’t you focus your bitterness at the welfare frauds and illegal immigrants, who are bankrupting this state!
Walnut Creek Walt,
Most Police Officers and Firefighters don’t retire at 50. That option is available in case you must, due to injury or other needs. We should have the same for our military. It amazes me that it is ok to pay a sports figure or a actor/actress millions, but we always question what we pay those who watch over our country or communities. Here is my expectations as a citizen: Provide me emergency services, protect my borders, provide electricity, water, gas, and garbage collection, and I will provide the rest.
We love to have those who serve and protect, attend our parades and various services and social events, but we question their worth when it comes to their compensation. Michael Jordan or General Patton? Where is this country’s priority. FYI My father served in the USAF in Vietnam and other places. My brother and I both served in “Desert Storm”. We both have kids now serving in the USAF serving tours in Kuwait and Afghanastan. We should all question their lack of fair compensation.
Another slant by the beloved CC Times:
An interesting slanted article in the paper this morning about former 49ers player, Jeremy Newberry “helping” kids with a bay area toy drive in Antioch. It seems Mr. Newberry enlisted the help of the Richmond Chapter of the Hells Angels. Here is a quote from Mr. Newberry: “Todd was saying that everything ever written about Hells Angels is negative,” Newberry said. “Most of them are just normal guys with normal jobs and families. They have big hearts, and they wanted to help out.”
Really !?!? “Just normal guys?” “Big Hearts?”
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/humboldt-sd/TROBEAJE1496QMKAD
Nice “heart warming” story, CC Times
WC Walt, before getting any further with this retirement age thing, it’s the service age you should be most concerned with.
You really want a 60 year old fireman showing up to scale ladders on a 2 story building? You want a 60 year old cop showing up and then being expected to chase down some bad guy who decides he’s going to escape by fence hopping?
The retirement age for public safety officials is lower than other professions for obvious reasons if you think about it. You can’t filter an entire force through desk jobs or low physical activity in later years. Simply not practical.
I can see an argument for restructuring of new hires going forward. But going back on agreed to deals is against my principle. The rank and file are largely not at the bargaining table. They are not responsible for the deal they were dealt, but many of them have worked within that for years, if not decades. Seems people have completely abandoned honor in contracts here. The professionals are expected to uphold their end of the bargain, but the public through their proxies can reneg just as soon as the Times can get a mob started on the issue? Is that the mentality these days?
Pension spiking examples do exist, but people here are talking like it’s the norm, partly because of the way Borenstein presents the information. That’s not an honest discussion of the issue. When you look at the starting wage and extract retirement contributions, nobody is going to get rich on that. In fact, at those rates it still takes a 2 wage earning family if you want to own a home.
There’s a perfect storm brewing there and it doesn’t bode well for fire protection services in CoCo County. Both ConFire and ECCFPD are on the verge of adding ballot measures for revenue enhancements in 2011 as both are on a path to insolvency. Property tax revenues are off in a big way and that’s what funds fire in the county. The Prop 13/AB 8 funding models have finally caught up to us and 1970s rates won’t properly fund 2010 fire services.
If you want to buy into the Borenstein drivel in blind fashion, you’re obviously not be in the mood for a special tax to keep services afloat. So start picking which stations you want to close and how much longer you’re willing to wait for a fire engine or a medical response.
That’s the real dollars and cents consequence coming before you next year. You can hammer on them all you want in this bogus retirement witch hunt. That isn’t going to prevent your stations from closing if new funding isn’t approved by the voters.
Police Officers can retire at age 41, if they’re hired when they’re 21.
However, they’ll lose 20% of their pension if they retire before age 50.
If they’re hired at age 30 and retire at age 50 they get 100% of their pension.
If they’re hired at age 40 they don’t get full pension until age 60, and they’re not eligible for pension until age 60.
It’s called the 20/80/50 pension plan.
If there are gaps in their employment, or if they go out of state, it can take forever to accumulate those 20-years of employment credit.
WC Walt,
Try being a clerk, accountant or analyst in any Dept in the County for “below market wages”……Until you walk in our shoes shut you mouth as you don’t know what the hell you are talking about
And CalPers ain’t the “bible”……..The local Fire Districts are in CCERA and CCERA has proven CalPers to be incorrect about several assumptions on several occassions……….Maybe you need to look at CCERA data you stupid old fart
Wow! I wish someone would’ve told me sooner! I started at 21 and I’m 42 now! Thanks for telling me. I’m off to go turn in my badge and gun. I’m outta here!
So the CC Times can write a nice “heart warming” story about the Hells Angels being “nice guys” but the continue to bash our police and firefighters? WTH is wrong with society?
OK, here we go again. People responding to things I NEVER wrote.
Suggesting I am anti police or anti fire because I just gave the true statistics.
#1, CoCoNuts December 7, 2010 at 7:08 AM
—————————————————————————————
“WC Walt, before getting any further with this retirement age thing, it’s the service age you should be most concerned with.
You really want a 60 year old fireman showing up to scale ladders on a 2 story building? ”
—————————————————————————————–
CoCoNuts, Go read my posts. I said NOTHING about wanting 60 year old firefighters or police men. Nothing at all.
I merely said that a police officer or firefighter who retires at age 55 or 57 does NOT die in a couple years. In fact they live to the same age as all other retirees in the CalPERS system. CalPERS has the precise data and makes it available to the public.
Why do people here treat the true facts as “anti” police, bringing up all manner of other arguments, unrelated to the actual factual data.
That typical police officer or firefighter, if male, who retires at age 55 will in fact live to age 82.5….if female three more years to age 85.
Those are the facts. Why do you fear the truth?
#2. vnice December 7, 2010 at 12:29 AM
” Walnut Creek Walt,”
“Most Police Officers and Firefighters don’t retire at 50. ”
Vnice, I never ever, in any post, stated or even suggested that the typical police officer or firefighter retired at age 50.
Why do you bring it up? I stick with the facts which most here seem to want to avoid.
In fact, most police officers and firefighter don’t retire before age 55.
I believe in most departments the average age of retirement for those who, not out because of disability, ranges from age 56 to age 58.
I know a large East Bay department where the average age is 57.
All I have said…….I repeat,….ALL I have said is that after they retire they don’t die in 2 or 3 years. NO, in fact the guy who retires at age 55 can expect to live past over 27 more years, until age 82+.
Why do all you posters keep throwing in the kitchen sink, of unrelated issues when I post these simple factual statements?
Do you want to live with myths? Do you want to believe distortions?
Now, in the case of Feckin Irish Mouse that is probably the case.
He is just nuts for some reason.
He says, policemen and firefighter get below market wages, or as he terms it “lousy wages”…. Laughable, simply laughable.
When I ask him to show me one department in the county that has “lousy” wages, he then changes the ENTIRE issue.
He suddenly jumps from police officers and firefighters to the following statement…
“Try being a clerk, accountant or analyst in any Dept in the County for “below market wages”……Until you walk in our shoes shut you mouth as you don’t know what the hell you are talking about”
You try to point out the absurdity of his statements about firemen and police officers and suddenly he switches to “clerks, accountants, and analysts”… Then he tells you to “shut your mouth” …..”until you walk in our shoes”…..
Clearly Feckin Irish Mouse realized his statements about the “lousy wages” of police and fire personnel was ridiculous.
Here that Mouse….. your statements about their wages being “lousy” is simply laughable.
Apparently you are a bitter public employee who doen’t feel his wages are up to your excellent skills.
OK, mouse, how about trying some of your own medicine.
Take your huge skill set out into the private sector and see how fast everyone runs to hire you.
Clearly you only want to avoid the issue at hand. Every time I address the issue of how long police and fire personnel live in retirement, you simply run away or switch the topic.
You clearly without any facts to dispute my statements.
You have been exposed. Relying only on such absurdities as saying that police and fire have “lousy wages”…
Really…….Really……Really……? Please don’t make us laugh
CoCoNuts
Finally someone who gets it………………
Anon 12/7 8:50am – the CC Times is to big of a Chicken Sh*t to cross the Angles and Borestink is a little guy with a severe Napoleon complex who suck idiots like WC Walt into believing what ever he says.
W.C Walt (Mr Borenstein)
We know each other and I was a big supporter of yours until you started bashing the fire fighters and police. I did some lengthy research and found that everyone you have mentioned in your column are upper management and not the rank and file. Their bosses are county or city government, they are the ones to blame for letting managers pad their retirement. For a firefighter or police officer to last 25 or 30 years on the streets, give them all they deserve. Like you, I sit behind a desk with a pen and at my age (49) I can’t even imagine doing what these people do or would I want to. According to CCERA the fire fighters apply 25% of their monthly income to their retirement (WOW). Maybe you should start writing about how much money is spent on free medical care for illegals, protect our boarders, modify welfare. You did accomplish one thing, you upset a lot of people and put a smile on others. This is a waste of your talents as a journalist.
WC Walt
Go back to sucking on your bottle of CVS generic Scotch like all the rest of the Rossmoorons…………….Or better yet get off yourfat white trash butt and put in a day as a Firefighter or Cop
You are the kind that thinks all Gov’t employees are over paid. Well did you ever take the exams to get hired?? Yes more than like you did and failed.
Bottom line is a-holes like you want servie but don’t want to pay for it…..
FYI – You need to check CCERA as the rank & file safet employees don’t get anywhere near hat District Chiefs get as far as salary and retirement. CalPers does not handle County Safety personnel CCERA does…..Oh that’s right CalPers is the expert…….NOT!!!!!!! CCERA is the retirement “expert” in CC County not CalPers. None of the Fire District or Sheriff’s Dept are covered by CalPers. So you CalPers info is not applicable
Pencil Pusher – you give Borestink too much credit…..He is not a journalist with any talent for if he was he would be working for a reputible paper and not he CC Times. And thank-you Pencil Push for supporting Public Safety personnel…People like you and CoCoNut get it when so many others don’t. Folks like Walt are just jealous old farts as they have failed in life and will never be considered a hero except in their own little minds
Thanks WC Walt (Mr. Borenstein)! You have convinced me to cancel my subscription to the CC Times! Oh and the CC Times supportive story on the Hells Angels helped make my decision as well!
Dear Pencil Pusher,
You state the following.
“According to CCERA the fire fighters apply 25% of their monthly income to their retirement (WOW).”
From what you write, it seems you believe that a firefighter or police officer making $100,000 in their “regular” pay, will be contributing 25% of that, or ($25,000) toward their pension.
That is simply NOT true. I don’t know what you read, or where you read it, but a “employee” contribution of 25% is absurd.
Why do you believe anything you are told? Why do you believe such myths. Like the age of death being 57 to 59, these crazy myths are passed out like candy.
No, CCERA covered employees are not paying a “employee” contribution of 25%. Simply FALSE.
In the entire San Francisco Bay Area, the “employee” contribution rates of police officers and firefighters range from 0% to 13%… with the average or typical being about 8% of salary (not including overtime).
No doubt the mistake you have made, is mixing up the “employer” contribution with the “employee” contribution, or some mixture of both combined.
I repeat, NO firefighter or police officer in Contra Costa County, either part CCERA or CalPERS, is paying a “employee” contribution of 25% of their basic salary.
Do you understand. Do you see why you have to check the true facts instead of just believing everything passed along?
BTW, “W.C Walt (Mr Borenstein)” — Yes, I’m sure Mr. Borenstein is spending his days posting here under a different name.
It seems any post, even those stating nothing but simple facts, is suddenly thought to be the sinister work of Mr. Borenstein.
As before, I invite ANY of you to call CalPERS, ask the truth of what I posted regarding age of death of their safety employees.
Why do you over and over and over, refuse to accept the truth.
What is so awful about the true facts of the matter. Your refusal to accept the most valid factual data is amazing. Seems you would rather believe what you choose to be true, instead of what the facts show is true.
Very strange behavior.
Please, call CalPERS. They have a toll free number on their website.
It won’t cost you anything to verify what I have been writing.
Can anything be simpler than that? A simple telephone call.
Or you can continue to live in denial.
This is really becoming a study in psychological behavior.
That you could be so glued to your belief that you ignore easily attainable facts. Very interesting behavior, don’t you agree?
Anon 123 -”Everything the Captain did was with the permission of Chief Livingston and was authorized in the MOU. Get over it”
Really, you asked the Chief if the midget captain was allowed to work holidays at $140.00 an hour, times 10 = $1,400.00 a holiday, plus 10 additional hours at $90.00 an hour (straight time) or $900.00 a holiday shift, for a grand total of $2,300.00 a holiday, while he sent “non essential” employee’s home???? Really,,,, and you better check the MOU again, because you are wrong…!!!
And maybe you can tell me exactly what the good captain accomplished while working the holidays at $230.00 an hour? Well let me educate you because I was there. For $230.00 an hour he attended patrol briefings where he brought us $30.00 worth of food to enjoy, and he rode around with “select” patrol sergeants trying to figure out why morale was so low in his division.
In closing Anon 123, lets pretend the MOU allowed for said captain to work holidays, do you really think it was ethically correct for him to do so? Do you really think he did it to support the officers working that day, or to improve morale…the same morale he and the homicidal lieutenant destroyed.. ? If you honestly believe that then I have a bridge to sell you…wake up and smell the coffee man…!!!
Fecking Irish Mouse….
That you for your astute information/correction.
“CalPers does not handle County Safety personnel CCERA does…..Oh that’s right CalPers is the expert…….NOT!!!!!!! CCERA is the retirement “expert” in CC County not CalPers. ”
I see, yes, “county safety personnel” are under CCERA, not CalPERS.
I see. Sad to learn that while CalPERS police and fire personnel who retire at age 55, live on average to age 82.5 years old (male) and 85.4 (female), while apparently to “Irish Mouse” the same job title holders working for Contra Costa County only live to age “57 to 59″.
Irish Mouse, don’t you think a study needs to be done to determine why county safety employees live 25 to 30 fewer years after retiring?
If I was you Mouse, I’d demand a study.
Of all the folks posting here, you seem the most disturbed.
You are so skilled and admirable, I’m sure you’d make double in the private sector. I can only thank you for your sacrifice in working for half your true worth.
Hey everyone quit trying to reason with WC Walt….The old dude has been sucking too much generic scotch to have functioning mind…He still thinks CalPers is the “expert” when CCERA is driving the bus around here. He still thinks all safety has an “over generous spiked” pension when in fact it is a few Bat & Dept Chiefs.
If there is a God no rescue workers will show up to help Walt in his time of need. I sure as hell would hate for any Firefighters I know waste their time and risk their lives to save him. He just ain’t worth it.
Hey Walt did you catch that the BOS only had a 45 minute meeting today???????? They make $97,000 plus around $1500 per month in other perks and yet only worked 45 minutes today. Where is your snitty fitty over that????????????
Walt
I talked to many people that contribute to this retirement and all said the same. Their salary is public record. A person blacked out the personnel portions of his/her check and the retirement contribution from their end was $2546. I have seen this with my own eyes, it worked out to be 24.6666666% (WOW again). This is an official pay stub from the county. That’s a big hit to a monthly paycheck and before you say that’s to much the remainder of the check wasn’t that much, below average if you ask me. Nice chatting with you again Walt.
Feckin Irish Mouse,
I see, CCERA safety employees only live to age 57 to 60, while CalPERS safety employees live to 82 to 85 on average.
That is the logic that is implied by Mouse when he tries to NOW suggest he is ONLY talking about CCERA employees. Never mind that most of the employees in the county, working for cities, are CalPERS covered employees.
No, the Mouse types will do anything but trade factual content with you.
They refuse to give up on their foolish remarks.
Mouse sticks with the opinion that firefighters and police officers in the county at large make “lousy wages”.
He really said that. They make “lousy wages”.
Enough said, when a poster says the wages brought home by our safety personnel are “lousy” and “below market”.
If only Mouse were in charge, then our police and fire personnel could finally get what they are worth. No doubt a minimum of 25% would be required to take them out of the “lousy wage” category.
Mouse opinions…with a reasoning ability of similar proportion.
WC Walt,
The whole point of the boycott was due to the CC Times slanting their stories and only offering one person’s viewpoint on the subject matter. The Times is attempting to use bullying tactics to try and convict the police and firefighters in the media. You still fail to respond to the issues of welfare fraud/misuse and illegal immigration costs pushing California over the brink.
Walt,
ALL OF THE FIRE DISTRICTS IN CC COUNTY ARE UNDER CCERA!!!!!!!!!!None of the local Fire are CalPers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So why are you talking about a CalPers study that even CCERA will say is flawed. We won’t even get into the toxins that Firefighters breath becaus aparatus is 100% air tight, the high rate of cancer in FF or the explosive fires (meth labs) they are encountering. And if you looked at the heading on the CCERA Charts you would see they are Employer Rates not Employee rates. No County or Fire District Employee gets a “free ride”…..We all apy a % of our income to retirement. I think the only “free ride” in CCERA is some of the Central San folks.
Pencil….You are partial correct in that they have a high contribution rate but it is closer to 17%. Perhaps you comboed the health care into what you saw which pushes it closer to 25-28%, dpending on the health plan
FYI Walt – I performed payroll functions for the Fire Districts and SO for 7 years……..And what function did you perform???????????? Just another Rossmoron….the kind any service person, crafts/trades person hates because you are rude igorant a$$. Want service and perfection but don’t want to pay for it. Want a La Tourette dinner for Burger King prices.
Pencil Pusher.
I thank you for your non-inflammatory reply.
I don’t have the pay stub you speak of in hand.
A couple points.
IF indeed that person’s contribution was $2,546 and that indeed was 24.6666666% of their “gross” “regular” pay, then that would mean their regular (non-overtime) salary was $123,859 per year.
That $123,859 salary (without overtime) is rather high depending on their position.
You may not know this but in addition to the “employee” contribution, the deputy sheriffs, (if that is a example you are using) may also contribute to deferred compensation,
AS follows..
DEFERRED COMPENSATION – Contra Costa County offers a voluntary Deferred Compensation Plan administered by the Hartford Life Insurance Company. Under Section 457 of the Internal Revenue Code, employees are able to set aside pre-taxed monies up to 100% of includable compensation up to $16,500 if under age 50, or up to $22,000 for ages 50 and over for calendar year 2009.
In other words, (and I don’t have the pay stub in question nor know what type of employee this is) you could have as much as $1,833 of that $2,500+ under deferred compensation included under that category of what you called “retirement contribution”.
Again, I have NO idea what you are looking at.
I will state again, NO employee in the county, nor any of its cities, has a “employee” contribution of 25%..
Now, since most here won’t believe what I say, why don’t you call and find out for yourself.
CCC Employees’ Retirement Association
1355 Willow Way, Suite 221
Concord, CA 94520
Phone: (925) 521-3960
Be very specific. Ask the following. Ask what is the “employee contribution” in percent. NOT the total contribution, nor the employer contribution. You want the “employee” contribution
That portion of the regular salary that is collected from the paycheck.
The answer will NOT be 25%, not 20%, not even 15%…..
Make a quick call and report back.
Walt
Def Comp is its own line item on pay stubs as has retirement, health plan, taxes, charity contribution etc………… And Def Comp has nothing to do with what you are whining about as it has nothing to do with retirement. I worked in payroll and there are those in rank and file non-safety poositions that pay around 15% because of the tier they are in and age they were hired. I was hired at 25 but a person in my classification that was hired at 35 or 40 pays almost double what I pay because of “age at hire”. And Safety is always at a hire rate than non-safety.
Pencil Pusher…
Better yet, go to the source.
For example, look at Walnut Creek.
Here are all their labor agreements. Look at them, see the reality
http://www.walnut-creek.org/citygov/depts/admin/hr/labor.asp
Look at their police contract.
You won’t find a “employee” contribution rate even approaching 25% for any type of worker. Simply not factually true. ( I still don’t know what kind of pay stub you were looking at., or what the category you were thinking you saw. Just that NO ONE is paying a “employee” share of 25%, not even close.
Look, I don’t have county figures, but I simply don’t believe what Irish Mouse is saying.
Some concrete examples. Yes, I know they are Walnut Creek CalPERS examples but NO ONE is crazy higher like some have suggested here. 25% , 15% “employee contribution” Just crazy stuff.
Here is Walnut Creek Police
For regular officers,
The “employee” or “member” share/contribution is 9%..
However, under the current contract, the “employee/member” pays ZERO percent. Their 9% share is “picked-up” by the employer, the city.
For police management positions, the “employee/member” share/contribution is also 9% , but they currently pay only 3.5%
That 3.5% will rise to 7.0% in the future.
In any case, whether they pay ANY of it or NOT, the so-called “employee/member” share is ONLY 9% which is typical.
Currently the typical officer you see on the street pays ZERO percent since the city is picking up their 9% share.
Now, for all the other common employees in Walnut Creek City government. The accountants, the park workers, the planning department etc.
Their “employee/member” share of the pension contributions is 7%.
However, under the current contract, they ONLY pay 1.75% of that 7%.
So there you have a common example of how public employee pension “employee” share of the contributions are made.
Typical rates run from a low of about 6% to a high typically of about 10%.
NO ONE…..NO ONE.. in the entire state of California pays a employee share of 25%. NO ONE.
I have never heard or seen a employee share of even 15% that Irish Mouse is trying to foist on us.
These stories are myths and distortions.
I challenge anyone to bring here the true actual facts about the CCERA rates for “employee” contributions.
This 15% to 25% exaggerations have just got to stop.
I don’t understand why you distort the truth. Why try to fool the reading public? What is your agenda?
Walnut Creek Walt appears to write as Borenstein does. He doesn’t want the entire truth out there. He wants you to ask what the employee contribution to the firefighters retirement is. You need to ask what the total contribution is because the firefighters pay 9% of the employers cost. The firefighters pay 3 portions of their retirement cost, basic, COLA, and 9% of the employer cost which brings their contributions to 25%. This is why I canceled my subscription months ago, if the Times allows this type of reporting then I assume that all the articles don’t tell the whole truth.
Walt,
I hate to burst your bubble but Irish Mouse is right on. I don’t work for in this county but the one that I do work in, my contributions have been 14 percent. I know for a fact that Con Fire pays what was reported earlier @ *24 percent.
I have been reading these blogs for quite some time and I am amazed at the things that people incorrectly assume when it comes to public safety. For instance, the false assumption of padding your retirement by working a lot of OT in the last year; Sorry to inform you but overtime does not count as a retirement component since it is not regular or reoccurring. I guess that gets to the heart of the issue because much of it has been brought on by lazy and irresponsible editorial writers like Daniel Borenstein who try to get people like you stirred up. I guess we can see that in your case it worked. This is only made worse when it is put into print without any sort of balance. I have it on good word, the best in fact, that the CC Times (Dan Hatfield) has not allowed either PD or Fire to put up a rebuttal. Sound fair and balanced to you? Agendas?
I have been taking the CCTimes since the days of the Green Sheet. Guess what? Monday I called and cancelled my subscription. While Dan Borenstein has his rights (Freedom of the Press), I have mine, which is to exercise where I choose to spend my money and get my news. The Times and its advertisers are sure to come out the losers; in fact they already have.
Agenda? Simple it is to get the truth out there. What is yours?
Troublemaker…
OK, I’m always willing to change my mind in the face of evidence.
In CCERA there are many agencies, many departments.
I see there is the possibility of the subsidization process going in both directions.
Subvention, where the employer pays part of the employee share, such as in the case of the Walnut Creek Police Dept. where the city pays ALL of the 9% employee “basic” share. BTW, they, under CalPERS have no COLA contribution either.
Then there is the case where employees can pick up part of the employer’s contribution share.
So, that brings us to departments under CCERA.
Examining the “employer” sections of the BASIC and COLA for Con Fire I see that for both BASIC and COLA it seems that the employer’s share is lower than the other districts (Moraga/Orinda, County, and other districts, although M/O is also very low)
Here is what I see for Con Fire.
Employer pays 18.46% for basic, and 5.92% for COLA..total 24.38%
For a typical employee who begins at age 25, they pay the following.
Employee pays 8.35% for basic and 6.29% for COLA..total 14.64%
Now that would be prior to any subvention for the employee or employee payment of employer share, as it can work in either direction.
BTW, I should add here that those employee rates, as listed above, hire than most city employees pay. My prior example of the WC Police Dept. where the employees pay ZERO share of the “employee’s” share of the basic.
What I don’t have, and the CCERA site does not give, is what share, if any, of the employer’s share, the employee could pay in a given district or department.
I do see for example, that the County pays for safety 3% at 50 employees ….28.55% for BASIC and 12.26 for COLA or a 41.8% total.
While Con Fire pays a total for those two of only 24.38%
Thus there is obviously some missing contribution needed.
You have indicated that Con Fire employees pay the missing 9% or so of the employer’s needed contribution.
Which if added to the 14.64% employee contribution would add up to 23.64% for that employee who began working at age 25 years old.
I am not able to find out if those in the County or some of the other districts pay any portion of the employers share.
Such as the San Ramon Valley FD.
Given that those “districts” are listed as paying a 36.82% BASIC share as well as a 19.92% COLA share it would seem that there would not be a need for any employee payment of the employer’s share.
If you understand what I mean.
So, from just the numbers, on the face, it would appear that Con Fire, Moraga/Orinda, (and possibly County) BASIC “employer” rates are being partially covered by employees making contributions.
I realize with the age related contribution rates being different for each employee that one can’t give a blanket total contribution rate.
Also, these various entities entered this plan with pre-existing funding situations from what I understand. Accounting for part of the differences that may be seen.
In Oakland for example, the police currently contribute ZERO percent, with the employer picking up any needed contribution, while the Oakland fire department is contributing 13% after trading a higher payment for a pay increase. Lots of math to compare the two as to value.
OPD is now being asked to kick in 9%.
BTW, all my figures regarding CCERA come from the following.
http://www.cccera.org/contribution%20rates/contrib%20rate09-10w.pdf
People here would do well to offer that site to people they discuss this issue with. They WON’T likely find it on their own and it is very complicated to understand.
As I said, even after spending time there, it still does NOT tell me what, if any employee contribution portion is being pay by the employer “subvention” or what employer contribution portion may be being made by the employees.
You suggest Con Fire employees pay a 9% contribution to cover some of what the employer does not pay.
While I still cannot determine what the various CCERA employees pay, I can see how you are adding up, in some cases to 24%.
Two points, actually three.
1st,
The normal employee share, even for “enhanced” 3% at 50 safety employees, is higher than most departments in the state.
IN the case of ConFire at about 14.6%. Compared to the already high end Oak Fire Dept at 13%.
2nd,
The employee paying a 9% share of the employers BASIC is also very high and unusual for most Bay Area Departments from what I know.
3rd,
Apparently I was wrong for some, or even all of those entities covered by CCERA, although I still don’t know the specific rates for the other three categories listed on that Web site.
I also have not taken the time to look at other “non-safety” categories of employees to determine their percentages.
Well, you can’t say I didn’t make the effort to understand.
Nor to come back and speak about it.
I must say, I would still need to know more to be certain about everything.
I still stick firmly to my main point in my first half dozen posts.
That issue being the age at which firefighters and police officer die.
They do not die at some unGodly young age such as 57–59 on average.
They do actually live normal long lives, on average.
I was at my uncle’s 80th birthday a few years ago. Several other of his fellow FF’s were there, all of them in their late 70′s and early 80′s.
In my family, my grandfather was the youngest firefighter do die and that was at age 79…..almost 80. He did die prematurely due to his career in the following way. He fell when a roof collapsed, in the era prior to hip replacements. Walked with a cane ever after. That inability to exercise combined with smoking, no doubt took years off his life.
OK… say what you will.
At the very least I search for the true facts.
Wouldn’t it be nice if some of the folks posting here would direct people to the site I gave above?
If you want folks to understand some of the issues in dispute, you might give them some facts to work with.
For some members, some departments, and some agencies, it would seem members are paying a much higher share than many other departments in the greater San Francisco Bay Area.
Will those payments enable the cites and districts to fully pay for future obligations? I don’t know.
IN the end, the people are responsible, regardless of how investments turn out. The benefits are guaranteed, while the investment returns are NOT.
Given the woefully “underfunded” position of many if not most public pension plans, we, the citizens need to be very concerned.
Cities like Oakland and Vallejo are headed for bankruptcy… or having a condition were pensions will grab huge chunks of their general fund.
Oakland’s future is bleak in that regard.
Hats off to Walnut Creek, during the pension Gold rush early in the decade, they kept their general employees at 2% at 55, while most other cities jumped to 2.5 or 2.7 percent.
OK…….
Nice long post, huh?
Can’t say I ran away from controversy or even some misconceptions I may have about particular department pensions within CCERA .
@Walt
It appears you are getting very close to the 25%. Maybe with a little bit more investigation you can print it in the times. Strong work, this is what investigative journalism is all about. Time for the paper to step up.
Geez Walt you finally get it….Yahoooooo!!!!!!!!!
Oh and under CCERA us “General employees” are also 2% at 55. That is pretty standard…but very few can retire at 55. Also you may want to check into the fact the CCERA has in the past paid the Counties retirement contributtions. This County has skated a lot of years thanks to CCERA funding. Can’t tell you a thing about WC but I do know the county and CCERA….Another thing did you know the BOS members are fully vested into CCERA after 10 years of service…..Just like us rank & file employees……
Just got out my confire pay stub WC WALT. $9421.40 base pay with two overtime shifts, $2514.00 retirement contribution. Do the math. I wish you would find out the facts at a retirement board meeting. Bornstein went and was silenced by our rep. He just didn’t have the balls to own up to his muck raking mistakes in previous columns. You are wrong on many levels, and it makes you look foolish from the standpoint of those in this business. Do us all a favor and shut up or get your facts straight.
Walnut Walt (Dan, Larry, Curly, Moe, WHOEVER!) and Sgt. Friday amongs others:
Thank you for taking the time to clarify details of the misgivings that exist here (there, everywhere). Without knowing the true facts–which you have shared–WE are being screwed–and not in a good way. You guys are the BEST. I wish I had half of your energy in this fight. My hope is that you both sleep well at night knowing you are making a difference. Again, Thank You.
Geez, Walt. With that kind of exhaustive effort we could kick Borenstein to the curb and get you a newspaper job in the blink of an eye.
Maybe now people can start to understand they are NOT getting the full story from the pages of the Times, but instead a butchered story with tortured facts that pursues some as yet inexplicable agenda on the reporter’s part.
Look, before everyone pats themselves on the back and suggests I don’t know or care about anything.
#1. The majority of my posts, probably the first 7 of about 10, were speaking almost entirely about the AGE issue.
I kept point out that the idea that police officers die at a average age of 57-59 or even in their early sixties was just plain absurd.
It make no difference whether they are in CCERA or CalPERS.
So STOP with promoting that myth.
The widely collected data suggests that retired officers live just as long as retired firefighters, and that both groups live just as long as all other county, district, city, and state workers.
Police organizations and associations have been spouting this myth for decades. Stop it.
Now, regarding the level of contribution.
Whether the workers pay more, or the county, district, or city pays more of the contributions, the problem with many if not most public employee pension plans is that they are underfunded.
That would be fine if the obligations had to come ONLY from the pension fund assets.
However that is not the case. If the CCERA or CalPERS doesn’t have enough money because they can’t achieve their 7.5% or 8% projected growth, then the citizens are on the hook for any shortfall.
Those shortfalls, expected by most unbiased experts, mean that every citizen is going to be taxed to raise the funds to meet the obligations promised.
Either future taxes will be raised or other city spending will have to be shifted to pension payments.
It makes no difference whether the agency, city, district, etc. pay 100% of all contributions or whether the workers pay 100% of all contributions.
The financial obligation is still that of the taxpayers.
As such, if in certain districts, the pensions are too high, then that still needs to be addressed. Any pay-out changes are almost always limited to future workers, not those currently employed.
Those workers who are at 2% at 55, I don’t have significant problem with given that most don’t retire at 55 anyway.
If you work from 25 to 65, like most others in the private sector, you will end up with a very generous pension of 80%.
It also appears from CCERA information that some of those folks will also be getting Social Security on top of that, probably taking that 40 year worker up near a 100% pension.
I would have to look into that aspect further for clarification
Under the “worst case” I see, for the various levels of pensions I saw on that CCERA page, it still seems that a worker working a typical 25 to 65 career will end up with a pension well in excess of that gained by a typical worker in the private sector, even after 401k, Roths, and IRA’s are considered.
So you may feel that the Times hasn’t given the entire story, but you are hardly doing poorly compared to he rest of society.
Not everyone is a investment banker with millions in the bank.
When you take “total compensation” including salary, vacations, sick leave, benefits, health, dental, and pension, the average public employee is still making more than “most” of the similar positions in the private sector.
Those police and fire employees we are discussing. Using most agencies in the Bay Area, Oakland, San Jose, Walnut Creek.
The typical “total compensation” package is about $180,000 per year WITHOUT overtime. Remember, that is total compensation, not even counting any future unfunded pension obligations that may arise.
It is NOT by chance, that when public agency job openings come about, that there are hundreds and even thousand of applicants. That condition existed even prior to 2007 and this recession.
The general public knows and understands that the combination of salary and benefits, including pension pay well. To which is added under most conditions, job security.
So don’t cry me a storm about the beleaguered poor public employee.
CC County sheriffs typical pay “salary only” without any overtime or benefits or pension.
40hour sheriff…. $80K to $82K
Sergeant $90K to $95K
About 10K to 15K lower than many “city” departments such as Oakland and San Jose. No shortage of applicants.
Look at the CC County Fire Department.
Not the top guys…. look down to about #200 of 400+ firefighters.
Base salary about $100,000…….with overtime #200 about $140,000 last year. Plus all the benefits and YES a very lucrative pension of 90% after 30 years. Even if you pay a substantial amount of the contributions that is still very excellent. $90,000 a year from age perhaps 57 until age 82+ on average.
Please don’t have the taxpayers crying for your plight regarding compensation.
As to County workers in other departments.
Examples I see… Clerks etc, about 45K to 50K with all the benefit package on top of that. Not as high as some cities I’ve seen but when you factor in a benefit package of over well over 50% on top of that, you have a “total compensation” well in excess of what a similar position in the private sector would pay. Benefit packages, especially for lower salary positions are well in excess of 50%.
That $4,000 a month clerk can have total benefit package, health, dental, vacation, pension, etc of $2,500 to $3,000 per month depending on family health package etc.
I can assure you, in the private sector, firms are not spending $6,000 to $7,000 in total comp to keep a clerk on the payroll.
If you know, how much does the county pay for health care for a worker and their family.
By way of example, on the high end, the AC Transit bus system pays a worker over $1,900 a month for their Kaiser coverage alone if they have a family. In that case, the employee pays nothing, not even co-pays.
The citizens can’t know every detail about every public agency when tracking down abuse and excess compensation.
And finally I might add, that it the “public employee” groups, perhaps including CCERA that fought against the public’s right to know about employee compensation and salaries. Which has now become the law of the land all over the state.
The public employees were stonewalling on that issue.
I believe to their credit, the Contra Costa Times took that issue to court and prevailed.
They are to be commended for doing so. Otherwise the public would still be in the dark.
As for health care…………………….3 plans availabel with 2 levels, Singel and Family. The county refuse to do “couple” even tho it would save $$$$. And the plan the subvent the most for an employee…….Their own CCHP (county health). So if you want to be with the Welfare folks you can pay approx $22 a month out of your check if you are single and around $80 a month for family……………next cheapest for the employee is Kaiser single at around $100 a month….the only thing I can say is it is better than nothing but I had free and better health coverage when I worked private sector. Like I said there have been lots or trade offs.
And not all people get the “50%” beneift package……my average is 34% so again Walt you can not blanket your assumptions. The 50% would be old Tier1 retirement with Helath Net family health coverage which very few have (most tier 1 folks have retired) Also the benefit rate includes FICA, W Comp, SUI, crumby life insurance (won’t even bury a person) and SDI or other disability if a person is management…..More to it than just health and retirement. FYI – FICA & SUI are federally mandated.
As for the public info thing……..it was not a “stonewall” it was the fact that “too much” info was going out like complete naees, addresses, ss #’s etc…..for a retired cop and address could be dangerous as not all people want to see where their tax dollar goes….some want revenge. And personally I still don’t feel anyone has a right to my name….The can get info on my classificaiton etc but no tax payer has a right to personal info like my name, address and ss#……
Look a few points.
Regarding health care. I and everyone in my extended family has Kaiser and has had it for 40 years. Including all those in the fire and police departments. It is quite different than it was before.
I am not going to feel sorry for any employee who gets Kaiser.
You pay $100 for a single. I self-pay $490 (more next year) for a policy where my visits are $50 and where I get no drug coverage.
Full coverage with $25 co-pay and drugs would be well over $600 for a single.
$100 is cheap.
While I have not been shown to be 100% correct in everything, I am going to have to express my disbelief when you say your entire benefit package only costs the County etc. 34% of your regular salary.
That would, in the case of a $60,000 worker, be only about $20,000
Covering all the employer pension contributions, all the health care, dental care, insurance if any.
Why do I doubt that? I know of no public agency or city operating at that level for a typical employee.
On the other end of the spectrum as examples. AC Transit benefit package costs 85% of base salary. The Golden Gate Bridge District costs 67% of base salary for a average employee.
Most cities range from 50% to 65%…
I would guess the medical alone, even if Kaiser, would cost the employer for the average worker, a minimum of $700 to $1,000 a month.
Some singles, some married, some with children.
Add in dental, the employer pension contribution and all the other work related costs, and I can’t see any way the counties average could be anywhere close to 34%….
Or perhaps that was only for your case.
I don’t know what you mean by your benefit package.
When I refer to “total compensation” I am talking about ALL employer costs aside from straight basic base salary, but not including overtime.
So you take the base salary and the total compensation package (without overtime) and do the math.
Like I said, the Golden Gate Bridge District is 67%
I suppose it is not impossible for a public employer to be at 34% but typically even private employers who don’t offer many or any benefits are not that low.
You see even the private employer has to pay a share of Social Security and workers comp and all those other items on a pay check.
That before even adding on a excellent Kaiser coverage at only $100 cost to the employee.
We may be talking about different methods and items in our calculations.
I would guess a city like Walnut Creek for example is well over 50%, perhaps over 60%.
Even discounting for their higher employer pension contributions it would be near impossible to get anywhere near 34% of base salary as their total cost of benefits.
I will say this, Contra Costa County does not appear as lucrative as many other public agencies in the Bay Area.
However I say that not knowing all the facts or details.
The real story is often in the fine print.
Little tricks that public often is not told.
Let me give you one example.
In many agencies where the employer picks up the 9% “employee share” of the contribution, that 9% is counted as income for the purposes of pension calculation.
In Oakland, the police appear to only get 90% pension after 30 years.
High enough, but the hidden income from the city paying that 9% adds on another 90% x 9%…or 8.1% more. So a true pension for a 30 year retiring police officer in that department is actually 98.1%….
All hidden from public understanding.
As I said, you need an accountant to uncover who is really getting what.
I’ll take what you said, but I am very skeptical about a comp package only equaling 34% of of base salary. I’ve just never seen that to be the case in any public agency.
Walt
Just when I thought you were human again. Your hatred for fire and police appears to be jealously and is very obvious. If you were treated badly by one of the professions then step up and say so otherwise just drop it, you made your point. I will say, I am 18 months from retiring, will be on a fixed income and if I have to pay a little more for this service then so be it, small price to pay for piece of mind. As for what these people will make when they retire, more power to them, they earned it just like everyone else who looked ahead to their golden years.
Walt,
I am an Accountant and I know what my current benefit rate is as an employee. 3 factors age when hired which is the largest factor when it comes to retirement (I was 25), type of health plan (CCHP Single great for perscriptions) and a funky disability because I’m in a “professional class”. You really have to look at a case by case with each employee…..all 6000+ of us…….And I just pulledmy pay stub and it my benefits calculate out to 35.98%….My calculated retirement if I were to retire at 55 with 30 years (both being possible as I will be 55 when I have 30 years) is $3,100 a month before tax and health insurane are deducted. $3,100 is 60% of my current salary. I know this as I requested the numbers from CCERA the first part of September …….because of my birth year I can not collect full Social Security until 70 but I will take a smaller amount at 62 because I want my money out of there. Besides I have worked hard and earned all of this…………..
The information you have is generalized averages but the problem with that is you have lots of people below that average and few above. And you are correct we are not as lucrative and I could have made around 30% more working for Alameda County but……….. There would be commute cost and working in Oakland one could get shot at…being an Accountant in Martinez no parking fees, not to much gas to get there…..no bang-bang. That was the trade-off.
Walt, hold on a sec. I give you props for tracking down the pension percentages, but your assumptions on age are still wacked.
Don’t know how you got your facts jacked up, but step back from the blind copy and paste of CALPERS stats for a second.
The average life expectancy of a US male is only a tick over 75. To suggest public safety people somehow live 7 yrs on average longer doesn’t pass the smell test.
I can see where the earlier stats come from. Depending on the study, it can put pegged at 53-66 yrs. We can start talking about PTSD, higher suicide rates, higher stress levels and all the other things that would contribute to that lowering of the average.
A better way to have this discussion would be to understand just how many are enjoying 3@50. That is a fairly new program(about 10 yrs) and with the average time served in public saftey being something like 22 yrs(a CALPERS stat, btw), my guess is not a lot.
It’s easy to cherry pick extreme data points and get everyone all riled up. It doesn’t do anything for the integrity of the discussion.
More info from CALPERS studies that is pertinent here. I believe this comes from the very same article Walt is quoting the higher ages out of. There are also some large, looming questions about what state employees were included in this “public safety” classification that is being discussed. If the positions are not comparable to the duties of CoCo police and fire, then it’s a dishonest apples to oranges comparison.
“CalPERS also tests the myth to determine whether most public safety employees are receiving 90% of their final salary upon retirement. Given the 3% at 50 formula that would require them to work for 30 years. To get 30 years and retirement at age 50, one would need to start at age 20. Cal PERS found that the average age of entry for people who got 3% at 50 was 28. Overall just 34% of public safety officials accrued 30 years or more of service and almost all of them retired after the age of 53. In fact only 1% of safety employees retire at age 50 with a benefit of 90% of final compensation.”
Read that last one especially. Only 1%. So just how big is the boogeyman that Borenstein wants his readership to be afraid of? Are we to accept that the highly regarded “investigative reporter” couldn’t drum up a few more facts and use a little less drama to sell print?
David Greenwald was the reporter on the CALPERS stats and I think it originates in an Orange Co. Register piece if you want to search for the full article.
Feckin Irish Mouse,
“And I just pulled my pay stub and it my benefits calculate out to 35.98%…”
OK, I think I see where the problem MAY be?
You see, when I talk about “total compensation” without overtime, that is not something that will fully show up in your pay stub, unless I am wrong.
I am talking about salary plus the benefits/pension you are charged for and ALSO the portion that the employer pays that may not show up on your pay stub.
When I talk about 50% plus, 67%, and even 85% on top of BASE salary, (not including overtime), in some districts, agencies and cities, I am including all of the portions and contributions that the employer makes. All benefits you receive, whether indicated or not on your stub.
The employer paid portion of your medical, dental, insurance, the portion of your pension, and other items.
Do they show all of those in your pay stub?
Do they show the (if it was Kaiser) not only the $100 the worker pays, but also the $400 the employer pays.
Do they also show on your stub the entire “employer” portion of the pension contribution? All of their contribution to any workmans comp, Medicare, and any of the other costs they contribute to your total compensation (without overtime)
Look, if you worked for the county under CCERA, from my records I see they paid in the following for a 2% @ 55 Tier 1 thru 3 worker.
for BASIC 15% to 16% on everything in excess of the first $350
for COLA about 6% on everything in excess of the first $350
Those two combined would by themselves equal 21% to 22% of your check in excess of $350.
For the first $350 it looks like the rate would be about 10% + 4% or 14% total.
Thus over all it would seem they contribute about 20% of your salary (without overtime) to your benefits JUST for the pension alone.
Do I understand it correctly, they also pay the employer portion of your Social Security?
I don’t see that portion included in the figures I have
http://www.cccera.org/contribution%20rates/contrib%20rate09-10w.pdf
So, let me know.. Your 35.98% as seen on your stub. Does it include all the items I mention?
I cannot see how it does if we include all of the “employer” portion of the payments and contributions.
We may just be talking about different things. Under my definition your total benefit package could easily be 55% or more even though you see about 36% on your stub for benefits.
Now, not to be misunderstood… If YOU are paying the 35% then I am not counting that as part of the 50% to 60% on top of base salary.
So if a person made $5,000 of base salary, and the total benefits/pension, etc. were $3,000, but the employee paid $1,000 of that $3,000 then the employers portion would only be $2,000 or 40% of the base salary.
For a place like the Golden Gate Bridge District, salary might be $6,000 and the benefits might be $4,500 with the employee contributing only $500, leaving $4,000 of benefits to be paid by the employer.
That portion equaling about 67% of base salary.
Its all about definitions and who is paying what portion of what.
Sorry guys, but I’m beginning to understand WC Walt. As for Borenstein- I think his rant has been almost all about “spiking”. I agree about boycotting CCtimes but mostly because I don’t thimk I should have to pay for advertising and get most of my news from other sources anyway. I guess I was in the army when house bombing in 1968 took place I don’t think I ever heard of it.
CoCoNuts,
Addressing both your posts.
You are wrong when you USE what you state.
“The average life expectancy of a US male is only a tick over 75. To suggest public safety people somehow live 7 yrs on average longer doesn’t pass the smell test. ”
It doesn’t pass your “smell test” because you simply do NOT understand actuarial data. A common mistake is to use US Male Life Expectancy.
That is life expectancy at birth, not life expectancy at retirement.
Look, so you can understand. Even the Social Security Administration does not use “US Male Life Expectancy”
For example Soc. Sec. tables say if a average man retires at age 57 he will live 23.06 years, a female 26.33 years.
Look for yourself.
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/STATS/table4c6.html
Now, that is for a widespread cross section of all economic strata, all races, and all areas of the country. California has longer living people than the national average.
Also, people with higher incomes and better health care live longer.
Police officers and firefighters not only live in California, but have better incomes and better health care than the average American that the Soc Sec Adm tables represent.
You are mixing apples with oranges when you use the figures you used.
Seriously, you are way off on this issue.
Next….. Yes I have red and seen those articles you mention.
However, I didn’t trust just anything I read in the Orange County Register because they and David Greenwald have a bit of anti pension agenda.
So I did NOT immediately trust what they wrote without going to CalPERS directly asking CalPERS if the AGE numbers were correct.
The numbers listed were correct according to CalPERS and they are the same numbers I gave you here in prior posts.
If you note above, I never use the “unusual” example of officers retiring at age 50 because very few do.
However, regardless of when they retire, whether age 50, 55 or 60, it makes only a slight difference as to what age they will live..
Here is the CalPERS life expectancy data for public safety members (police and fire, which are grouped together by the pension fund):
– If the current age is 55, the retiree is expected to live to be 81.4 if male, and 85 if female.
– If the current age is 60, the retiree is expected to live to be age 82 if male, and 85.5 if female.
– If the current age is 65, the retiree is expected to live to be age 82.9 if male, and 86.1 if female
If there was a age 50 included above I would expect the life expectancy to be about .6 or .7 years less than that listed at age 55 .
There is a reason for that which I won’t explain here.
However though the early retiree, as a group average, lives slightly fewer years, they spend more years on their pensions. So they live a year less but still collect a pension for 4 extra years. That is why you normally get less for retiring early.
You are falling into the trap of mixing ups concepts and using concepts that don’t apply here. Such as the “life expectancy at birth” you cited above.
This is why, CalPERS, CCERA and Social Security all employ actuaries who specialize in such calculations.
You simply have it wrong.
Everything you have said, I have seen before. It changes none of what I have written.
If you had been carefully reading my post you would see I never use a officer retiring at age 50…. Instead, as in my prior posts, I use a more common 57 which is much closer to what is true in most departments.
After all, who gets out of school and is hired at age 20 by a police department.
All the 3% @ age 50 allows is that a individual can retire at 50, but it would be likely he’d only have about 22 years of service, thus getting only about 66% of his pension. Often his medical is not covered during the period between age of retirement and 65 when he qualifies for Medicare.
My brother was not covered for about 5 years. Very dangerous, or very expensive.
I hope I have clarified some of your misconceptions.
Walt
Yes my pay stub show my side and the county side. I am not as I was a payroll clerk. I know what I’m talking about and know how to read my stub. The 35.98% is the percentage of benifits paid for by the County and the County only. I get no OT as I am OT exempt. So I have base pay of $xxxx and benefits of 35.98% which equals $yyyy per month. So county pays an equivalent of 35.98% of may base pay as benefits or in simple math $35.98 for every $100 in Salary. What I pay into benefits is never included in the “county calculation”. If I counted my Defered Comp I pay as much toward my “retirement” as the County (if I put both pieces together) And before you say more I spent 7 years in the Auditors Payroll unit and it’s “thee” payroll unit for the county. You are mixing apples and oranges when you mx what I pay with what the County pays as what I pay is out of my wages and skews the argument. Which is why Borestink & Co are not credible as they mix te fruit so to speak. And another thing about Borestink & the CC Times….why do they never print our rebutals to what they write. I know at least 30 current and retired employees who have written and not ONE letter has been published. Not one. Why are you not questioning the ethics of that. Is that because the CC Times is also your employer???? Makes me wonders
Instead of speculating, please look at the powerpoint presentation by the County Administrator. On page 46 of this under “CCCFPD” you will notice that a firefighter pays on average 24% of salary towards retirement (the full 9% load of 3@50), which equates to 60% of the total share. This level of employee contribution is unprecedented anywhere in the USA. Please feel free to contact the CCCERA if you don’t believe that statistic. I bet you won’t see the CC Times printing those figures.
Sorry, here is the link to the County Website that verifies these numbers:
http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/DocumentView.aspx?DID=4556
4 the Truth….finally someone comes forth with the real facts.
Why has no one given this document previously?
http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/DocumentView.aspx?DID=4556
Will EVERYONE please go to the link and tell me how what you’ve been telling me compares to what I see on pages 42, 44, 45 and 46 of that document.
It seems to fly in the face of what I’ve been told by most of you.
Feckin Irish Mouse, what do you say?
“General membership”, Tier 3….
Says total pension rate is 37.7%, with 32.04% paid by employer and only 5.66% paid by employee.
That is ONLY pension, not all the other benefits.
Then look at page 45 for Sheriff Safety Membership
Hugely HIGHER rates and percentages. with the employer paying nearly 83% of the total, while the employee is paying only 17% of the total.
On page 42 it says
“In Contra Costa, for every dollar being spent on salary, we spend 40 cents on pension, and ANOTHER 41 cents on other benefits.
Most of what I am reading seems to be completely different than what many of you have been telling me.
The only page that starts to look like the discussion we’ve been having here is page 46…. which is for Non-Sheriff Safety Membership.
On that page we see two types—
Tier A (other) where the employer pays 61.35 percent and the employee pays 19.97%, for a total of 81.32%…
But as you see, the county is still paying 75% of the total cost.
NOW….lets examine the other category which I assume is comprised of some of the fire fighters we were talking about.
Con Fire in particular.
Some very interesting issues here. Especially the “missing 40%” that we see in the other categories such as above that and for Sheriffs, where the total input for the pensions is about 80%.
Why is this Con-Fire total input only 40.6%…..
That anomaly is explained at the bottom. I assume POB stands for Pension Obligation Bonds? The missing, and needed, 40% apparently is not shown here but is covered by a TAX…..essentially I am guessing it is off the books here and yet STILL covered by the taxpayers.
Otherwise this Con Fire pension is short the extra 40% needed to equal the sheriff pensions.
This issue is key..
OK…. look at the rest of the story for Con-fire
The employer rate is only 16.6% while the employee rate is 24.34%
That is high, BUT the portions are distorted because of the missing POB being covered by taxes.
Yes, the 24.34% is still relatively high compared to other departments and agencies. For example, the Sheriffs only pay 14% for theirs.
However, of the total approx 81.3% “needed”, the Con-fire employees pay about 30% with the employer + “taxes” pay about 70%.
I don’t completely understand the tax covering of the 40% portion that is obviously missing but clearly there is something going on, or the math is absurd. See the notes on page 46
But the pensions of Con-Fire, with their 24% rate is the EXCEPTION to all the other plans we have been discussing, not the norm.
All the other data I am seeing in these pages seem to be at odds with the general discussion we have been having.
I suppose there is some simple explanation.
What I am reading in this document looks an awful lot like what I’ve been telling you about most counties and cities I have seen before.
Something is wrong. This document is dated May 18, 2010.
The last page says to go to http://www.ccera.org for any questions so they seem to be in step with that organization.
OK…….Explanation of the seemingly contrary information I am reading.
WC Walt,
Bravo, you’ve done an awesome job with a very thorough and reasoned analysis. And putting a nice little smackdown on the numbskull who doesn’t understand actuarial data vis-a-vis life expectancy. Good stuff.
Simply put, you have public workers who can’t stomach the fact they are part-and-parcel of the pension bomb that is pushing states and municipalities to the brink of bankruptcy. But they’ll post long-winded diatribes defending the pigs at the trough.
Walt, No point talking to you as you are the “expert” and refuse to think beyond an average that has way to many pluses and minuses. You document also leaves out the fact that there have been several years that the earnings of CCERA investments (which are most bought on employee contributions) were used to cover the Counties portion of retirement as the County was using a pay-go (they didn’t put their portion of funds in until an employee reitred) and that is what created the “hole”. Also Safety personnel are at a completely different level than rank & file (which I am). And Consolidated Fire and Sheriff are also 2 different animals and SRVF, Orinda-Moraga, Crockett-Carquinez & Rodeo Fires are autonomous districts divorced from the County. I don’t know what the Cities have done or pay and since the Cities are not part of CCERA I really don’t give a rat ass. And don’t car what CalPers says or does as they are not CCERA and I am a member of CCERA. I know what I pay based on my paycheck…You don’t!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You obviously don’t understand what you are reading and are only willing to belive people like Borestink who only tell part of the story. And when confronted the little toad runs away from those that want to tell the other side and the biased Times will not print any of our letters. God forbid the public ever sees or hears what we have to say.
I really hate “John Q Publics” that piss and moan but never took the entrance exams or put their lives on the line for others. Or in my case has taken abuse from mental patients, been exposed numerous times to TB or other physically threated because a paycheck was pulled because of a tax lien. So please go work inthe jail, County Hospital ( J-ward would be a good start) or fight a fire…Do this for a week and then come back and tell me how we don’t deserve what we have earned…..Yes we have EARNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Walnut Walt for Governor! You’d have this state’s finances in order in record time. Although my head is spinning at this point, I can’t get enough of your ability to dig, discover, and report the documented facts. Persevere, my friend!
Feckin Irish Mouse,
I see, you want to go back to screaming at me rather than addressing the specifics I pointed out in the document that another person posted the link to. You call it my document.
You accuse John Q. Public of being a ignorant fool to listen to the CC Times and then when someone like myself takes considerable time to track down the facts as best I can, you avoid the issue and sink back into name calling.
How does a citizen win with what you offer. If we ask questions we get blamed. If we read the newspaper we get blamed.
You won’t even address the most common employee group I found.
While you have not said, I would assume it is the category you are in.
“General membership”, Tier 3….Numbering 6,000 employees.
Says total pension rate is 37.7%, with 32.04% paid by employer and only 5.66% paid by employee.
That is ONLY for the pension contribution and yet you have stated the county only pays a total LESS than 36% for all their contributions for all your benefits, pension, health, dental, medicare, etc etc…
Am I suppose to believe that everything aside from pension is paid for with ONLY 4% of your base salary.
Sorry, but for this person struggling to understand, I don’t see how the math works given your explanation.
This document is factual, or they wouldn’t be giving a link to the CCERA at the end….if you have any questions.
In fact I’m not certain this document isn’t produced directly in conjunction with your CCERA. Look at page 55.
Now you refuse to answer the most basic questions.
Contrary to what you have said, it appears that the county is indeed spending well in excess of 50% of base salary on all their other costs to hire county employees.
ALL the compensation costs, not just some you suggest are listed on your pay stub.
You have tried to make reader here believe that in total they only spend less than 36% of base salary for everything they pay for you.
I simply don’t believe that and this document seems to completely dispute that.
I have tried to work in a manner to uncover the truth but it appears that as I get CLOSE to seeing the true picture, you now want to begin again with the name calling.
Accusing anyone who is reasonable of being in bed with Borestink.
I think any reasonable reader can begin to see what is going on here.
I would suggest you or some other employee drop your attitude and make realistic answers to the questions.
This document does not appear to be telling lies.
The numbers they give appear to be accurate.
Just take that one number for a very very large group of employees.
Six Thousand…….6,000…. employees are in the General Tier 3 category. SIX THOUSAND!
They pay 5.66% of payroll for their pension. The county pays 32.04% of payroll.
Yet you suggest here that IN TOTAL the county may only pay less than 36% for everything… pension, medical, dental, life, medicare, all the other costs they are required to pay.
Four percent to cover everything else….?
That doesn’t pass the test of logic.
That doesn’t pass the most simple math test.
So it prompts me to ask some simple questions, which apparently you now refuse to answer.
I am trying to learn, so that as you suggest, I won’t be sucked in by “Borestink”….. but now perhaps he has lots of this correct, because you seem to be unwilling to explain it, throwing in all the usual stuff to obscure what we are discussing.
I wish someone with a cool head, would answer and explain the obvious problems I have pointed out.
I do not think we are getting the whole picture.
I do NOT believe that the ConFire pension is paid for with ONLY a 40% total contribution when the similar Sheriff’s pensions cost the more normal 81%…
The notes indicate the other money is being used to make up the difference.
You CANNOT fund a 3% at 50 pension fund with only a 40% total contribution (worker and employer combined)…
The notes at the bottom of those tables suggest that taxes of some sort are paying for the other needed 40%…
Again, I don’t know all the details, but I am not math illiterate.
So there are some issues. I raise them again.
Perhaps someone else can give a better explanation instead of suggesting that the “entire” contribution for everything by the county only adds up to 35.98% of base pay. Something is left out.
Again, the state….
On page 42 it says
“In Contra Costa, for every dollar being spent on salary, we spend 40 cents on pension, and ANOTHER 41 cents on other benefits.
I am willing to believe that over 80% isn’t precisely true and of course it includes higher cost for safety employees, but probably a whole lot closer than some other figures I see posted.
Even for regular non-safety employees such as those in General Tier 3, 36% seems impossible.
However that 80% figure is very close to what agencies like San Jose and Oakland pay for their police and fire in total benefits, pension and other. A $100,000 officer/firefighter costs the city over $180,000 in total comp (without overtime).
Their regular employees, probably in the 50% to 65% range.
Just trying to get a true picture of the facts, since everyone is saying “Don’t trust the CC Times”.
I think I am reasonable in my questions. Let us see.
Irish Mouse,
*SIGH* You don’t get it. It’s not a matter of entrance exams, hating public employees, or any of the other drivel you spew. It’s a simple matter of these compensation/pension packages are UNSUSTAINABLE. It doesn’t matter which politicians or govt bureaucrat signed off on these various contracts. Do you understand that? What DOES matter is that they are fiscally reckless and will be virtually impossible to honor. Look at Spain, Greece, France…or just today, the crybabies throwing a fit in London. When “something” becomes economically impossible to continue, austere measures are introduced. CA is broke…bankrupt at the state and local levels. You’re an accountant, you understand bankrupt, right? I know scores of people from the prviate sector who had pensions slashed and eliminated, healthcare benefits reduced and eliminated. It sucks. But it happens. So cry me a river about what you’ve “EARNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”
And really, one or maybe two exclamation points would have sufficed.
Walt, fire districts in CoCo are funding almost entirely through property tax dollars. Mid 90 percentile in ECCFPD and around 90% as I recall for ConFire. That’s why it’s stated it’s covered by tax dollars, though what function of government isn’t when you think about it. Fire does not receive general fund dollars. It can’t.
Part of the reason the whole discussion is convoluted and can’t be presented in the manner that Borenstein likes to do is because of this difference in the funding models.
Have you forgotten that in years past salaries were kept lower in exchange for deferred compensation? Do you know when the figures that pay for fire were locked in?
CoCoNuts…
I don’t have all the answers. I do realize that CCERA is dealing with many different entities, departments, job titles etc.
However, in the case of the missing ?25% or 40%? that would bring Con Fire up to a “total” percentage in the similar range as that of the Sheriffs, and that is apparently not listed because it is paid for by taxes of some sort, possibly property taxes.
In that instance, what I was saying is that the money is still being paid by the employer, the people.
As such we are still talking about compensation for the total benefit package (pension, medical, dental, medicare, etc etc…) in the ranges I was suggesting.
Meaning from 50% to 80% of base salary (without overtime)..
Obviously police/sheriffs and fire are higher than other county, district, agency employees.
I suppose I am just getting tired of many public employees being in some denial about the total cost of their total benefit package as a percent of their base salary.
If you make $100, don’t believe the employer is only kicking in another $35 to cover everything.
I suppose it is possible, but when “everything” is counted, I’ve just never seen such a low rate in public employment in many years.
I find it almost impossible to believe that any of the employees we’ve been discussing, in any of the agencies, departments, or groups, have a total benefit package (including pension) where the employer is paying only 36% as mentioned here previously.
It may be that in the case of Mouse, getting 2% at 55 is just fine.
Although from reading some it seems if you stay past age 60 or 62, that 2% for some districts, agencies, counties, etc, progresses to 2.4 or 2.5 percent for each year of service.
At any rate, it may be that for example a person who works from 25 to 55 and takes his 60%, that is fine.
It is very good for that individual, hardly some tiny pension in the real world of such.
That would be and is fine if the pension plan is fully funded. It would seem the current consensus is that overall, the public pension funds are not fully funded and that the public will end up having to pay even more to meet their legal duty to pay a defined benefit pension. Should further funding be required to pay those pensions then it means that the true percentage the employer paying today are essentially even larger, but not being paid now.
What irritates some is that when we discuss this, many public employees say that without question they are already contributing a very large amount.
That is when the issues of who and how much each party is really contributing comes up.
Even if the public employees truly feel they are contributing a very large amount, it makes little difference if the future is headed into a unfunded situation.
States, cities, counties and agencies are all heading into the future and it looks like the sufficient money will not be there because the projected returns are higher than most experts suggest will be possible. But the legal requirement to pay the pension will still be in place.
But every time people bring up these issues they are accused of hating cops, or not being appreciative of public employees.
All manner of charges fly about. They say, why don’t you apply for the jobs…. etc etc.. as though that would change the pension picture.
I also get the picture that not all public employees really know how much the employers really pay to give them all their “total benefits” including pension.
That is why we see such outrage when I suggest that almost all public agencies pay in the 50% to 80% range of the employees base salary for these benefits.
They either don’t understand the concept, or can’t believe they are getting so much.
I am not saying every public employee is overpaid or even that every pension is too high. Some are….and many more are under funded. There have also been some very obvious abuses of the system.
I see in that document that still, to this day, many employees in some agencies are being entitled to from 280 to 466 hours of vacation into their “final year” calculation for pension purposes.
Now, I am not entirely clear on this but if you can add in….sell…that many hours of vacation or leave, you could boost your true final year income by as much as 20% and then get X percent off that for a pension.
I’m sure not everyone can or does do that, but according to page 11 and 12 of the following, it suggests some still can.
http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/DocumentView.aspx?DID=4556
Clearly many of the issues that the CC Times brought up were valid, as are the very real concerns about pensions funds remaining financially sound.
Because SB-400 passed in 1999, public agencies went rather crazy over the next few years. Granting unsustainable and retroactive increases in pension promises.
Excessive… Yes, those pension increases were excessive.
Not every worker got those increases but many groups did and now it has led to concern.
You have to ask yourself why the county says what I quoted before from that document…
“In Contra Costa, for every dollar being spent on salary….
we spend 40 cents on pension….
and another 41 cents on other benefits….”
See page 42 of that document.
http://www.co.contra-costa.ca.us/DocumentView.aspx?DID=4556
Most public employees posting here seem to suggest that statement is a lie.
I don’t think it is, when you count everything involved.
BTW, that statement doesn’t even include any future unexpected unfunded liability.
Walt, please do not confuse the fact that Con Fire Employees pay 24 – 27% of salary as that number being the equal amount of the total contribution to the CCCERA. That 24 – 27% is equivalant to 60% or more of the total retirement contribution, with the employer paying 40% or less. And you are correct that a few years back when the economy was strong and the budget was better the former Fire Chief fully paid off the Pension Obligation Bond for every memeber of the department with money from reserves….fully paying the load for all current and former employees at the time.
Walt,
I’m too throught witht his but……………..what Borestink neglects is the County in all of it’s “wisdom” (NOT) decided a gazillion years ago to adoppt the pay-go system which is they don’t pay a dime into my pension until I actually retire. All vested dollars as my contributions. Well a few years back GASB said “no-no you can’t do that” and now they are in a freakin spin. As a result they try to blame the employees for the screw up and the public buys it. The CCERA Board which is comprise of 3 employee elected members and 6 county appointed members including John Gioia who put himself on there doesn’t help matters much.
Does Borestink ever bring up that the majority of the CCERA board is County appointed and not employee elected???? Does he bring up the fact that things are a mess because of the “pay-go” system the County used????? Does he mention that most of the money in the fund is employee moneis???? Does he bring up how CCERA has bailed the county our by paying the County contribution out of CCERA profits in the past??? Or that CCERA bought County Buildings as a way to bail the County out in the past?????? Nope….he is a mouth piece for the County in its attacks on employees…..Another thing he doesn’t bring up is the “double dipping” done by most management as they retire then come back under contract for 2,3,4+ years. Yep they get thier $60,000+ a year in retiremetn and also make $80,000-$90,000+ a year under contract. Amazing how he doesn’t report that. And he has been told about it but for some reason it is easier to attack Firefighters, Deputy Sheriffs, Engineers, Clerks, Nurses etc…………And you Sir are as bad as him.
Like I said earlier I hope you have an emergency and no engine company shows as you don’t deserve the best and the bravest this County has to offer.
Comments on this entry are closed.