77 Comments - Demoralized - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 11:54 am: ==Local control of bargaining== Changing collective bargaining at the local level isn’t going to happen. == Local control of bidding and contracting== Eliminating prevailing wage requirements isn’t going to happen. He’s been told no on these items for 3 plus years and he continues to push the same thing over and over. Move on to something else. - DuPage - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 11:55 am: Calling Elgin State Hospital, report of someone making insane statements. - 47th Ward - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 11:57 am: ===We’re not only shifting pension responsibilities to where the decisions are made on what the pension costs will be in terms of deciding who gets what salaries, when they retire, what their terms are. We need to align responsibility for decision-making with responsibility for paying.=== So he agrees with Madigan now? He’s three years too late. - Perrid - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 11:57 am: Agreed, if he gave the schools time to try and renegotiate contracts then maybe it wouldn’t affect property taxes. This would mean cutting teacher’s salaries, and thus benefits, of course, but he won’t say it in those words. “Teachers get paid too much(Exclamation Point)” doesn’t usually go over too well. And as always, what is “reasonable”? Just because non-Union/private workers get a worse deal, does that make them the gold standard? Typical conservative race to the bottom argument. “The minimum wage should be $0; if someone is stupid enough to work for a dollar a day they should be allowed to let themselves be exploited until the starve.” - Hamlet's Ghost - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 11:57 am: Statements such as these should disqualify Bruce Rauner from re-election. But that leaves us with Jeanne Ives - Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 11:58 am: ===Local control of bargaining. Local control of bidding and contracting. Local control of consolidation. Local control of shared services. Local control of property tax levy. We will bring down our property tax burden and we’ll align our interests and get more money for our schools and it’ll be a win on every level. That’s how we’re gonna do it.=== As Rich says, it’s all fantasy, there is no way in 4 years you shift this burden to local schools AND lower property taxes by destroying labor… if Rauner could even get Labor, and that includes the trades, to a point they no longer have any place at the table. It’s reckless, disingenuous, and is phony to what Rauner craves in actuality, the destruction of Labor, not the holding of property taxes, or reducing that cost to “taxpayers” If Rauner was honest, he woulda let his Raunerites vote for property tax relief, less the labor destruction. Labor destruction first, property tax relief.. second. So, a fantasy exists. Rauner can shift costs, reduce property taxes and do it in 4 years… just let him destroy organized labor. Pure. Fantasy. - ArchPundit - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:02 pm: ===Local control of bargaining. Already exists. ===Local control of bidding and contracting. Already exists. —-Local control of consolidation. Already exists. —-Local control of shared services. Already exists. –Local control of property tax levy. Already exists. All of this is weird, but the local control of consolidation if you are pro-consolidation is the problem. There is no incentive to consolidate many of the primary or secondary districts with each other. Now, assuming he’s talking about getting rid of the teachers’ unions with his local control of bargaining–because districts already have local control of bargaining itself—does he really think the costs of labor including pensions will be adjusted downwards enough in four years to lower property taxes? If so, he’s losing connection to reality. Even if you got rid of collective bargaining wages would be sticky in those places and the districts would still be competing for talented teachers especially in a shortage. - Aldyth - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:04 pm: Facepalm. Seriously, dude? - Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:04 pm: Anyone can say anything, as Rauner does. It’s up to informed people to realize that most of what he claims, as in this piece, is just smoke and mirrors. Who wants that in leadership? - Dan Johnson - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:04 pm: I still think we should aggregate health care costs for all school districts and tie all those insured lives into the Medicaid hospital assessment package and require hospitals (which is where the bulk of health care spending comes from) to accept Medicare rates for all teachers and staff in the state. Paying marketplace rates for each school district is a real cost driver and hospitals consume the vast bulk of those dollars. Come on working groups — just throw that in there in the final package…. - Back to the Mountains - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:05 pm: Not sure what is scarier: his ideas, or the fact that he actually believes them. - Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:06 pm: “Local control of bargaining.” Rauner has caused massive damage to the state because he doesn’t have 60 and 30 votes in the GA. Thankfully enough Republicans passed a tax hike, which should help blunt some future effects of Rauner’s hostage-taking - Lucky Pierre - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:08 pm: Well we can count in the Democrats to support zero policies that will reign in government spending resulting in lower property and income taxes. After all they are not “change people”, they like the system as is and the insiders it benefits just fine. - Dance Band on the Titanic - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:09 pm: “Local control of property tax levy.” Rauner has spent three years running around saying he wants a freeze to override those who are locally elected to have decision making authority over the property tax levy. In what version of reality is that “local control”? - JS Mill - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:19 pm: =Local control of bargaining. Local control of bidding and contracting. Local control of consolidation. Local control of shared services. Local control of property tax levy. = What he clearly does not understand is simple vocabulary. We have “local control” of al of these things. I have been doing it long enough to know that. He does not want “bargaining” he wants telling. And even more so he wants salaries to be cut. Not a good plan for an economy. K-12 is an enormous economic engine in any state. Cost shift should happen. And it should be controlled locally. Just like SSI and IMRF districts should make the decision as to how to pay for it which could include Levying for the funds. Neither Rauner or Madigan want that, but allowing schools the decision locally is what local control is all about. What Rauner wants isn’t really local control. - Annonin' - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:23 pm: OK Now Ds can run an ad calling for voters to stop the GovJunk property tax hike. Does he not realize local bargaining exists today and that is how we got six figure police salaries and end of career windfalls. Most locally elected folks are not penny pinchers - Retired Educator - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:24 pm: Slight of hand. I will give you this while I steal your wallet. The Governor missed his calling, he should be an Illusionist in Las Vegas. Everything he does is smoke, and mirrors. He is really clueless at this governing thing. - RNUG - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:25 pm: The only thing the local school districts control is the salary. They don’t have any control over the actual benefit formula, which the State controls. So a lot of what Rauner claims is not factual. - Fixer - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:26 pm: Madigan and has he Bruce Rauner he controls… - Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:29 pm: “Local Control” is great says Rauner, when it’s the locals who will wear the jacket for the tax increases he’s forcing on them. Out the *other* side of Rauner’s mouth: “We have too many levels of government for every little thing… we need to consolidate and reduce all the Bar-Ock-ra-see.” Watching the guy talk is like watching Bugs and Daffy argue if it’s rabbit season or duck season. - wordslinger - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:29 pm: Ignorant, dishonest or a combination of both? I used to think that Rauner was wholly dishonest until he canned the Superstars. Since then, he’s revealed himself to be remarkably ignorant, too. So, I go for the combo. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:38 pm: So the cost shift is thinking about school districts that some feel over pay. How’s the cost shift for pensions going to work for school districts with low ability to pay? I can now hear the unfair shout. - Michelle Flaherty - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:39 pm: Imagine if a school board said it was hiking retiring teachers’ pay and the result would be a state income tax cut. - Jocko - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:41 pm: According to WebMD, some of the symptoms of Legionnaires include a high fever and confusion. Has Bruce been cleared medically since visiting Quincy? /s - Demoralized - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:51 pm: LP Destroying public sector unions isn’t about saving money for him. - G'Kar - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:55 pm: ==The only thing the local school districts control is the salary. They don’t have any control over the actual benefit formula, which the State controls. So a lot of what Rauner claims is not factual.== There, RNUG, as always, concisely makes my point. - illini - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 12:57 pm: When Rauner, his agenda and plans, are criticized by the Belleville News-Democrat one has to realize that even they think he is delusional and unrealistic. Just more evidence that he may have finally lost the final bit of any credibility he may have once had. - My Button is Broke... - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 1:15 pm: If the Governor is proposing to make TRS & SURS more like IMRF, then maybe total pension costs would be reduced over time, but I can’t imagine property taxes going down at all. However, there doesn’t seem to be talk about this. TRS would still set one normal cost rate for the entire state. So even if a school district is frugal, those savings would be spread across the state, and if a school is lavish, those costs would be spread out over the entire state. Just like credit card fees. If everyone used cash, then retailers wouldn’t have to pay credit card processing fees (around 2%) and could lower prices. But no one person has an incentive to pay cash because they don’t receive the savings, but would forego any potential points on their credit card. - Smitty Irving - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 1:17 pm: Retired Educator - Thank you for your comment, helped me remember what the inspiration for the Governor’s proposal is - Dan Walker’s smoke and mirrors for the Illinois Lottery and education funding. - Rich Miller - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 1:18 pm: ===the Illinois Lottery and education funding=== As everyone who was ever in Zeke Giorgi’s office knows, the lottery was originally intended to help mass transit. - Chris P. Bacon - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 1:21 pm: Rauner saw Orwell’s ‘Animal Farm’ as a “how to” instead of as the intended cautionary tale. - Joe M - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 1:22 pm: Its all part of his fantasy to bust teacher and other public unions. Other than “blame Madigan” busting public unions has pretty much been his disillusion solution to everything. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 1:27 pm: I’d be in favor of making TRS and SURS more like IMRF. It would never happen because contributions to IMRF may not legally be skipped. Where would all that free money TRS and SURS provides (via theft from employees) come from then? In addition, IMRF members also pay into Social Security. TRS members cannot through their teaching jobs, at least No skipping payments for IMRF/Social security like retirement sounds far better than having your retirement savings stolen and spent on others. - JoanP - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 1:29 pm: I want whatever he’s smoking. - Smitty Irving - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 1:32 pm: Rich - Never was in Giorgi’s office. Lo those decades ago when I first moved to Illinois (right before the 1st $40 M Lotto winner) people were complaining about how the Lottery receipts weren’t “added to” education funding but was “offsetting” State reductions. - I Miss Bentohs - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 1:33 pm: I am still baffled how this man with his money does not understand some basics. We as CFO’s, and the former Director of GOMB, felt like we were banging our head against the wall trying to convince him of the simplest of truths. - Joe M - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 1:35 pm: Next Rauner will be telling us that shifting the pension and health insurance costs to the state universities and community colleges will bring down tuition. Or has he already told us that? - dr. reason a, goodwin - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 1:47 pm: I know a local district that gives 6% raises to teachers each of the last three years before their retirement. They don’t care about the big bump for the pension because they don’t have to pay it. The responsibility should definitely shift local. - Blue dog dem - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 1:55 pm: Seriously. Rauner knows. Everyone with a half a brain knows. The next governor is going to have to raise taxes. Lots. Doesnt matter where they come from. Lots and lots of taxes. Eventually this is how Rauner wins. He knows he wont be the next governor. He knows the next round of tax hikes are going to have to be so large that it jeapordizes the established party. This is how he wins. Gonna take a few years. Maybe a decade. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 1:56 pm: It would be unChristian to call Rauner a #%^*#{{}%%^, so I won’t. - Henry Francis - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 2:01 pm: I think everyone should take into account that if you can get someone to think they are buying some used computers when in fact you are selling them a nursing home full of liabilities, then you too might very well think you could sell anyone anything. Forgive the man for his hubris. - PublicServant - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 2:02 pm: ===It would be unChristian to call Rauner a #%^*#{{}%%^, so I won’t.=== God will forgive you…trust me. - Mama - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 2:13 pm: It appears our governor is trying to turn IL into Kansas. - DuPage Bard - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 2:13 pm: Local control is already present on property tax freezes. DuPage County hasn’t increased their portion of the levy in 8 years. Rauner doesn’t understand policy, as we saw with his butt kicking by Jeanne, while DuPage County hasn’t increased their percentage of the levy the property taxes have still risen. that is due to assessed value within DuPage County. When he understands the policy of what a tax freeze is as compared to a freeze of the levy let me know. Until then why doesn’t he debate Ives again and take another policy beating. Maybe he can use a single sound bite from her in an ad as opposed to his mumbling, stuttering, chuckling lack of intelligence? - Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 2:18 pm: 6% bumps? ELiminate them. That’s an easy one. - Demoralized - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 2:21 pm: ==6% bumps? ELiminate them. That’s an easy one.== Tell your local school board. Those bumps at the end of career are normal. Some used to be more but they were capped I think when Tier II passed. - Skeptic - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 2:28 pm: ===It would be unChristian to call Rauner a #%^*#{{}%%^, so I won’t.=== I’m atheist, maybe I can offer assistance? - Sue - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 2:47 pm: Rauner didn’t create the pension obligations but he sounds really dumb saying on one hand he wants to shift the costs to local districts but he will then help lower property taxes. The state should look to reduce the costs it controls wages. Nd benefits since pensions are beyond their ambit - downstate commissioner - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 2:52 pm: ” #%^*#{{}%%^.” You forgot: “dumb” #%^*#{{}%%^ - RNUG - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 3:02 pm: == Tell your local school board. Those bumps at the end of career are normal. Some used to be more but they were capped I think when Tier II passed. == Technically, the amount the State would pay the pension payments on was capped at 6% a year. The school board can give a raise over 6%, but then they are on the hook for the additional pension. Damn … it looks like, at least in this small case, Rauner’s idea kind of works. - Sue - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 3:08 pm: RNUG- as the Tribune reported sometime last year- the school districts have largely ignored the caps and TRS and or the State has failed to pursue the money from the districts. The State has failed miserably over the past 40 plus years controlling pension costs and now transferring any financial responsibility to local school districts without giving them real bargaining authority over their pension costs is just BS - City Zen - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 3:12 pm: ==6% bumps? Eliminate them. That’s an easy one.== Slowly but surely, districts are finally starting to phase this out. At least the smart, transparent ones are. ==Those bumps at the end of career are normal.== Normal isn’t necessarily right. - PlayK8 - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 3:12 pm: Sue, they are only beyond their ambit because the State failed to pay their share. Do you rack up charges on your credit card and then refuse to pay because you spent to much? - RNUG - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 3:13 pm: -Sue-, thanks. I obviously don’t read the Tribune. - Arthur Andersen - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 3:30 pm: RNUG, never trust Sue as a source for anything about TRS. She must have been turned down for a job there or something. The Tribune (the intrepid Diane Rado) did find that a number of districts north of I-80 continued to pay end-of-career amounts greater than six percent. They did not report any noncompliance by TRS in collecting amounts due from districts for those payments. I’m not a fan of paying people a “bonus” basically for providing advance notice of their intent to retire, which is why many of these payments arise. However, they also arise when teachers take on coaching positions, department head duties, become National Board Certified, and other merit or extra duty situations. - Arthur Andersen - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 3:31 pm: Oh, and by the way, Rauner is nuts. Forgot to say that above. - City Zen - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 3:46 pm: ==I’m not a fan of paying people a “bonus” basically for providing advance notice of their intent to retire, which is why many of these payments arise.== “I quit…4 years from now. Now give me a raise bigger than everyone else who isn’t quitting.” - Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 4:01 pm: Why don’t Rauner and GTCR manage all public employee pensions—I mean public servants’ retirement savings accounts—since Rauner said he and his parters did well for taxpayers? - RNUG - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 4:11 pm: == I’m not a fan of paying people a “bonus” basically for providing advance notice of their intent to retire, which is why many of these payments arise. == The theory is it helps the school district plan for replacement teachers in an orderly manner. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 4:26 pm: It helps school districts plan for replacement teachers as well as helping usher you out the door.Just as we see some of the most competent older workers in companies getting a buyout to get them to leave, so we have it in Education. Quite a simple concept. However, 6% would probably get a laugh in some of these company buyouts. People complain that experienced teachers at the end of their careers earn too much. Is that to be expected in every profession? You should earn more at the beginning and the least at the end of the career? So, yes many believe by getting rid of the higher earners will solve some problems but then we move to the retirement payments and folks don’t like that money either. - Morty - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 4:30 pm: *I know a local district that gives 6% raises to teachers each of the last three years before their retirement. That‘s only partially true 1) you have to give notice of the intent to retire, and locking into that benefit typically takes a teacher off the salary schedule for purposes on step or lane increases 2) the benefit only is available for teachers who have served a set number of years in a district- typically 15-20. If you don’t have those years you are not eligible for a “bump” 3) if you have been in district for enough years to recieve a “bump” you have typically been recieving longevity pay raises- usually anywhere from $250-$1000 a year instead of the base and step raises that other teachers in district recieve. - City Zen - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 5:26 pm: ==The theory is it helps the school district plan for replacement teachers in an orderly manner.== No employer needs 4 years notice to replace anyone. It’s quite easy to predict when most teachers will retire based on years vested anyway. No coincidence that these notices usually come around 30 years of service. - City Zen - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 5:32 pm: ==People complain that experienced teachers at the end of their careers earn too much. Is that to be expected in every profession?== It’s not that they earn too much, it’s that their pension is calculated on that minute portion of their career. And if those final years are spiked with raises not typical during that career, it skews the numbers more so. Find any successful professional and ask if they live off of 75% of their top career earnings (inflation adjusted) in retirement. I’d wager most do not. - Morty - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 6:35 pm: *No employer needs 4 years notice to replace anyone. It’s quite easy to predict when most teachers will retire based on years vested anyway. No coincidence that these notices usually come around 30 years of service. Not one of your brighter comments. Schools have difficulty finding the right candidate months ahead of the start of the school year. If a vacancy occurs right before a school opens (like a last minute retirement) then good luck finding a qualified applicant. Teacher’s have yearly contracts- any teacher who walks away from a district within 30 days before the start of the school year can have their license held for the year by the district. That part of the law is in the school code BECAUSE it’s so hard to replace someone so late in the game. If a district is into July and they haven’t filled a spot for the year they are in trouble Do you think district’s are so flush with cash that they hire candidates based on when they “think” someone might go? They don’t. At least none that I’ve been aware of. They can afford to hire once a spot opens. Hiring takes place from March to June. Panic hiring takes place in July. That’s because that is when evaluations go out, new applicants are graduating, and yes, people who have put in for retirement because they had an incentive to do so are finalized. If someone’s not in a spot by August chances are that spot doesn’t get filled- especially fot positions like math, science and special ed - Morty - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 6:46 pm: *Find any successful professional and ask if they live off of 75% of their top career earnings (inflation adjusted) in retirement. I’d wager most do not. Nor do most teachers. To get to 75% you have to have 34 years in the system. Many do not, therefore their pension is less (roughly 2.2% for each year short). And that’s only if vested. That’s 4 years. Roughly 1/2 the teacher’s leave the profession before that. TRS have stats on pension recipients- most earn around $50,000 a year. Which isn’t horrible- it’s better than Social Security, but hardly lavish, especially when the pension mostly makes a person ineligible for social security. - Morty - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 7:21 pm: *RNUG- as the Tribune reported sometime last year- the school districts have largely ignored the caps and TRS and or the State has failed to pursue the money from the districts. Not remotely true The law was passed in 2005 and exemptions were provided for existing contracts That means a district that signed a 5 year contract in 2005 could have fully complied with the law up until 2009 and still have been in compliance. Those penalties were ‘exempted’ by state law but, as usual, the Trib failed to disclose that．In fairness, they did disclose that many of the penalties since the expiration of the prior contracts were the result of miscalculating extra-curricular activities as Arthur Andersen mentioned. That‘s a far cry from ‘largely ignored‘ - Ole' Nelson - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 7:42 pm: Morty says “TRS have stats on pension recipients” Why would you assume that City Zen would be interested in actual stats (especially those that do not support his/her worldview)? What City Zen fails to realize is that replacing many positions in K-12 schools is becoming more and more challenging. The lowering of Illinois pension benefits will not likely cause an influx of quality teachers into the profession. - Jibba - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 8:11 pm: You are all thinking about this wrong. He actually meant it would bring all the school districts down. And he meant it. - Anonymous - Tuesday, Feb 20, 18 @ 10:34 pm: Local government that employees people should pay retirement benefits of those people. It’s real simple. - Demoralized - Wednesday, Feb 21, 18 @ 7:54 am: ==Local government that employees people should pay retirement benefits of those people.== If you are talking about local government’s in general, they do. And they don’t get to short their payments. - City Zen - Wednesday, Feb 21, 18 @ 8:53 am: Morty - You did an excellent job explaining the need for a one year notice. However, I said 4 year notices are not necessary (really, multiyear). In my school district, the common practice was to max out the notice at 4 years per the contract, until the practice was phased-out. I am not aware of any teachers that give just a one year’s notice. Not saying it doesn’t happen, just doesn’t make sense financially when you get a bigger raise by promising to quit years before you actually quit. And it’s obvious to anyone when this notice will occur. Give me a teacher’s age, years of service, and accumulated sick day balance and I can predict when they will retire. It’s not hard. - City Zen - Wednesday, Feb 21, 18 @ 8:57 am: ==TRS have stats on pension recipients- most earn around $50,000 a year. Which isn’t horrible- it’s better than Social Security, but hardly lavish== You left out a crucial component: years of service. $50,000/yr isn’t a windfall, but it’s not bad for 28 years worked. - Demoralized - Wednesday, Feb 21, 18 @ 9:15 am: ==$50,000/yr isn’t a windfall, but it’s not bad for 28 years worked.== Tell me, how long do you think someone should have to work? - Demoralized - Wednesday, Feb 21, 18 @ 9:16 am: Why is there this incessant need by some of you to complain about what someone else gets? - Occam - Wednesday, Feb 21, 18 @ 11:47 am: ==Why is there this incessant need by some of you to complain about what someone else gets?== Because I have to pay for it…And my children…And my children’s children. - Demoralized - Wednesday, Feb 21, 18 @ 11:50 am: ==Because I have to pay for it== Not just you. Those that get the benefits pay as well. It’s petty and juvenile to complain about what someone else gets. - Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Feb 21, 18 @ 11:53 am: ===Because I have to pay for it…And my children…And my children’s children.=== “Because taxpayers” Who is not a taxpayer? (Sigh) Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.