Election hot topics: PENSIONS
I’ve been hearing a lot about certain topics in Shelby Township. I hope to investigate and look into some of them and give my point of view on them. You may not agree, but I value your ideas and input, so comment away and let's see if any idea comes up to resolved this without raising a property tax millage.
One thing repeated to me on the street and in post is that the previous leadership of the Shelby Township Police and Fire Departments developed surpluses in their accounts and the Board of Trustees is doing a shell game to make it look like there is a deficit in the accounts.
Quick update:
Both the Fire Department and The Police Department received new buildings this past couple of years. Both paid for with cash saved up by the department heads but where did that cash come from?
We the taxpayers voted to pay for police and fire protection with a separate millage.
My point of view:
The problem I have is this: The “Police and Fire Pensions” are currently underfunded by over 25 million plus dollars this happened because not enough funds were set aside to fund these pensions by previous leadership. I believe this is where the police and fire fund surplus actually came from, not from prudent saving but from ignoring and not paying one of the biggest bills in both departments.
I believe, as a taxpayer, when I voted to pay for police and fire protection this meant all expenses involved in that protection including legacy cost (pensions). The employees, equipment and building cost are all covered by the special police and fire funds. The employee cost should include each employee’s pension.
Then why is this money coming from our general fund?
The funds to try and balance this pension fund have been coming from the general fund, not the specific funds that we voted for to cover this. General funds are what we use to fund senior programs, parks and rec, our parks, roads, beautification and our entire government including all the other services, except, Police and Fire protection.
Sure there may have been some money saved up in the Police Department for a new building but that money saved was and is being paid out of the general fund towards the pensions.
I believe this is a shell game that needs to stop. You can not claim surplus police funds without including the legacy cost of the police employees. As for now, the police and fire budgets are both in deficit by over 10 million dollars for those legacy cost and who do you think is responsible to pay this?
I would like to note that the current board of trustees has been overfunding the pension fund in an attempt to catch up but the lack of oversight and future planning by previous board of trustee members along with previous leadership of the police and fire departments is going to cause a huge financial drain on taxpayers tomorrow, at a time when taxpayers can’t afford higher property taxes.
Katy J
7:27 pm on Saturday, July 28, 2012
"The Fire and Police Pension Board is a separate body that oversees the investments contributed by Shelby Township and its Police and Firefighter/Paramedics. These investments are controlled by statute and are invested to ensure a stable financial picture for all retiring Police Officers and Firefigher/Paramedics of the Charter Township of Shelby."
Directly from Shelby Townships website. There is a board that oversees the police and fire pensions. It's not done by either the police or fire chief. If you want to blame someone for underfunding the pensions of these departments, blame the correct people (there is a list of the current board members).
Both chiefs have to show the board the proposed budgets, so if there's an issue with the amount they are contributing to the pensions, I would figure that would be the perfect time for the board to bring it up.
Katy J
7:27 pm on Saturday, July 28, 2012
According to Shelby Townships website, there is a pension board in place whose sole purpose is to oversee the investments made into the Fire and Police pensions. So when it comes down to it, it is this boards responsibility to make sure everything is being funded as it should be. Also, the chiefs of both departments are required to show their proposed budgets to the board members. These budgets show the allotment to the pensions. If the board had an issue with this, I would imagine that would be the best time to make it known. You seem to be trying to put blame on induviduals who aren't ultimately responsible for the underfunding. The board has recently requested that these chiefs show that they are capable of coming under their proposed budgets (in some cases it seems in order to keep their jobs). With the economy the way it is, that's a resonable expectation, but if you want to get the pensions back to where they need to be, maybe they should be asking them to raise the amount they are putting in to the pension and just coming in at budget...
Matt Guarnieri
9:08 am on Sunday, July 29, 2012
So the department heads are heros if they do a shell game and show a surplus but when upon a closer look we see that the police and fire have actually been deficit spending and hiding a huge debt to taxpayers we push blame to others. Leman and Morehouse helped create the pension deficit, not the current board, in fact, the current board has brought the debt to light..... now you will attack me for speaking this truth. It's a problem, I have pointed it out and I want it corrected without raising taxes.... If you claim savings then those savings are shown to be false, it's still the responsibility of that person who tfied to take credit for something that is false.
Dan Bartold
9:17 am on Wednesday, August 1, 2012
We need to take a step back and understand where the money that goes into the fund originates. From what the Shelby web site says, the Pension Board only controls only the investments. There is a line item on the Winter Tax Statement that says "POL/FIRE PENSION". Is that the only source? If so, I do not think it could have been used to build buildings. I suspect the significant underfunding could be due to the stock market collapse and significant reduction in property values.
Either way, I do not think we should be using General Funds to reimburse the fund. I like the idea of going to a more of a 401K plan.
Dana Horton
8:22 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Doesn’t the Supervisor and the Board have anything to say about the spending that takes place within the Police and Fire Department?
I also take exception to you demeaning Mr. Morehouse. You need to find some respect.
Bill Peters
8:47 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Really who made you the keeper of respect
Larry
10:55 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Matt, YES or NO.
You currently live in Shelby Township?
My understanding is that you moved to Grosse Pointe.
By labeling yourself a Shelby taxpayer, are you talking about your hush-hush business?
Matt Guarnieri
10:55 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
I think I make a pretty convincing case that "there never was a surplus or savings account in either police and fire departments. Past leadership hid a huge liability (pensions) from taxpayers.
Only the most recent board leadership. By placing the finanaces on line, for taxpayer examination, has allowed a taxpayer like myself to see the truth.
Maybe the previous leadership did not realize the true nature of what they were doing to taxpayers but the most recent leadership has allowed a simple taxpaying blogger such as myself to figure it out and are trying to correct the issues that previous ignorance has left for the taxpayers.
Matt Guarnieri
4:37 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Larry, I never lived in Grosse Pointe and if I had anything to hide I would probably only post under the name "Larry" and not my full name.
Larry
9:18 am on Wednesday, August 1, 2012
Matt---- was that a YES or a NO?
Do you live in Shelby Township.
YES or NO?
Dan Bartold
11:43 am on Wednesday, August 1, 2012
Larry --- Yes or No
Is your real name "Larry"?
Matt Guarnieri
2:06 pm on Wednesday, August 1, 2012
The only way to get to a 401K type pension is through negotiation and the police union has decided they would rather wait and see if any of the candidates that receive a pension now, might win the election.
I also think the minimum age for retirement should be 55 to 59 years old.
There is a mil dedicated to police and fire pensions, this mil creates 2.3 to 2.8 million a year but this is half of what is projected to be needed. We are 23 to 25 million short in the pension fund. This is the fault of years of ignoring the problem, no other supervisor would risk the election to shine a light on this problem.
Previous leadership believed and some still believe that increased property values will lift us from this burden or as stated by Mrs. Manzella in one of her post (something to the affect of) People have realized a huge property tax decrease because of falling values, they afforded more property tax in the past, we should be able to raise the tax mil rate without much complaining since the higher tax rate will still be less in dollars than what was paid before.
I believe this should never be the first option... never... and will campaign against any of the candidates that agreed with this which is ALL the "save shelby" slate..... Leman, Manzella, Nightingale, Curtis, Kopp, Cook.
This kind of thinking is NOT good for taxpayers at all.
Larry: A simple internet search of the Shelby Twp. Tax rolls will tell you where I live.