Posted on 12/16/2005 9:02:42 AM PST by NormsRevenge
If you are among those who cling to the politically fashionable view that San Diego's financial troubles are due to the simple fact that our taxes are too low, think again. A special watchdog report by Union-Tribune staff writer Steve Schmidt and research analyst Danielle Cervantes documents a very different explanation – one that the city's powerful public employee unions don't want told.
The real truth is, for years San Diego has been run more for the benefit of its unionized work force than for the benefit of taxpayers. Consider these fundamental facts:
In Los Angeles, a city with a bloated public payroll and politically muscular bargaining groups, fully 58 percent of the general fund is consumed by wages and benefits for municipal workers. Yet that is a pittance compared to San Diego, where a staggering 80 percent of the general fund – four out of every five tax dollars you pay – goes into the pockets of city workers in the form of wages or other benefits.
In San Diego, the city's general fund employees are paid an average of $66,500 a year. By comparison, private sector workers in San Diego make $21,500 less, or an average of only $45,000 annually. So much for the argument long advanced by union leaders that city workers deserve fat pensions and early retirement packages because they are paid less than their counterparts in the private sector. If that ever were true, it plainly is not true today.
When pensions, health coverage and other perks are taken into account, the average city worker receives a stunning $101,800 a year – far more than is the norm in San Diego's private sector. Oversized retirement checks account for most of the costs of the fringe benefits of city workers.
In fact, as far as pensions are concerned, San Diego municipal workers are in a league all of their own. Where else can veteran workers retire with pension checks that are 120 percent or more of their highest-year paychecks? In a bid to sustain this lavish retirement plan, the city has tripled its annual payments to the system in the last five years. Yet, incredibly, this unprecedented hike in payments has not been enough, not nearly enough, to keep up with ever-growing pension costs. As a result, the plan's funded ratio has plummeted to 65 percent or less, from approximately 100 percent in 2000. At the same time, the plan's unfunded liability has reached $2 billion and growing when retiree health coverage is included.
Since 2000, total personnel costs for the city have soared by $234 million, or 52 percent. During the same period, the general fund has grown by only 38 percent, to $857 million. Is it any wonder, then, that the City Council has had to close swimming pools, reduce library hours and cut back on street maintenance and other basic services in order to keep up with rapidly escalating personnel costs?
Mayor Jerry Sanders was elected on a pledge not to raise taxes to pay for the extravagant benefits of city workers but rather to reduce personnel costs across the board. The disturbing numbers compiled by Schmidt and Cervantes for the special watchdog report demonstrate that Sanders is headed in the only sensible direction.
Thar's still gold in them thar civil positions. Time to move to san Diego.
Look for the public employees union bankruptcy label.
San Diego needs a violence tax on moovies - it's for the children
Jeez. When I worked for a San Diego-based state assemblyman I only made $42,500 and worked 50-60 hours a week. I was told that everyone there makes lower salaries than elsewhere because they get "sunshine dollars" (i.e., people will work for less money to live in a sunny and warm place). Guess that doesn't count for bureaucrats.
From what I understand, housing in San Diego is very expensive.
I think there's now a sunshine pay premium because of the horrendous cost of living.
I'm thinking of leaving the US because I can't stand living in a cold-weather climate, but all the warm weather states are too expensive :-(.
D
If 80% of funds are spent solely on personel costs they need to be firing a lot of folks. Even in labor intensive businesses like nursing homes, personel costs are around 60%.
Ever try to fire a worker in the People's Republic of California. It ain't that easy. America's Finest City (about 25 years ago San Diego may have merited that title) will ultimately be forced into bankruptcy by the unions and the City Council they control.
Don't think they're hiring.
My brother and his wife just bought a condo in SD last month. Something like 1200-1300 sq feet and it cost them over $480K.
Yes, it is. But the point of this article is that people in the government sector -- IN SAN DIEGO -- are paid much more than people in the private sector. That's basically socialism -- the government workers live like kings, and the non-government workers live like serfs, and have to scrimp and save so they can pay taxes to fund the benefits of the government workers.
"From what I understand, housing in San Diego is very expensive." """
The point of this article is that San Diego's government workers are paid much more than San Diego's private-sector workers. That's basically socialism -- the government workers live like kings, and the non-government workers live like serfs, and have to scrimp and save so they can pay taxes to fund the benefits of the government workers.
This is not exclusivbe to San Diego by any means.
The biggest voting block in the State of Oregon is present and former public service employee union members. There's been a half baked effort to reforms PERS (Public Employees Retirement System) for several years with little effort. In short, the PERS Board was made up primarily of PERS beneficiaries, and voted themselves absurd mandatory rates of return on their pensions.
There are towns in Oregon that have to lay people off in order to pay their share of PERS.
The city of Portland, OR pays their teachers in the top tier nationwide. Part of the package is health insurance that costs over $1100.00 per month per employee in the whole system. They even get acupuncture and massages paid for on their plan.
At the same time there is active discussion of a regional income tax in the Portland area "to pay for our children's schools". More accurate is that they need the money to keep up with the hemorrhage into the local Teacher's Union.
San Diego is playing catch up...
This is not exclusivbe to San Diego by any means.
True.
In a typical gov't school budget, 90% goes to teacher salaries.
In a typical gov't school budget, 90% goes to teacher salaries.
...and the administrators tolerate this? ;-)
The problem is twofold, allowing the existence of public employee unions (they should be banned...again) and not having lifetime term limits imposed on elected officials at ALL levels of government, from dog catcher to the POTUS.
The greatest personnel costs and highest percentage of general revenue funds go to public safety employees, not the typical public works or cleical employee.
This has been a trend in California cities (and nationally) for quite some time.
Public safety pay and benefits, including lush retirement packages, are the reason that such a great percentage of municipal general funds are being consumed as personnel costs.
The reason? Public safety employees have a lot of political clout and local politicians will give them the moon to gain their endorsement.
San Diego should consider a violence tax on Hollywood moovies - it's for the children
Maybe they can pay for it like Illinois.http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1542074/posts?page=1
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.