Why should the public be saddled with the “burden” of public worker pension debt?

28 Dec

Here’s a letter I sent to the Enterprise Record in response to the editorial run Monday – “CalPERS keeps loading public with huge debt”.  

In answer to the editor, I’ll ask why the taxpayers should be stuck with the “burden” of public employee pensions? 

At Chico Area Recreation District, for example, management has only recently started paying into their own pensions – at a rate of 6.25 percent.  “Classic” management members pay 2 percent. For 70 percent of their highest year’s salary at age 55. The current CARD director makes over $110,000/year in salary.  

The median household income in Chico is about $43,000/year, while the average city of Chico worker makes over $80,000.  Many public safety workers and  most of city management make over $100,000, plus perks. Why can’t they contribute more than 12 and 9 percent, respectively?

The state mandated that “new hires” – that’s an employee who has never been in any public retirement system – pay 50 percent. Why aren’t existing employees asked to pay 50 percent?

Our current mayor, and vice mayor, and two council members are or have been enrolled in the public retirement system. The spouses of two others are enrolled in the system.  Does this make it difficult for council to demand more from our city employees? 

Join me at chicotaxpayers.com to demand that  public “servants” pick up more of the tab for their retirement.

For some reason, Little failed to post that editorial in the online edition. That is a physical job, requiring intent. Little once admitted to me that he doesn’t print every letter he gets in the paper edition, but chooses instead to post them online. So, it’s definitely a choice he makes, whether or not to post in the online edition.  

What? Didn’t want to open the editorial to discussion on Disqus? 

So, something tells me, he’s not going to print my letter. Well, there it is. I hope the rest of you will give him your two cents.

NOTE: I contacted the San Jose Mercury register, a managing editor told me the editorial had been written by one of his co-workers. He explained to me that the ER is owned by the same company at the MR, and has permission to reprint.

So, this is “local” journalism?

Advertisements

3 Responses to “Why should the public be saddled with the “burden” of public worker pension debt?”

  1. bob December 28, 2016 at 6:12 pm #

    For some reason, Little failed to post that editorial in the online edition.

    He did, just to the wrong Web site! 🙂 Poor Little, he’s lost his mind. 🙂

    http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2016/12/21/editorial-calpers-keeps-loading-taxpayers-with-pension-debt/

    • Juanita Sumner December 29, 2016 at 5:14 am #

      Wow – the shit is hitting the fan! Lately I’ve seen similar stories in other papers and a story on tv said CalPERS was going to be cutting benefits.

      But have no idea what happened to David Little’s ghost editorial. I have it in my mail box in the “print edition online,” but it hasn’t hit the online version yet.

    • Juanita Sumner December 29, 2016 at 8:04 am #

      And here it is again in the Mercury News:

      http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/12/22/editorial-calpers-again-falls-short-of-addressing-deficit/

      OMG – whole sections of Little’s editorial match the Mercury News piece as though they were lifted – did he keep his piece offline because he was afraid to be charged with plagiarism?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: