FOP political committee: Mike Hogan for mayor

[stjr]

JSO Officer's (unlike the Mayor and city council) pay into their own retirement pension.  Their employer also contributes per a labor contract.  No on is "taking" anything from the taxpayers in that scenario.  The taxpayers (including JSO Officers) get "taken" by a lot of government programs, but JSO Officers and their pensions do not fit the bill of that description.  To try to politicize JSO pensions in this way either shows ignorance or misleading intent.

Notnow, not to get into an extended conversation at the moment about the pensions, but your comment is not full disclosure from what I understand.  Officers may contribute a FIXED amount of their pay, but the taxpayers/city are left making up the difference and this difference is getting geometrically larger due to benefits growing far faster than the contributions and achievable investment returns.

[NotNow]

FULL disclosure would then require you to acknowledge that benefits have not changed at all since 2003.  FULL disclosure would also require you to acknowledge that when the "achievable investment returns" were well above what was "required" for benefits in the 90's, the City of Jacksonville chose not to contribute at all while Officers always paid with their "fixed" 7%.  No one mentions all of the years that the City contributed less to the pension than the Officers because the markets were up.  So now, when the markets drop for a couple of years, the City declares the almost one hundred year old pension plan "unsustainable" rather than meet their contractual obligation. 

FULL disclosure would require that you acknowledge that every other Florida Sheriff's Office utilizes the State retirement system and requires NO contribution by Officers.  FULL disclosure would require you to acknowledge that the City of Jacksonville had to put up MILLIONS during the Delaney administration to put the Mayor and City Council on the State system, so that they are eligible for benefits after only six years of service.

Why doesn't anyone ask how our retirement costs compare to other comparable Florida Sheriff's Offices or City Police Departments?  Because ours is the least expensive, and the lowest paying. 

Sorry if I got a little extended, but there is more to this story.

[JC]

I suppose it is a matter of what you want to cut.  JSO is already down to ninety some odd other Florida law enforcement agencies paying better.  The pension is substandard to the state pension that our mayor and city council enjoy, as well as most other Sheriff's Office's in Florida.  We could cut the numbers of Officer's, but we are already at about half of the nationally recommended number and WAY down the list of Officer's per capita amongst Florida cities.  As qualified applicants go to higher paying departments, we can reduce the educational and other requirements for employment.  Of course, there would be a resulting loss in standards as well. 

What do you want to cut at the JSO?

You could of course privatize the police force....  I just cant imagine how any good god fearing conservative can feel comfortable taking a pension from tax payers.

JSO Officer's (unlike the Mayor and city council) pay into their own retirement pension.  Their employer also contributes per a labor contract.  No on is "taking" anything from the taxpayers in that scenario.  The taxpayers (including JSO Officers) get "taken" by a lot of government programs, but JSO Officers and their pensions do not fit the bill of that description.  To try to politicize JSO pensions in this way either shows ignorance or misleading intent.

HA.. Whats good for the goose certainly isnt good for the gander!  A labor contract?  Seriously? 

[NotNow]

Um yes, a labor contract.  Do you have a point?

[tayana42]

If JSO officers are paid less that counterparts in other urban areas on Florida, it's likely because the cost of living is lower here.  In this economic environment I think they are paid appropriately if not overpaid.  Unless and until a rising tide floats all ships, everyone must tighten their belts.

[JC]

Um yes, a labor contract.  Do you have a point?

You have argued against collective bargaining, pensions and labor unions in other threads and I think its amusing that these things are ok when they suit your needs.  

[NotNow]

Really?  Do you have an example?  I do not recall making such an argument.

[NotNow]

I can take it.  I can tell you of several decisions that the FOP took that I did not agree with.  I can rattle off a few union decisions that I thought were stupid.  I can also tell of several decisions by management that were equally stupid in my eyes.  It's called independent thought.  I obviously believe in labor unions, collective bargaining, and pensions since I participate in all of these.  I do not believe that all of the people involved in these institutions always make wise decisions. 

Now, tell me when I have argued against collective bargaining, labor unions, and pensions....and not the stupid decisions made by persons involved in these institutions.