City budget hawks such as David Walker, former U.S. comptroller general, and the dogged John Marshall Lee often address the burden of pension costs on Bridgeport and the state of Connecticut. A study by the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College examines proportional pension costs of cities. Bridgeport ranked number 43 among the 173 U.S. cities examined for city pension costs/revenue.
See report here.
The Connecticut Post has more on this story here.
This Friday morning Walker will join U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal, Congressman Jim Himes and others in a panel forum on Debt, Jobs & Growth at the Hartford Club, 46 Pratt Street in Hartford. The forum will focus on state fiscal challenges and fostering economic growth.
Walker will make a presentation addressing federal and state fiscal and competitiveness challenges, including comments about cities such as Bridgeport. The forum is sponsored by the Connecticut Business & Industry Association, Connecticut Voices For Children and No Labels.
“We know what we have to do now,” Bridgeport Finance Director Anne Kelly-Lenz said. “We know what our number is every single year. It’s set us on a path to fiscal sustainability.”
Anne, I am so happy that Anne and City Hall knows the number, aren’t you? After all “sustainability” is a goal for all. But has this info been shared with the City Council? Is this “path” public?
And are the existing Pension Obligation Bond payments that absorb $31 Million of public safety budgets each year part of the calculations?
When sustainability is mentioned, you need to look at the ‘assumptions’ for these long-term plans. If you assume 8.5% (as legislators have allowed in the past because it will cut down current contributions from taxes, for instance) but real returns for both up and down investment return years are less than that, greater contributions will be required to gain sustainability. Where is the watchdog for taxpayers? In a presentation made to Budget & Accountability each year?
Finally, we pay actuaries some $34,000 approximately each year to do the calculations necessary to know where we are. With the change of active Plan B Police and Fire from City Plan B to CT MERF plan in the past year or so, what calculations have been made to account for the Overtime compensation now allowed in the MERF retirement plan that was not present before. If that has not been included in a study, Anne, how can we consider our current state sustainable?
Finally, how well are we doing on Pension plan funding, etc. at the State level and which one of our State Senators or Representatives have discussed the subject publicly? Time will tell.
*** “POLITICAL MINDED” FUTURE CITY CONTRACTS THAT ARE AGREED TO WITHOUT REALISTIC PLANNING ON ACTUAL FUNDING OF BENJAMINS FOR THESE PENSIONS, HAVE IN THE PAST AND CONTINUE TODAY AND INTO THE FUTURE TO PLAGUE THE TAXPAYERS OF BPT. *** TIME FOR A MOVE TOWARDS A CONTRACTS AND B&A COMMITTEE MOVE TOWARDS WORKING WITH AN EXPERIENCED INDEPENDENT LEGAL FIRM TO HANDLE CITY CONTRACTS AND THE CITY’S YEARLY BUDGET. ***
*** Knowing the number is not achieving sustainability, it’s merely making numbered assumptions, no? *** BACK TO FINANCE BASICS 101 ***
The big problem in Bridgeport is not underfunded pension plans, it’s the almost $1 billion in unfunded retiree health benefits.