Tuesday, October 7, 2014

Captain Obvious Says: 2013 CalPERS Payout Costs Are Now Available Online at Transparent California

-
(Mod: Over on the California Policy Center site there is the following big announcement regarding Transparent California. The very same source that broke the stunning news that our very own City Hall offers city employees here what are just about the highest costing health care benefits in California.)

California Policy Center - 2013 CalPERS Payouts Online at Transparent California (link): CalPERS financial struggles are draining state taxpayers. The ever-increasing contribution rates it demands from state and local governments have already bankrupted several cities. Even for more financially stable agencies, increased CalPERS contributions have crowded out other spending priorities or tax relief.

While discussions about unfunded liabilities and projected rates of return are necessary and important, the average member of the public is too busy to dive into the details.

That’s why the recent release of CalPERS’ 2013 base payouts, including retiree names, on TransparentCalifornia.com is so important.

For the first time, average Californians can quickly and easily see how much CalPERS paid out to retirees in 2013. The names and payouts are available here.

Even a casual glance at the data, shows the root cause of CalPERS’ financial struggles: It’s paying tens of thousands of its government retirees pensions that dwarf what private-sector households make while working full-time.

(Mod: Equally intrigued by the latest news from TransparentCalifornia.com is Captain Obvious. Apparently the Captain has been doing a little research on his own there, and yesterday dropped off some information he asked us to share with you.)

Dear Mr. Tattler, Captain Obvious here.

When Transparent California reported they’d uploaded the 2013 California public pension reports, I checked it out. Imagine my delight when I discovered that Los Angeles County pensions were there, too!

I thought, who would Tattler readers know among those recipients? Lo and behold, I found the name of the leader of the Yes on UUT tax increase effort, yes, Sierra Madre’s recent Mayor, the one and only Nancy Walsh.


You know, the woman who never met a tax increase or a water rate hike that she didn’t like? A person who continues to strongly advocate for City Staff pay and benefits increases, even as recently as last month?

Let me share a little Captain Obvious math:

$ 99,201.96 divided by 12 months = $8,266.83 per month. For us paycheck to paycheck folks, that’s $1,907.73 per week.

Let’s say Nancy averaged only $90,000 over the 12 years that she’s been retired.

$90,000 x 12 years = $ 1,080,000. Let’s round it down to a cool one million $$.

This is the same Nancy Walsh who scolded the citizens and said that it was “shameful that the City of Sierra Madre didn’t do more for its seniors.”

I guess that’s true. Look what LA County is doing for her as a senior in her Golden Years.

Question: What has Nancy Walsh really done for the Seniors of Sierra Madre? What financial support, if any, has she personally given to Sierra Madre’s Senior program? What has Nancy done with the over $1,000,000 she’s collected, courtesy of LA Taxpayers, since 2002?

A pension paid for by taxes collected from working stiffs like you and me. Working stiffs who can only DREAM of a $99,201.96 per year pension. Plus COLA increases.

(Mod: Damn. I forgot to ask Captain Obvious what a "coastal cluster" is. Oh well, maybe next time.)


Tonight's City Council Special Meeting

The City Council is trying to move the General Plan updates forward, despite all of the foot dragging in certain downtown precincts. What this means is they're talking land use and water tonight. Issues that are kind of big in this town. Here is how City Staff limns the excitement in this evening's meeting agenda:


The rumble is scheduled to begin at 6:30 pm. You are going to want to tune in for this one!

http://sierramadretattler.blogspot.com

62 comments:

  1. Cpt. Who else is on that list? What are they receiving?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yes, inquiring minds want to know!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is all there for those who look.

      Delete
  3. It's none of your business. Just keep paying your taxes!

    ReplyDelete
  4. it's a ponzi scheme

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is, to use the term, unsustainable.

      Delete
    2. I know that is a rabble rousing word, but it really is not capable of being sustained.

      Delete
  5. Is there a tax I can vote against next month?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are a couple of big ones. Read your voter information booklet.

      Delete
  6. A coastal cluster comes with chocolate, nuts and nougat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And, in Nancy's case, a double helping of hubris. What a colossal waste of money!

      Delete
    2. Why California is going down the tubes. It a nutshell. And I do mean nut.

      Delete
    3. Makes me want to find a saner place to live. And one that has water.

      Delete
  7. With income like that, it means that Nancy is now qualified to be a "Sugar Mama".

    ReplyDelete
  8. We're making millionaires out of government office managers! How special for us!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is like the British aristocracy. Our money, their pleasure.

      Delete
    2. Where are the Platinum Pensions for Sierra Madre residents?

      Delete
    3. At the end of the rainbow. The unicorns are guarding it.

      Delete
  9. Personally, I don't think the majority of Sierra Madre cares. They like to have their own opinions but never go to a council meeting to voice them. They don't seem to even be aware of what they're losing. It is disheartening to say the least. Someone on the blog yesterday that were already part of the L.A. Sprawl. I wonder if he even lives here or thinks that living on top of each other is a fun exciting thing. Guess we'll never know.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I saw those comments. I think somebody was lookjng for someone to fight with. As far as I am concerned "sprawl" is just one of those words city dwellers use to express their hatred for tiwns like ours. They want to stack, pack and bus us into oblivion. We need to tell them where to get off.

      Delete
    2. That's the biggest problem of all 10:23 - too few people getting informed about city business. That means that too small a number gets stuck with all the chores of keeping up on the materials and attending meetings, instead of participating a reasonable amount & then having a break. No wonder we get so tired of it. I'm hoping that the new Preserve group will solve that.

      Delete
  10. Walsh, and one million taxpayer dollars. Cognitive Disconnect.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is city staff next?

      Delete
    2. Wheel Of Calpers! (Formerly known as Wheel Of Fortune.)

      Delete
    3. Every LA County employee a winner winner winner. And every LA County taxpayer a loser.

      Delete
    4. Never vote for anyone with a Calpers pension.

      Delete
    5. 2:43, you're a millionaire hater. That's not civil.

      Delete
    6. Class warfare! Class warfare!

      Delete
    7. Is it class warfare when the taxpayers paid for the million $$

      Delete
    8. No. It is tribute money given to the people who provide services we are so fortunate to enjoy.

      Delete
  11. Nancy did arrange to get the profits from recycling of printer cartridges from the county (not sure what section). Those monies partially paid for the remodel of the interior of the Park House and will pay for the infamous storage room. Those monies do not come out of her pocket except for taxes which we all pay.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OK, so Nancy was able to take printer cartridges that were paid by taxpayers. Then, instead of LA County getting the $$ from recycling (and saving taxpayer $$), then Nancy took that money and gave it to the Seniors? Do I have that right?

      Delete
    2. As I remember it the battery recycling program was a COG effort.

      Delete
  12. Have you all heard that our Albertsons is closing, or am I the last to know?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just heard the other day.
      Odd business choice - they had a captive audience, no matter how shoddy they got.
      Wonder what will be there.

      Delete
    2. Albertson's was bought out by an investment group called Cerebrus Partners. They are the folks that bought Chrysler when it was a heartbeat from death, cleaned it up and then sold it to Fiat. That is what they will do with Albertsons. Clean it up and sell it to somebody. Trust me, Cerebrus cares nothing about the local situation here. They will do what they think needs to be done to make some cash. That's it.

      Delete
    3. Maybe they'll bulldoze that plaza and put up something new?

      Delete
    4. Ask Nancy Walsh. May she can get a Fresh N' Easy put in.

      Delete
    5. 12:52, if Cerebrus "will do what they think needs to be done to make some cash", maybe they'll get a LA County pension, too!

      Delete
    6. that Albertson's should have been closed years ago

      Delete
    7. Oooooh 1:07, what if they put up Section 8 apartment buildings, to match the ones to the north?

      Delete
    8. That place has been almost empty for years. Why would anyone be dumb enough to repeat that mistake?

      Delete
    9. Great name for a distressed properties remainder company.

      Cerberus (/ˈsɜrbərəs/;[1] Greek: Κέρβερος Kerberos [ˈkerberos]) in Greek and Roman mythology, is a multi-headed (usually three-headed) dog, or "hellhound" [1][2][3] with a serpent's tail, a mane of snakes, and a lion's claws.[4] He guards the entrance of the underworld to prevent the dead from escaping and the living from entering. Cerberus is featured in many works of ancient Greek and Roman literature and in works of both ancient and modern art and architecture, although the depiction of Cerberus differs across various renditions. The most notable difference is the number of his heads: Most sources describe or depict three heads; others show Cerberus with two or even just one; a smaller number of sources show a variable number, sometimes as many as 50 or even 100.

      Delete
    10. 1:35, low-income housing? Maybe. Good luck going to Pasadena Planning Commission and telling them its a bad idea.

      Delete
    11. Maybe Albertsons can get Nancy Walsh to save them.

      Delete
    12. Nothing that a few wayfinder signs wouldn't fix.

      Delete
    13. They're low income units all the way through the process. Then they go on sale at market value.

      Delete
  13. This could be an interesting meeting, but city staff is doing everything they can do to make it as boring as possible.

    ReplyDelete
  14. How sweet! Like that 121 build out number wasn't what they wanted all along.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The General Plan rewrite has been going on for 5 years. Why isn't it done yet?

    ReplyDelete
  16. What does sustainability actually mean? Why is that funny?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Matt Bryant, great speaker.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tattler, please get Bryant's speech and publish it. The guy is saying everything we all need to know.

      Delete
    2. General Plan needs to be approved!!!!!
      People who wrote that are more qualified than any consultant! !!!!!!

      Delete
  18. KGEM is breaking up again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I called them. They assured me everything will be great next week.

      Delete
  19. Excellent point about changing "encourage" back to "ensure" or even better, "require".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is how you turn steak into hamburger mush.

      Delete
  20. The meeting is over? KGEM is not playing it live, just the tape. Early night?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And the tape is full of stops and skips....

      Delete
    2. Enjoy your services.

      Delete
    3. If only Nancy were here to save us.

      Delete