 |
 |
By BRETT WILKISON
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Sonoma County supervisors, in their first public meeting Tuesday on tentative job cuts for the next fiscal year, faced down what they said were two related budget scenarios.
First, several supervisors expressed relief that filling the county’s own $43 million gap may require a smaller number of job cuts than originally thought. The latest estimates call for elimination of 223 jobs and 63 layoffs, cutting the county workforce by 6 percent.
Previous proposals put job cuts at 300 to 500, with a much higher number of layoffs.
Supervisor Shirlee Zane called that larger estimate “shocking.”
Early retirements, spending cuts and fee hikes at some departments helped avoid steeper workforce cuts, officials said this week.
“Because of your hard work, we were able to soften the blow,” Zane told county managers.
But concerns about the state’s budget crisis dispatched any certainty about the county’s financial picture.
A standoff between Democrats and Republicans over proposed tax extensions tied to about half the state budget means much of the impact to counties — including the final layoff numbers — won’t be known until late summer, after the county wraps up hearings on its own projected $377 million general fund budget next month, administrators said.
“It’s not over until it’s over,” said County Administrator Veronica Ferguson. “We’re going to give it our best shot in June and then come back in September (on the state budget).”
Already, the county faces between $30 million to $60 million in cuts, mostly to health and human service programs, plus a permanent state takeaway of $15 million in early childhood education funds as part of budget legislation approved in March.
The fate and fiscal impact of other proposals, including a shift of low-level offenders to county jails, remains unknown. Most of those so-called realignment deals depend on extensions of taxes on vehicles, income and retail sales — the issue that’s now tied up in Sacramento.
Supervisor Valerie Brown, a former state assemblywoman, said the board should be wary of the state’s shifting proposals in county budget hearings starting June 13.
“This is the worst budget I’ve ever seen,” said Brown, the lone two-term supervisor. “We need to be as conservative as possible and hope we can add instead of take away more.”
A representative of Service Employees International Union Local 1021, the county’s largest union, told supervisors that rank and file workers have been impacted far more than management by the county’s cutbacks.
She cited an SEIU analysis of county workforce data showing the number of line workers has shrunk by more than 12 percent in the last four years, while management has shrunk by only 4 percent.
“It makes us wonder, if we’re cutting line staff, why we have these additional layers of management,” said Marcia Barton, an SEIU field representative.
Zane, who was backed heavily by labor unions in her 2008 election campaign, defended the county’s managers, saying many were doubling up with frontline duties.
“Which I think is important in these times,” she added.
The county’s proposed budget is due out before June 1.
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
It was union trying to get the Government body to go with a cheaper deal. The ethics are just fine, they have been trying to be part of the solution. Not all gov’ts are having any.
Let’s hope future union negotiators have better ethics.
I had not thought about the possibility of unfunded liabilities for medical.
Where does all this debt end? I say here and now.
This thread is about to be taken down anyways, so here is food for thought.
Here is a little tid bit from the bargaining table of one of the largest unions in Northern Ca, and Sonoma County. In 2007, 2008 and 2009, Offers were made to revamp the medical insurance programs for both retirees and current members to cheaper plans. Offers were made to extend the years of service to qualify for any medical in retirement, big savings. Offers were made to create a Retirement Health Savings program that would have eventually ended any government obligation in retirement. End of unfunded medical liability. We could have sold those programs to the voting members. It was rejected. They said No, Absolutely not. Later, when one of the unions went to the government with it’s own contribution and give back to help with the budget shortfall did we find out why. The reason the other plans were rejected for a more expensive option was because the government body did not think of it first. It was not their idea so they were not interested in it. I asked the pointed question, “They took a more expensive option instead of the cheaper one just because they didn’t think of it?” The answer told me a lot, “That is exactly right?” was the answer. Most of you think the unions are the problem. No amount of education will salve that, because the truth is almost too crazy to believe. Watch out who you vote into office. They are more powerful behind the scenes that you ever knew.
Bear makes a good point…kind of.
If this were a TV show it would certainly be a comedy.
I agree that the bail outs and stimulus is the worst government waste of all time. The figures show that private sector jobs were lost. We are currently slaves to the debt.
Taxpayer is partially correct. AB 961 ‘fell victim to public employee unions.
http://arc.asm.ca.gov/member/68/?p=article&sid=429&id=248356
It is my understanding there is a concession to comprimise through barganing. If that fails the bill will again be on the floor again in 2012.
In that sense AB 961 was fruitful.
That said, it is now the responsibility of the unions to come to the table to fairly negotiate in the interest of everyone. We will see.
I do expect that like our SSI program, the retirement age will be extended and heavy pressure will continue for a new pension system based on market returns, not bail outs.
http://calpensions.com/2011/05/05/public-vs-private-pension-study-the-gap-widens/
As this continues and people are hurt by laws,regulations and greed that deepen the debts and make elitists of some( public or private); the will of the people will be heard and revisions will be the basis of elections, not special interest spending.
Common Sense has it right, Valarie Brown is not part of the solution, nor is she responsive to local issues. Try and a get a meeting with her to discuss anything. Two voice mail and two email requests for an audience in the past six weeks have gone unanswered. She needs to stay out of Washington ans spend more time in her district.
Anybody but Brown
Why are the highest paid workers – department heads and the supes themselves not taking pay cuts. McGuire took 30%. No one else did. All dept heads and supes get take home cars and free gas or a car allowance $600 a month. The state cut Noreen Evans car to much whining. How about their cars.
They need to feel a little pain like the rest of the staff. It’s easy to cut others when u are not worried about yourself.
You folks need to watch more TV. There are ads running every half-hour that tell you how to evade taxes and credit card debt that YOU signed up for.
Demonizing public employees and threatening benefits earned over decades of service is nothing but a cheap, self-serving ideological tactic. By this standard, the entire federal government, including defense spending and corporate and other subsidies, ought to be out of business.
When that happens, I’ll support you.
Meanwhile, stop giving away subsidies and and cash to failed private sector businesses. Then impose realistic limits on the antics of the financial sector. Then stop the off-shoring of jobs and profits. Then stop the tax breaks that gave GE $3 billion in refunds on $14 billion in profits.
Until you do that, you’re either bought off or stupid. Which is it?
Make sure your grandchildren understand the answer to that question.
Monsoor pulled all his bills last week. They looked at the data and realized there was no way for fool everyone into thinking these funds were in that much trouble. I have friends who work for the county and the cities so I looked into the hype. No source could change the mind of people who want to take down others because the others have something they don’t have. Once the Stanford student’s study came into play, all was common sense was lost. I bet you have run the numbers or looked at their investments like I have. My returns a better only because of a few emerging markets that have blasted off. I understand why they avoided those, oops, but they are is good ones. The fact that the bonds are stuck in your craw shows you don’t understand. The bills are dead, nothing is changing for the present, class dismissed.
I agree GAJ. Now is a perfect time to repay those bonds in full so the County does not have to make further cuts to programs for children and the elderly.
Taxpayer. You have failed to submit any documentation to support your opinions…none.
Municipal bonds are supposed to be used for large infastructure projects that can not be funded otherwise. Not emergency pension bailouts.
It seems to me you are in the same position as the pension trust fund trustees. Begging for money on one hand declaring an emergency and on the other hand reporting questionable results and refusing reforms to the system.
Without supporting data, I continue to support State Assemblyman Allan Monsoor’s bill to ban collective barganing rights for pension plans. I also support eliminating the defined benifit program and instituting a 401K type of plan that is market based.
Nothing but the finaicial reports of the retirement accounts which are line and support the position that they are ok. You may not like the bonds, but they make perfect sense and are doing what they were designed to do, earn more thatn they cost. Sonoma county is paying out 6% and earning 16% so far this year. How is that bad? Yes, taxpayers are on the hook, but so far are not having to pay, other than their contributions, which the state and county knew about and expected. Bonds are not evil, they are a finacial tool. These tools are working. That cant be said for all the tools out there.
Fiscal Conservative.
What I’m hearing from “Taxpayer” is that there IS no problem.
If that is the case then the Pension Funds should stand on their own two feet with no “guarantees” from us and no bond measures to prop them up.
Finally, something we can all agree on then.
Problem solved.
So what I am hearing is that you have nothing.
Your opinions overlook the emergency bonds used to shore up the system.
and the constant request for more.
I think we can all agree it is a real crisis when the taxpayer is held responsible for principal ind interest on emergency bonds.
I sure would like some additional information showing experts sharing your opinions.
I won’t add links to the Stanford study, it can be found easily enough.
Did you know it was done by the students, not the faculty?
Quoting the study, “Adjusting the discount rate used on liabilities to a risk-free rate, we estimate the combined funding shortfall of CalPERS, CalSTRS, and UCRS prior to the 2008/2009 recession at $425.2 billion.”
That is taking a bond rate with a guarantee of about 3.5% to a fund that historically has returned over 12% in the last 20 years and over 9% in the last 30 years even with severe market dips. Their future liabilities are based on a return of 7.75%, recently reduced from 8%. The Sonoma County Retirement Board followed them and reduced theirs as well to 7.75%. CalPers earned 13.6% in 2010. The Sonoma County system had a gain of 20% in the month of March alone and is doing fine. The only time a dire picture is painted is when people throw out the actual returns these funds are earning and replace it with a risk-free bond rate the system was never based on. That is entirely political and counterproductive. It creates a false crisis. Like telling you your mortgage at 5% costs you $1500 a month. Stanford students- “If that rate were raised to 25%, you wouldn’t be able to make the $6500 payment, and you are on the verge of financial collapse.” Public- “But my payment isn’t going up to $6500 a month.” Stanford students- “Oh, but it could if it were recalculated using a higher rate!”. Public- “But it’s not going to be.” Stanford students- “Oh, but it could and your are THAT close to being wiped out.”
Why not just say the market will absolutely crash and never recover and the unfunded liability is $100 Trillion. It makes about as much sense. The market has been recovering just fine since the 2008 crash. Most funds and private accounts have recovered more that 80%. My own funds have gained 94% in 2 years. The market is fine if the managers are watching closely. Most of them are.
We are all welcome to an opinion. My opinion differs from yours.
The studies are not just Stanford University, but also Northwest University as well as Chicago University and several others.
I have cited some of my data. Please present yours. I currently don’t know of any prognosticators who have a differing opinion, so I look forward to reading your information.
I would not call the studies by these acedemics fraudulent or the other condemnations you have submitted. But again, I have not read your data.You may have proof that these studies are irresponsible and ignoring logic.
I don’t believe the Universities are hiding their studies nor are they recieving oversight from Federal monitors due to unexplainible logic.
The figures they have used are simple mathmatics. Where is the lack of data and facts? How is billions of dollars in debt outlandish and corny?
Please share your data.
Anyone who cites Opinion pieces and the Fraudulent/irresponsible Stanford study loses anything resembling credibility. That study ignores logic, facts, real data earnings and makes outlandish, unrealistic, corny projections. The opinions are also ridiculous.
Actually the facts are BS
State assemblyman Allan Monsoor has prepared a bill to ban the collective barganing rights over pensions becouse those in charge of the pensions will not discuss the issues.
I have supported open and honest talks to come up with a solution, but the stakeholders will not come to the table.
Here is what the figures are on the State and County pension systems. The County is not looking good for 2011 nor is calpers.
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20110313/WIRE/110319794?p=1&tc=pg&tc=ar
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20110504/ARTICLES/110509757
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20101130/OPINION/101129512
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/06/opinion/la-oe-crane6-2010apr06
As I posted previously, this is overwhelming debt that will cause cuts in the the basic services for our children,elerly and basic services to our communities. A debt so large our grandchilden and great grandchildren will be paying it.
Facts or BS?
The facts are BS!
http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/06/opinion/la-oe-crane6-2010apr06
http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20101130/OPINION/101129512
Good Lord help us.
MOCKINGBIRD we had to sell bonds to kept it afloat and the private sector has NO such protections.
Fairy tales and BS.
If you don’t know the answer to question, don’t make one up.
..
Fiscal said:
::Any percieved ‘evil economic policy’ was that of the unions who has sole care of the pension contributions. They made huge real estate investments in Las Vegas and other questionable holdings that are bankrupt. (my understanding only).
The unions now want the taxpayer to pay the benifit again, and again. They created an ‘unfunded liability’ for the union employers. The money is not there for the pensions, so therefore the taxpayer and employers are somehow responsible for the lost investment.
Federal regulators have become involved to monitor the insolvency of the pension accounts.Records are difficult to obtain.”"”
:
Really?
Calpers lost almost $100Billion in 2008. They earned back $70Billion in 2009.
Sounds like a lot, but their funds about about $250Billion, and growing.
The silliness about the DOW Jones speculation would be funny if it didn’t fraudulently try to inflate a weak position and do damage for na unknown reason.
Your info and facts are as flawed as global warming. And just as false.
Fiscal Conservative-the unions are not responsible for the county pension fund. The county does it’s own investing for the contributions from county workers. AND IT DOES VERY WELL when compared to other counties. The investment income was way down in 2008 but has been climbing in 2009, 2010, and looks good in 2011. Maybe you’re talking about private workers unions?
And Calpers isn’t union either.
Just thought you ought to know.
Bear, you are one funny person.
You complain about ideological whining but you’re the only one engaging in it!
I also agree with Mockingbird that most cuts are being borne by the lowest levels of employees.
Check your California history in terms of who took us out of the frying pan and put us into the fire.
“In 1999 then California Governor Gray Davis signed into law a bill that represented the largest issuance of non-voter-approved debt in the state’s history. The bill SB 400 granted billions of dollars in retroactive pension boosts to state employees, allowing retirements as young as age 50 with lifetime pensions of up to 90% of final year salaries. The California Public Employees’ Retirement System sold the pension boost to the state legislature by promising that “no increase over current employer contributions is needed for these benefit improvements” and that Calpers would “remain fully funded.” They also claimed that enhanced pensions would not cost taxpayers “a dime” because investment bets would cover the expense.
What Calpers failed to disclose, however, was that (1) the state budget was on the hook for shortfalls should actual investment returns fall short of assumed investment returns, (2) those assumed investment returns implicitly projected the Dow Jones would reach roughly 25,000 by 2009 and 28,000,000 by 2099, unrealistic to say the least (3) shortfalls could turn out to be hundreds of billions of dollars, (4) Calpers’s own employees would benefit from the pension increases and (5) members of Calpers’s board had received contributions from the public employee unions who would benefit from the legislation. Had such a flagrant case of non-disclosure occurred in the private sector, even a sleepy SEC and US Attorney would have noticed.”
http://neveryetmelted.com/categories/gray-davis/
Wow Bear, all that ranting over one simple question?
From my view your opinions do not reflect fiscal conservative democrats,republicans,independants or libertarians.
On your points..
The ‘so called’ unfunded liability is the dollar amount difference between the promised retirement benifit amount made by the unions and what they have left in the bank to pay.
Any percieved ‘evil economic policy’ was that of the unions who has sole care of the pension contributions. They made huge real estate investments in Las Vegas and other questionable holdings that are bankrupt. (my understanding only).
The unions now want the taxpayer to pay the benifit again, and again. They created an ‘unfunded liability’ for the union employers. The money is not there for the pensions, so therefore the taxpayer and employers are somehow responsible for the lost investment.
Federal regulators have become involved to monitor the insolvency of the pension accounts.Records are difficult to obtain.
Your opinions of an ‘ancient strategy’ seem off base and more like a twisted theory. They do not match conservative economic values.
Conservatives are in every political party. Google blue dog democrat.
Currently we are seeing local polititians who were once very progressive left, turn more conservative as the fiscal crisis deepens.
Let’s hope pension issues improve. In Sonoma County, one group has placed the current unfunded liability amount at over 1 billion dollars.Almost half that amount has been borrowed and we(the taxpayer) are paying interest on that amount.
That’s taxes our great grandchildren will be paying to fund the retirement of those who passed away in the previous century. Simply not sustainible.
That’s why I asked the question. It is the huge debt that will change how we live and how our government functions.
I’m not offering any ancient evil economic war loving republican anything…. I am asking the question about how much money your great grandchildren allready owe our municipal government and what can be done to fix this.
Hatred of political parties needs to be cast asside.
I agree that we are all in this together and that we need to work to rebuild this Great Nation.
@Bear,
Really?? Last time I checked the State of California had large budget issues, in which unfunded pension liabilities took a part. And where is your proof that Republicans alone were responsible for the pension liabilities almost every state including ours suffers from? This State has been led by a mostly democratic assembly and senate for years now, so how is that the Republicans are to blame for the current state of affairs in California, which by the way is the point of the article. So while you rant about party politics and out of state election results, you miss the point of the article. California is in financial trouble period. And guess what, the Federal Government isn’t going to being bailing out the states, so its time for us to get to work and fix our own issues first. We don’t have a revenue problem locally or within the state, we have a spending problem. We need to get back to core basics of government and get rid of the extras and work on eliminating waste/fraud, Period. It really doesn’t matter if you are a democrat, republican or a delcine to state in this situation, we will all experience the consequences of the overspending, some just in different ways then others.
The so-called “unfunded liability” for pensions is the DIRECT result of the delibertately evil economic and war policies of republicans. How many private sector employees have lost their 401K investments? We are all brothers and sisters in this situation.
Every lost job reduces the chances of economic recovery. Isn’t that the goal?
This is the ancient strategy of fiscal conservatives: build up a deficit and ignore promises to the middle and lower classes as an excuse to achieve “fiscal stability.” Any rational person could fix this in 30 seconds.
But pension issues might get better as the stock market recovers under a Democratic administration. You folks crashed, and now we have to fix your mistakes.
As long as it doesn’t involve YOUR interests, or YOUR property or YOUR lifestyle.
You want an economics debate? You want a class war? I really haven’t heard anything but ideological whining.
Just for laughs, check the results of the special election in New York District 26 – held by GOPs for 40 years. So sorry.
The tea party will continue to split the republican vote. A shame.
As a voter in Valeries district I beg to differ with her about managers. From my perspective the managers AREN’T doubling up on frontline duties. She should visit the various offices already suffering from huge layoffs of frontline people and see who is working with the public. It ain’t the managers. The extra duties are being done by the remaining frontline staff.
I didn’t vote for Valerie last time and I won’t vote for her next time. I hope Will runs again.
There MUST BE some way to blame this on the Republicans…
Oh, yeah… Arnold was a Republican! …well, kinda!
“This is the worst budget I’ve ever seen,” said Brown, the lone two-term supervisor. “We need to be as conservative as possible and hope we can add instead of take away more.”
Valerie Brown is part of our problem! we have already gone into debt with bonds to support their pensions and she needs to face reality.
Brett, was the unfunded liability for the pensions discussed at all?