Pension ballot arguments are in
| Monday, Jul 19 2010 07:45 PM
Last Updated Monday, Jul 19 2010 07:45 PM
Texts of the supporting and opposing ballot arguments for the city of Bakersfield's pension measure have been turned in. City residents will vote Nov. 2 on whether to reduce pension benefits for future police and firefighters hired starting in 2011. The arguments will appear in voter pamphlets before the election.
Each side also gets to write a rebuttal, and those texts will be released next week.
The measure hasn't yet been named by county elections officials, so it's left blank, but here's how the arguments read:
Argument in support, written by Bakersfield City Councilmen Zack Scrivner, David Couch and Ken Weir
A vote in favor of Measure _ is a vote for public employee pension reform and fiscal responsibility!
Bakersfield taxpayers cannot afford 3% @ 50 for retired police and firemen, which guarantees up to 90% of their final salaries at age 50. Numerous retired City employees receive over $100,000 a year, money they receive for life! Measure _ rolls back the pension benefits for new sworn safety employees to the previous level of 2% @ 50, which was the benefit level just 10 years ago. Measure _ also requires new employees to contribute to their pensions for their entire career and will prevent "pension spiking."
Measure _ will slash the mounting costs of City pensions to the taxpayers. The City has gone from an excess of $94,000,000 to a deficit of $100,000,000 in unfunded liability in 10 years since benefits were drastically increased (50% for Public Safety). Current benefit levels are excessive and unsustainable. Taxpayers statewide have seen higher taxes, layoffs, and decreased government services to cover public pension cost increases.
Measure _ will save the City $1.5 million in the first 5 years alone. By year 10, the cumulative savings to the City's General Fund is estimated at $7.5 million, and the savings will continue to grow! This will mean more dollars for public safety, roads, parks and other critical city services that taxpayers expect and deserve.
Measure _ will protect taxpayers by requiring voter approval for any future pension increases for sworn public safety employees.
This is not an issue that should be left up to the Unions and future City Councils. It is a critical issue that directly impacts the taxpayers of this City and needs immediate action.
Join the majority of the City Council by supporting this measure. Vote YES on Measure _!
Argument against, written by Mark A. Martinez, Thomas S. Webster, Robert A. Otto and Mark C. Salvaggio
Vote NO on Measure _ and tell the City Council to stop playing politics at the expense of public safety.
Bakersfield Firefighters and Police Officers face grave danger every day to assure that, in an emergency, we are protected. All they're asking for in return is fairness.
In tough economic times, everyone needs to make sacrifices. That's why Firefighters and Police Officers have repeatedly offered to sit down and work with the City on pension reform. But the City Manager and some City Council members refuse to budge.
Positive progress has been made. For example, Bakersfield Firefighters have offered contract concessions that would save the City's budget Millions to ensure adequate Firefighter staffing levels.
But instead of using this same process to negotiate pension costs, the City is using Measure _ to make one-sided cuts to our Firefighters' and Police Officers' retirement plans.
Firefighters and Police Officers have demonstrated that they are willing to negotiate sensible changes to their retirement plans.
Vote NO on Measure _ because we shouldn't balance our budget on the backs of our men and women in uniform.
The entire City has been hit by the economy and all city employees, not just public safety personnel, should be asked to make sacrifices.
Vote NO on Measure _ and tell the City that the people who fight criminals, save lives and protect property deserve to be treated fairly.
Measure _ does nothing to curb other City spending, like on unnecessary contracts and administrative salaries.
Vote NO on Measure _ and tell City Hall to cut its wasteful spending FIRST before making even harsher cuts to our police and fire services.
Vote NO on Measure _ and tell the City to return to the bargaining table and negotiate in good faith with its Firefighters and Police Officers.
