59 Comments - Qui Tam - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 5:15 pm: =”The court doesn’t say how the city should pay these benefits, only that it is responsible for doing so”….. “Which is nowhere.”= Disagree. It clearly leads back to the City. The Court isn’t supposed to micromanage the City’s contractual obligations, it just determined that the City has a legal requirement to honor certain contracts that it enters into. What does Brown want, for the Judges to sit in City meetings and determine a payment plan for every contract it executes? - Tone - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 5:20 pm: There is no money. It’s going to get ugly. - Yobagoya - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 5:23 pm: The Blue Model is failing everywhere. What we need is more Blue Model. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 5:32 pm: More revenue, less service, a mix of both. If you are ignorant to that reality, maybe you should not operate heavy machinery… - Tone - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 5:32 pm: Supreme Court can’t rule against math. - Tone - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 5:34 pm: Privatization as well. No more pampered public employees hiding behind a fundamentally unfair Constitution. - AnonymousOne - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 5:36 pm: If the city can get into the mess, it is their responsibility to get out of the mess they created by their own free will. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 5:39 pm: ===No more pampered public employees hiding behind a fundamentally unfair Constitution.=== Nope. The Unions will win that. Nice try, lol - forwhatitsworth - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 5:48 pm: Isn’t it about time for all the BIG BOYS to “Man Up”? - RNUG - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 5:52 pm: Court to Chicago: Not our problem; ball’s back in your court. - NoGifts - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 5:56 pm: Really, it’s like hiring a payroll company to manage your payroll. You can’t short the bank account and claim that it is the payroll company’s problem. - forwhatitsworth - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 5:56 pm: ===No more pampered public employees hiding behind a fundamentally unfair Constitution.=== Unfair Constitution for who? The clauses you pick and choose for you? - forwhatitsworth - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 6:03 pm: ===Supreme Court can’t rule against math.=== The Supreme Court has no responsibility to rule on math problems. Their job is to rule on law. - Juice - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 6:08 pm: Tone, you do realize that the pension protection clause was approved via a vote of the people, don’t you? - Anonymouse - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 6:10 pm: — a fundamentally unfair Constitution. — Give me a break. The Constitution is *the people*. It’s the voice of the people, ratified by the people, representing the people. There are a lot of unfair things in life — like rich white guys buying political races — but the Constitution is not one of them. It’s the definition of fairness because *it’s us*. Even you, Tone. - Diogenes in DuPage - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 6:11 pm: Shame on all those “pampered public employees” for personally crafting the constitutional language, personally negotiating labor contracts, and then not resigning and refusing their earned pension benefits when the courts rule to protect those benefits. Heaven knows that ALL of them fail to work as hard as some TONEdeaf people. It never ceases to amaze me that the people who complain the loudest about public employee pensions usually refused to seek work in PUBLIC service OR would never work for wages that low OR would never hope to retire on the retirement earnings of so many of these public employees. If I were Rich Miller, I would say, “Bite me.” - Yobagoya - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 6:22 pm: ===Supreme Court can’t rule against math.=== Wish the same could be said about Democrats writing laws that defy math. - Yobagoya - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 6:24 pm: Anymouse, what color is Madigan? Is he rich? - CapnCrunch - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 6:30 pm: “More revenue, less service, a mix of both. If you are ignorant to that reality, maybe you should not operate heavy machinery…” Probably shouldn’t leave your house unless accompanied by an attendant. - ex-ISU - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 6:44 pm: “The Supreme Court clarified that even if the pension funds become insolvent, and arguably they already are,…” The ISC has been willing to order payments in this year of no state budget. Nobody has asked the ISC to order pension payments because there has been no default, yet. Based on the recent ISC court actions, the courts might order pension payments (at least require minimum payments into the funds) the next time somebody asks them to do so. - Keyrock - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 6:44 pm: We are back where we started. And where we started is with a political class that won’t face the reality that we need to have higher taxes, and a better managed government. Rich Daley failed us. He spent imprudently, and wouldn’t raise taxes. The aldermen then in office failed us. They went along, for the price of their discretionary funds. Rahm failed us. He came into office and kicked the can down the road. Even now, he’s trying to avoid the necessary tax increases and changes. The current aldermen have also failed us. On the state level, several governors and many legislators have failed us, especially including the current Governor and the Four Tops. (Of all people, Pat Quinn, for whatever his limitations, actually did take responsibility and address the problem.) Neither Speaker Madigan, nor Governor Rauner, nor any of the other legislative leaders, want to take responsibility for doing what needs to be done. The State needs to raise the income tax (and should pass a constitutional amendment for a progressive tax). Retirement income should be included. Some financial relief should then be given to local governments, especially Chicago. Patronage fiefdoms should be eliminated. TIF funds should be redirected. Unnecessary layers of government should be removed. Etc. But there are no grown-ups here. - Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 6:49 pm: Public pensions, and the constitutional language that protects them, are not fundamentally unfair. I will say, however, that the way the IMRF has been managed (requiring the actuarially required investments to be made, and leaving no unfunded liability that local taxpayers are stuck with) is infinitely more fair to taxpayers than the way the Chicago and state pension funds have been managed. - Anymouse - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 6:51 pm: — Anymouse, what color is Madigan? Is he rich? — Madigan didn’t buy it. He earned it. - NotRMiller - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 6:56 pm: Speaker Madigan and the Supreme’s he controls!!! Oh wait.. - RNUG - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:00 pm: == Nobody has asked the ISC to order pension payments because there has been no default, yet.== No need for a new order; the IL SC ALREADY has weighed in. In IFT and subsequent cases, they said: the pensions must be paid when due. The court hasn’t ordered funding of the pensions, which is the responsibility of the General Assembly. - RNUG - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:03 pm: == the way the IMRF has been managed == The State made everyone make payments into IMRF. Too bad the State didn’t follow their own directive. - Anonymous - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:09 pm: “- Anonymouse - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 6:10 pm:” You did not have to say “white”. That is unfair to white people. - ex-ISU - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:10 pm: RNUG - I agree that there is no reason to ask the courts to order payments at this time. My point is that they have now shown their willingness to step in at the appropriate time. That time might come in the next couple of years at the rate the debt is increasing. - West Side the Best Side - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:13 pm: The city is always able to find money for bread and circuses - planters in the middle of busy streets, bike/running/walking paths in the middle of gang territory- but not find it for its legal obligations to its employees.Yet Daley and Rahm stay in office.The media likes ribbon cutting ceremonies, it can’t spare the time and space until after the fact,if ever, to look into whether something like selling parking meters, the Skyway, etc. is really a good idea. And the Alderpersons …. too many banishment words come to mind. (Same with the Lucas Museum.) - Tone - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:34 pm: Of course it is unfair. No one gets a taxpayer guaranteed investment return but public workers. No one gets taxpayer guaranteed health benefits but public workers. The ISC can’t defy math. Fun times ahead for a dying state. - Arthur Andersen - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:35 pm: Too bad the City can’t cash in some wrought iron for pension cash. - Six Degrees of Separation - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:38 pm: Are government bonds unfair? Are Social Security payments unfair? Are military pensions unfair? All have a government backed return. - Tone - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:47 pm: Social security benefits can and are changed. No guarantee. Government can and do default on bonds. Illinois is headed for default. Supreme Courts can’t stop math. - Union Leader - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:56 pm: Here’s an idea, if it is legal. Instead of giving away TIF money for the next couple of years, divert it to the pension funds. - Tone - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:56 pm: 4th highest tax burden already. More taxes will surely solve our problems. - AnonymousOne - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:57 pm: Tone: Sour grapes - stumped - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:58 pm: Every political hack is waiting till the November election to safe guard their positions before any budget and pension deal is reached, which will be 2017. I just don’t understand why does t the mayor and state offer union employees early retirement and give them a portion of their pension all up front for them to manage in exchange for surrendering the remainder value. If a retiree gets around $2 million in pension, just give them 1$ million upfront. It’s a win win situation for the government and retires . Just sayin… - Yellow Dog Democrat - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 7:59 pm: Privatization is a terrible idea. It doesn’t reduce obligations. Besides, most of the pension obligations for Chicago are police and fire, which cannot be privatized. We had privatized fire protection in the old days. It didn’t turn out well. Policymakers should consider the opposite: how do you grow Tier 2? Because Tier 2 employees pay in more than they receive in benefits, they reduce pension debt. Your options are to either convince a bunch of Tier 1 employees to retire early, which shouldn’t be hard, or reverse the privatization that has occurred over the past decades by expanding pension benefits at the tier two level to state contractors providing public services. - RNUG - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 8:11 pm: == Social security benefits can and are changed. No guarantee.== Exactly right. SS does not have a protection clause in the US Constitution. Totally different situation; doesn’t compare. - Tone - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 8:40 pm: TIF money won’t come close to solving the problem. And then what will all the useless aldermen use for funding affordable housing, Street repairs, school expansions, library upgrades and new play lots? - Tone - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 8:42 pm: Privatize the workforce ASAP. Eliminate programs and mass layoffs will help immensely. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 8:51 pm: ===Privatize the workforce ASAP. Eliminate programs and mass layoffs will help immensely.=== Won’t happen. You’re bitterness is comically tragic that you are blinded from reality. You’re like the Troll that tries to be angry but it’s endearing. Like “Grumpy” in Snow White… - Diogenes in DuPage - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 8:56 pm: ——You’re like the Troll that tries to be angry but it’s endearing.— +1 - Anon - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 9:04 pm: Tone — yes — massive, massive sour grapes. - AnonymousOne - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 9:21 pm: We all make choices. Many of my friends made 2-3 times more my salary (with less education) in the private sector and thought I was a fool to work for such a pittance in my publicly paid career. Vacations when I couldn’t afford to go, etc. You all know the drill. Fast forward to retirement. Their envy of my pension is not attractive. I have to wonder why they didn’t invest and save for their retirement instead of living so high and laughing at me. I have lost some of those friends over this issue. But I tell them we all make choices, Tone. - Lester Holt's Mustache - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 9:26 pm: ===Privatize the workforce ASAP. Eliminate programs and mass layoffs will help immensely.=== Mr. Governor, surely you have better things to do with your time than posting comments on Capitol Fax? - Thoughts Matter - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 9:27 pm: Tone -feel free to suggest a Constitutional amendment to change the pensions, which won’t apply to current workers due to contract law, and which is not needed because of Tier 2 already in effect. Do you get benefits where you work? You do realize that your employers customers are paying for those. Taxpayers approved the Constitution in the 70s.Taxpayers are the customers/employers of Public workers - who are also taxpayers. A lot of us could make more money in the private sector. So privatize us - it will cost you more. - RNUG - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 9:27 pm: == Privatize the workforce ASAP. == That actually makes the pension problem worse because it eliminates Tier 2 pay-in / pay-down and accelerates retirements, causing Tier 1 pay-out to increase. Eliminating outsourcing and increasing Tier 2 employees is what would actually improve the situation. - RNUG - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 9:32 pm: -Tone- Here’s the bottom line. You can fire everyone … if you can figure a legal way around the Civil Service Code. You can change the Illinois Constitution .. if you can get it on the ballot and approved by the voters. But you know what? IT DOESN’T CHANGE A THING!!! The State will STILL owe the pensions over $111B and will STILL have to raise taxes to pay the pension debt. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 9:53 pm: - RNUG - I feel your pain, bud. No one put more time here, or is turned to for analysis, as a commenter, on pension issues and gives of their time so openly like you do. - Tone - is Grouch Smurf or Snow White’s Grumpy… - Tone -’s schtick is endearing now, like those two, a comic relief based on the caricature of misinformation. It’s almost… endearing. I don’t like to see you get upset at the caricature. You’re one of the good guys, much respect as always… - Arthur Andersen - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 9:56 pm: RNUG is too nice to post that he could have bailed from his State job and made a heckuva lot more money, just like AnonOne and Thoughts Matter note above. Even old AA was once worth a lot more in the private sector than in the public. But, we all stuck around, and our pensions are due and payable. - illinois manufacturer - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 9:59 pm: Rauner is still saying …..pass his version of the Cullerton plan. - RNUG - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 10:04 pm: - Oswego Willy - Like you, I’m starting to feel -Tone- is my personal pet troll to play with. I was just having some fun at 9:32. - Oswego Willy - Thursday, Mar 24, 16 @ 10:08 pm: - RNUG - Oh! In that vain, please continue. With that prism it’s actually quite comical, lol. - Watcher In The Middle - Friday, Mar 25, 16 @ 12:00 am: “Here’s an idea, if it is legal. Instead of giving away TIF money for the next couple of years, divert it to the pension funds.” ————————— Unlikely. Only situation where that can happen is if there are no outstanding TIF Redevelopment bonds existing for the specific TIF district. IF outstanding bonded indebtedness exists, diverting TIF tax collections to purposes other than repayment of the TIF bonds (see repayment schedules for each TIF district) is a ‘no-go’. Plus, doing so would kill any attempt by the City to attempt any future issues any other type of bonded indebtedness. Sorry, no free meal there. Maybe a one-time snack, but that’s about it. Btw, in case you don’t realize it, TIF in most cases isn’t a ‘give away’. PART (only part) of the TIF money (actually callled ‘TIF Increment’ valuation) is going back to the businesses who actually invested in redevelopment of the City in what is supposed to be ‘blighted areas’. Now, if the areas covered by the TIF district(s) weren’t actually ‘Blighted Areas’, well, that’s on City Government and the Aldermen. Take it up with the pol’s. But if you don’t give the businesses the incentive to invest, well, they are quite free to take their money elsewhere if they get a better deal. Something to keep in mind. Just as a point to consider. Once a business gets ready to leave, it’s a nasty, hard slog getting them back. - blue dog dem - Friday, Mar 25, 16 @ 2:40 am: A little more revenue and a lot less service. - VanillaMan - Friday, Mar 25, 16 @ 7:45 am: No more pampered public employees hiding behind a fundamentally unfair Constitution. What you want is free government and all the free stuff that government does. Like a horribly spoiled brat who sits in one of the most modern societies in world history, you have absolutely no clue how you got where you are. You want to believe that you are being ripped off because you have to pay for yourself, and for others who cannot pay. You are confusing government service with getting a Whopper, and having it your way. Your market mentality shortchanges your citizenship and devalues everyone into a selfish twisted fun house mirror that lacks charity, values and ethics. Being an adult means accepting adult responsibilities. Being a citizen in a democracy means accepting the decisions made in a democracy. Being a civil servant means doing the people’s work in a respectable environment deserving of a people’s government. They need a union to keep people like you out of a system that has been refined since 1885 and has been evolving through constitutional laws and supreme courts. People like you who think they are being shortchanged whenever they have to pay more for anything in order to support things you don’t understand. If you want to go free-range and whole hog on your market ethics, then go ahead and make yourself sick with it. But don’t demand that we follow you into your pathetic world view. Governments need money to provide for the things they have been tasked to do by a voting democracy. Pay your taxes and cast your votes. Voice your disapproval and debate right here. But stop it with the crappy juvenile attitudes. - Grandson of Man - Friday, Mar 25, 16 @ 8:09 am: “No one gets a taxpayer guaranteed investment return but public workers.” Top earners paid ridiculously low state income taxes for decades, 2.75% average between 1969-2010. They were and are taxed at much higher rates in some of our neighbor states. Plus, the highest earners are protected by the state constitution from a progressive income tax just like government workers are protected by the pension clause. - burbanite - Friday, Mar 25, 16 @ 8:19 am: RE: What color is Madigan? http://www.chicagotribune.com/ct-rauner-warns-of-long-overtime-20150521-story.html There are millionaires and then there are multimillionaires. Most millionaires I know have no problem paying a little more, while the multimillionaires ie. Gov and buddies, want to hang on to every penny while those they deem not worthy suffer, while disingenuously touting “shared sacrifice”. Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.