Blue Chip city council challenger Ray Ellis has new help to topple liberal Sherri Lightner in District 1; this mailing by the California Republican Party. It features Ellis’ support for Props. A (contracting reform) and B (limiting City pensions). Ray Ellis has pledged not to accept a City council pension if elected. According to this SD Union-Tribune ‘Watch Dog” story, incumbent council member Lightner may over time collect an estimated $500,000 in City retirement benefits if re-elected in 2012. That’s not a misprint, the U-T foresees a $500,000 “expected lifetime benefit”. And you thought that YOU had a lot at stake in the 2012 election!
The outcome in District 1 will go a long way in determining which Party has majority control at the San Diego City Council starting in December 2012. A victory for Ray Ellis will likely mean a 5-4 Republican coalition.
So yes, sports fans, the race for Mayor is important, but so are the contests for the SD City Council. Please stay tuned to SD Rostra for more on these vital races.
DISCLOSURE: Ray Ellis for City Council is a client.
Comments 13
Jim,
How much is that Lightner pension on an annual basis and how does that compare to what she would have received if she put the same into a 401 K for eight years?
When you collect (or spend) any amount over a long enough period of time, it can sound like really a lot of money.
——————————————————————————————————–
.
Yes, $500K can sound “like really a lot of Money”. LOL. The link to the UT “Watchdog” report is right there in the story.
Jim Sills
I’ve looked at a LOT of pension plans. I’ve never seen anything that’s even CLOSE to the lucrative plan our San Diego Mayor and City Council get.
This pension is simply breathtaking. I’m amazed it’s still in place.
It’s an ASTONISHING money-grab, given how little the politicians have to put in, how big the pension is as a percent of salary, how quickly they “vest,” and how quickly they can start drawing the pension at an early age. Only outright crooks such as City Manager Rizzo (of the city of Bell) can approach such a deal.
I’ve written about this before. Perhaps I should post my analysis here on Rostra. again.
Jim,
You do know that we are not talking about an annual amount? We are talking about $500,000 over 30-35 years. Is that really one of the outrageous pensions you are railing against?
The UT article repeatedly made clear the figure is an “expected lifetime
benefit”. The Union-Tribune article did not state it would be over 30 to 35 years, however. Neither the UT story, nor my post, railed or expressed outrage.
It is disappointing to see Alger attack straw men.
Jim,
“incumbent council member Lightner may over time collect an estimated $500,000 in City retirement benefits if re-elected in 2012. That’s not a misprint, the U-T foresees a $500,000 “expected lifetime benefit”. And you thought that YOU had a lot at stake in the 2012 election!”
That was your quote. Were you not trying to rile up the readers and were you not at least insinuating that this sum was outrageous?
As for the the 30-35 year comment, I would guess that figure would be very close to Lightner’s actuarially projected lifetime after leaving office.
You, my friend, are the one who posed the straw man argument.
Geez, Alger, are you mad at the UT for doing the story, or just Jim for referencing it? On a conservative blog, of all places? Wow.
So, simple question: Will Lightner get a San Diego pension if she loses reelection?
What a nice photo. One of the best I have ever seen.
Where such city pensions get REALLY interesting is with young city council members such as (appropriately named) Tony Young. His pension is double Lightner’s.
While some of that increase is due to a few years he worked for Councilman Lewis, most of his $1,000,000 lifetime expected payout is due to his age. That’s because San Diego politicians have the UNIQUE ability to start drawing their pension the day the “retire” from city work. There is a penalty for that, but only 2% a year. And over time they make that penalty back because of COL pension increases (limited to 2% a year).
The smart move (though anti-taxpayer) is to draw the pension immediately. Except for two guys who opted out of the pension plan, they all do. Kudos to Carl DeMaio and Kevin Faulconer for putting the taxpayers first.
Alger inadvertently poses a good question — ” . . . how does that compare to what she would have received if she put the same into a 401 K for eight years?” His assumption, of course, is that the payouts would be about the same from a 401K. Insert “LOL” here.
Consider: Suppose she annually paid about $6K into a 401k as did her employer (a.k.a. the taxpayers). That’s about $96,000 put in. On the ninth year, she starts drawing her guaranteed pension of about $21,000 — PLUS 2% a year for COL increases.
I don’t have time to run the numbers, but EVEN Alger should be able to see that such a $21+K annual payout of that $96,000 (plus whatever was earned over 8 years — remember, the money is put in OVER 8 years, not at the start of the 8 years), would quickly deplete that 401k account decades before her expected “expiration” date.
And, just to be picky, let me point out that our current city council paid less than $5K annually until the recent change referenced in the U-T article. And to be even MORE picky, early investment money put aside is worth a lot more than money put in later. Or, in this case, a lot LESS.
Future value: I = P x R x T.
Jim is shy about the outrage. Let me inject mine here _____________
It’s an absurd pension as a percent of salary or for the retirement age — almost DOUBLE what Congress gets, for instance. Indeed, much better than ANY pension I’ve ever heard of! And I believe a city politician is “vested” from day one (not sure).
It’s a below-the-radar scam normally reserved for backwater water boards (like that term?). It was put in place in 2000 by a lame duck city council — when the U-T was essentially a regurgitator of government PR’s rather than an investigative paper.
And, to stick a fork in this Hotel California beast — remember that IN ADDITION our city employees (all but public safety — and including our elected city officials) get a full-matching “401k” plan as well!
No other city in the county provides such a lucrative second pension (though Escondido has a limited version of this).
Richard – to be “fair” (and I am not sure I need to be but it would seem the full analysis requires) what is Lightner giving UP in social security benefit being out 8 years of the system? I guess for math’s sake go ahead and figure she made her 40 quarters and paid last 10 at full.
It would be interesting to see all of the current politicians & candidates that are receiving pensions from being in city government. I admire Ellis for saying ‘no’ to the pension plan, though I am sure it would not be very much money to him, he is a self made man.
.
————————————————————————————————————————
Incumbents who have refused City Council Pensions include Kevin Faulconer, Jerry Sanders and Carl DeMaio. Council Candidates Mark Kersey, Scott Sherman and Ray Ellis have also pledged to refuse the pensions. All 6 of them belong to the same political party…. Any guesses, class?
Jim Sills