View as PDF
Jim Tobin, president of Taxpayers United of America (TUA) will discuss with Pam Zekman exclusively, the ‘Cushiest Illinois Government Pension Deal’.
10:00 p.m. news on Channel 2 WBBM TV Today, Monday, April 29
Be sure to tune in to hear Jim discuss the results of our latest government employee pension study – you will be stunned!
View as PDF
CHICAGO —All across the country, millions of government pensioners are contract-bound to receive lifetime pension payouts, each in the millions of dollars, along with taxpayer- funded, premium healthcare insurance, according to Rae Ann McNeilly, executive director of Taxpayers United of America (TUA).
“There has been a flurry of reaction to the ‘discovery’ of Alameda County Administrator, Susan Muranishi, securing an excessive lifetime annual payment of $423,000. We have completed analysis of government employee salaries and pensions in nineteen states across the country and while Ms. Muranishi’s pay is on the high end of the scale, it just isn’t as uncommon as you might think.”
Peter G. Mehas, retired from the Fresno County Office of Education, annual pension – $241,807; est. lifetime payout: $9,357,534
Tapas Das Gupta, retired from the University of Illinois, annual pension – $426,885; est. lifetime payout: $8,337,549
Frank A. Fairbanks, retired city manager of Phoenix, AZ, annual pension – $246,813; est. lifetime payout: $7,404,386
Irene Mitchel, retired from the Pennsylvania Higher Ed System, annual pension – $332, 017; est. lifetime payout: $9,960,523
“Alameda County, CA (ACERA) had fourteen pensioners receiving eight-figure pensions in 2011, the highest being $17,824,590 estimated lifetime payout to Gary Thuman, based on his annual pension of $396,102. This is what he is being paid not to work.”
“Alameda County government teachers have a real sweetheart deal too. Christine A. Lim, retired from San Leandro Unified and enjoys $239,092 in annual pension payments. Her est. lifetime payout is a stunning $10,436,359. Not bad for ‘civil servant’. The top 100 Alameda County government teacher pensions average $5.5 million.”
“How did pensions ever get so outrageous?” asks McNeilly. “These grotesque pension payments have far exceeded any possible original intent of adequately compensating ‘civil servants’ for meager wages that lean government budgets could barely afford for basic services. No, the pension scam has become the number one tool of corruption for top government union bosses to stay in power and to reelect those that would make such deals with the devil. And to ensure the scam proliferates, lavish pensions have been awarded to the legislators who would vote on this issue. This keeps them protected by the state’s laws, and for judicial certainty, the very judges who might rule on any challenges to the system have themselves been made part of the conspiracy with gold-plated retirement security of their own.”
“Knowing all that we know about the desperate state of government pensions across the country, how then do some states continue to hide their pension largesse behind a shroud of legal secrecy? One might think pensioned judges wouldn’t protect their own pension payments from public review. But consider Colorado, where Denver District Judge Edward D. Bronfin ruled that the state’s own treasurer, Robert Stapleton, could not have ‘unlimited, unfettered access’ to the state’s PERA data, holding that individual names and pension amount are personal. When you consider that Colorado’s PERA has at least a $16.8 billion unfunded liability, it would seem the public will be picking up a majority of that tab and it should be open for review.”
“Colorado is not the only state that still hides pension payments from public review. To give taxpayers an idea of what the current government pension laws allow for, TUA estimated pensions for current employees, assuming they meet the terms of full retirement. The shear magnitude of these estimates explains why government bureaucrats maintain the shroud of secrecy. Consider current Colorado State employee, Robert K. Hammond, a Colorado State employee whose salary is $225,000. Under current PERA rules, assuming he meets all of the criteria, he would be eligible for an annual pension of about $168,750 that could accumulate to a lifetime payout of about $5.4 million.”
“Nevada is another state that keeps individual pension payouts from public review. The state keeps its approximately $11 billion in unfunded liabilities hidden as well. Ricardo A. Bonvincin, a corrections lieutenant, was receiving $435,658 in annual wages. Assuming he met all criteria for full retirement, he would have been eligible for an annual pension of $335,456, potentially accumulating to a stunning $15,961,017.”
“And so the list goes across the country.”
“Cities, counties, government boards are buckling under the shear magnitude of these pension promises — promises negotiated out of corruption and expanded to include all who would challenge them, such as legislators and judges. The current government-employee pension system is indefensible on any level. If contractual agreements are honored across the country, taxpayers will be required to sacrifice all their property to ensure that the ‘new elite’ keep pulling in the big bucks.”
“It is actually too late for pension reform, and time for pension settlement for existing pensioners and pension replacement for new hires. It is mathematically impossible to tax our way out of the government pension debacle, so what is left? Stockton, CA, is taking the bankruptcy path to dealing with its fiscal irresponsibility, which will allow it to reorganize its debt. Does every city, county and state government have to go bankrupt in order to fairly settle the incredible financial burden placed squarely on the backs of taxpayers as a direct result of this ubiquitous corruption?”
“But the debt is only half of the problem. Any city, county, state, or court that manages to survive the overwhelming pension crisis and allows the system to perpetuate under the same set of rules is acting criminally. It is time to end government pensions forever.”
Note: All pension amounts are based on 2011 reports generated on data received directly from each of the respective funds and the pension laws in force at the time of each study.
TUA’s work in helping local activists defeat 4 property-tax-increase referenda was featured in the Daily Herald.
Experts used to say the best time to ask voters for a tax increase is when there are fewer of them at the polls.
Tuesday’s election results in DuPage County show how much times have changed.
Despite less than 19 percent voter turnout countywide, four DuPage school districts were left licking their wounds after voters soundly defeated requests for more property tax money.
Itasca Elementary District 10 sought more tax dollars to fill holes in its budget. Wheaton Warrenville Unit District 200, Lake Park High School District 108 and Butler Elementary District 53 were hoping to pursue construction projects.
All of them lost.
“We went into this knowing it was going to be an uphill battle,” said Alan Hanzlik, president of the District 53 school board in Oak Brook.
Still, supporters were surprised when the district’s request to borrow $15 million to build a $40 million K-8 school was rejected by about 72 percent of the residents who voted on the measure, according to unofficial results.
A ballot question related to where the school would be built did worse.
About 76 percent of the Oak Brook voters who weighed in refused to give the village permission to sell Sports Core land to District 53 for the school.
Meanwhile, voter turnout for both ballot questions was more than 41 percent.
Hanzlik said he’s now trying to figure out what went wrong with the referendum campaign.
But with voters also resisting property tax hikes in District 200, District 108 and District 10, it’s possible nothing could have changed the outcome.
“The failure of a broad cross-section of these referendums indicates taxpayers are still hurting economically,” said Terry Pastika, executive director of the Citizen Advocacy Center in Elmhurst. “They are feeling the squeeze. They are feeling overburdened.”
District 10 officials said they had to seek $1 million annually in extra taxes to fill a budget shortfall that was caused, in part, by decreased state and federal funding.
That didn’t stop Taxpayers United of America from campaigning against the ballot question. The Chicago-based government watchdog group argued the district was seeking higher property taxes at a time when Itasca taxpayers are taking home less pay.
The end result was the proposal being rejected by nearly 60 percent of the District 10 residents who voted on it.
District 200 residents who championed a proposal to replace an aging early childhood center acknowledge the sluggish economy likely played a role in the measure’s defeat.
“We feel that the community didn’t say ‘No.’ We feel that they said ‘Not yet.’” said Dan Wagner, who served as co-chairman of a group called Friends of the Schools — Yes to the Jefferson Early Childhood Center Referendum.
District 200 sought voter approval to borrow $17.6 million to construct a new Jefferson Early Childhood Center and demolish the existing structure in Wheaton. Roughly 59 percent of the voters rejected the idea.
Without a November election, taxing bodies can’t seek another ballot question until March 2014.
District 200 school board President Rosemary Swanson said officials will take time to review the election results to determine what concerns voters had about the proposal. “We’ll work to see if we can find a plan that’s acceptable to them,” she said.
In the meantime, the existing Jefferson doesn’t match the program it houses. While two-thirds of the students have special needs, the building originally was designed as an elementary school.
Some students receive therapy in converted storage closets, while others use equipment set up at the end of hallways. In addition, some entrances and bathrooms aren’t accessible for students in wheelchairs and walkers.
“It (Jefferson) needs an overall redesign,” Swanson said. “And we do not have the money in our district funds to be able to do that without going to the voters to seek their support in the future.”
In District 108, officials say they don’t foresee the issue of an indoor swimming pool at Lake Park High School going away.
In fact, they said they’re encouraged by the results, in which roughly 55 percent of voters said no to both questions related to the proposed pool.
“We’re seeing an increasing level of community support even though it didn’t work to our favor this time,” Superintendent Lynne Panega said. “Maybe there is some traction. So we’re trying to focus on the positive and use this to move forward.”
