Prop. B will save healthcare - Page 2

Even with contributions required by Prop. B, city employees will receive a benefit package that is unparalleled in the private sector

09.28.10 - 1:13 pm | Jim Illig and Jeff Adachi |

(59)

Jeff Adachi is a proponent of Proposition B and the city's public defender. Jim Illig is the president of the San Francisco Health Commission.

Comments

Prop B protects vital City services AND benefit sustainability

This post is pretty good. Most people posting here don't understand Prop B or the City's finances. I would say you're close to nailing it but your conclusions are a bit faulty. Prop B is about benefit sustainability AND protecting vital City services.

First, the pension side. You do realize that the 1.5% increase in employee pension contributions (2..5% for police and fire) goes right into the pension investment fund and works to make future pension payouts more sustainable. This increased contribution to the pension fund from employees makes that same dollar amount availble for vital City services as it reduces the employer/City contribution rate. Yes, these dollars could have been earmarked for a specific purpose but more likely the City needs the flexibility to address the huge budget deficits on the horizon. Dollars saved from pension reform is insignificant? At $40 million saved it generates more dollars for the general fund than any other single item on the November ballot. The City Charter caps contributions at 10% (save police and fire - prop H) so can't go much higher if that's what you are arguing...It is clearly "pension reform."

On the health side, specifically earmarking the proceeds from increased contributions would have opened up another can of worms. Again the City has a structural deficit in the $500 to $700 million range and it doesn't make great sense to mandate how the increased contributions can be spent in such an environment. Ultimately, after the structural deficit is addressed, the proceeds can be spent on preserving vital City services and paydown on the $4 billion unfunded health liability. (Agree that politically it might have made sense to look at earmarking some portion of the proceeds for the HSS trust fund.) Clearly Prop B is just a first step in addressing benefit costs.

The $250 million was certainly helpful in the current budget year but is temporary and does not address escalating benefit costs.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 06, 2010 @ 3:08 pm

well, I am a city worker and

well, I am a city worker and after taxes and forced union dues, I bring home about 2300 a month. That supports me and my child. Not sure where that 93000 a year came from , but that is NOT the average.. thanks Adachi for f*$# ing over those of us who work hard to keep this city going..
The little guy is who is going to get screwed. Next time factor in a pay scale tier.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 06, 2010 @ 3:14 pm

...Just want to note that it

...Just want to note that it is a violation of the City Charter (12.200) to charge some employees more for heath care than others...There is a reason it does not work that way now and police and fire pay the same as everyone else. Pay scale tier was not a option...

Posted by Guest on Oct. 06, 2010 @ 3:56 pm

prob b

$8 a month is a lie!
I'm a city worker who makes $26.00 an hour. I pay $272.00 bi-weekly plus all the co-pays for health insurance for myself, my wife and two sons. That's easily $6500 a year in premiums alone. I think this is in line with private sector employees.

I belong to SEIU (union) and we have always negotiated to meet the financial needs of the city. Working class employees who bargain in good faith should not get squeezed by the misinformation of the rich and politically motivated.

Posted by Guest Joe Storekeeper on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 12:35 pm

The Chron Endorses Prop B.

...Thankfully there are still bastions of sanity in this City. There is hope- good points from the Chron about 1) window dressing benefit reforms passed by out Mayor and BOS and 2) funny how the unions think it is only okay to INCREASE benefits via the ballot:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/11/EDGE1FOQVN.DTL

Pretty apropos that on the day the Chron endorses, there is a front page story that our streets are falling apart. Gee, I wonder where the money is going....??

Yes on B.

Posted by CJ Flowers on Oct. 11, 2010 @ 1:41 pm

First off Jeff Adachi is

First off Jeff Adachi is saying that if we do not have Pension Reform it will hurt the children of San Francisco. Well Mr Adachi is wrong it that regard, the Pension Fund is fine. He is hurting the children of San Francisco. The parents of may children of San Francisco will not be able to afford healthcare the way he is propsing it. Summer School being cancelled had NOTHING to do with the Pension or healthcare it has to do with many different item. If my insurance is raise to $375 per month as in what B will do, I will not be able to feed my son every day. Jeff Adachi on the otherhand will because again he makes a lot of money and pays NOTHING for health insurance or HIS pension.
He comments that certain City agencies do not put in for their pension, well that is a downright Lie, HE does not pay for his pension, HE does not pay for healthcare for his wife and children. This is just a way for him to try to be Mayor, sorry not going to happen.

MR ADACHI, GROW A CONSCIENCE AND TELL THE TRUTH.

Posted by Guest City Worker/Single Mother on Oct. 19, 2010 @ 8:47 am

"Pension fund is fine."?? Run-Out Date is 2032.

...and the current unfunded liability is $8.7 billion according to a study released last week by Northwestern University:

http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/faculty/rauh/research/NMRLocal201010...

I guess we have a different definition of "fine."

Yes on B.

Posted by CJ Flowers on Oct. 19, 2010 @ 11:21 am

You SEIU apologists do know that

SEIU is a massive lobbyist for all things "progressive" and all politicians "progressive"?

You do know that the SEIU lobbies the local government for more government jobs and spending on their pet programs?

Your union leadership is always finding new ways for the city to spend money.

The union leadership hob knobs with all the cities politicians in their progressive club and the union backs the biggest spenders and money wasters.

Now you bemoan that you take part in negotiated contracts, and you don't like things playing out this way.

You belong to a massive operation geared to swindle the tax payers from their last dime and you're bitching that you are getting a raw deal and you don't like being fodder for politicians?

In short you belong to a political machine and you folks are complaining that its losing a round and thats not fair, but when you get over it is "fair" and its "social justice" or whatever buzz word they tell you to spew.

I don't know why you want me to feel sorry for you?

Posted by matlock on Oct. 19, 2010 @ 10:50 am

This is a bad medicine

Adachi is a vicious politican, himself is a rich asshole and can afford to pay high health cost comparing to most city employee, he is making 200K and never contributes pension from his own pocket like those firefighters and policemen although most city employee contribute their 7.5 % salary to the pension fund from the day one they service for the city of SF.
It is unfair to sacrifice most city employee benefits to achive his own evil purpose.

City can cut high payments for those public defenders like him and most greedy policemen and firefighters (they choice the job , nobody forced them, why they can get such high pay and special benefits?). City also can cut down a lot uncessary management waste to easily solve the city budget problem, instead of seeking a real solution, Adachi again try to sacifice most city employe(scapegoats)
to fool those voters who will favor this Proposition B.

Adach is a lier and will get punishment one day by his own evil action even now he gets all benefit no matter this pass or not.

Posted by Guest on Oct. 21, 2010 @ 10:53 am