Here is one reason why our property taxes are so high

Double-dipping public officials, including our county head Joe DiVincenzo, county Sheriff Armando Fontoura, and Fontoura's second in command John Dough (you can't make up this stuff up.)

FULL STORY: http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/15/08/31/double-dipping-tricks-cost-millions-in-new-jersey-s-essex-county/

Its legal so what's the beef? No one has any reason to pass up any legal benefit.

xavier67 said:
Double-dipping public officials, including our county head Joe DiVincenzo, county Sheriff Armando Fontoura, and Fontoura's second in command John Dough (you can't make up this stuff up.)
FULL STORY: http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/15/08/31/double-dipping-tricks-cost-millions-in-new-jersey-s-essex-county/

What percentage of our property taxes are consumed by this practice? I am asking because a lot of the time, this sort of thing results in more outrage than substance.

bramzzoinks said:
Its legal so what's the beef? No one has any reason to pass up any legal benefit.

I'd like to see a higher standard than mere legality. Joe D. does great work for the county, but this isn't ethical.

It is fully ethical because it is fully legal. Zero reason to pass up a pension to which one is entitled. This is high profile but it happens at all levels.

2 issues I'd mention, one of opinion, one which perplexes me...

Generally speaking, higher level government officials are overpaid. It used to be that you accepted a lower salary to secure great retirement benefits and significant job stability. Now in many cases it seems that they get both- great retirement, great current cash, lifetime healthcare, etc.

So that's the opinion.

The thing that perplexes me however is getting bent out of shape over double dipping. Knowing enough about pension accounting to get myself into trouble, why should the taxpayer have a say, or even care, if a guy qualifies on years of service/age? If he quit after 25 years and qualifies on everything else and then went to go work for Walmart as head of store security, would people have a problem?

The issue, if people don't like the payouts, is with the pension formulas themselves- not with "double dipping".

To be clear, I'm focusing only on the math here- if the future pension benefit was properly valued, and the accumulated benefit funded, and they're only getting paid the vested benefit, what's the difference?

I get what the difference is if you're underfunded- knock some of these obligations out and improve your funded status. Forget all the political parts of this- what am I missing on the math.

Edit: is it because they start a new pension run at a much higher, senior salary? Wouldn't they still be held back by service requirements? Again a separate issue from the math, but if they do come in higher and get a new super pension? Or would we prefer people work another 20 years with no COLA and inflation saves our asses

bramzzoinks said:
It is fully ethical because it is fully legal. ...

what an interesting concept.

I wonder what is the present value of a New Jersey pension for a worker aged, say, 45?

bramzzoinks said:
It is fully ethical because it is fully legal. Zero reason to pass up a pension to which one is entitled. This is high profile but it happens at all levels.

Yet you consider someone buying an allowed item with an EBT card unethical because you think it is a luxury item.

tjohn said:

xavier67 said:
Double-dipping public officials, including our county head Joe DiVincenzo, county Sheriff Armando Fontoura, and Fontoura's second in command John Dough (you can't make up this stuff up.)
FULL STORY: http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/15/08/31/double-dipping-tricks-cost-millions-in-new-jersey-s-essex-county/

What percentage of our property taxes are consumed by this practice? I am asking because a lot of the time, this sort of thing results in more outrage than substance.

Is there an accountant who can actually answer your question without falling into a philosophical muck?

In the end, does it matter since public compensation of public officials come from the taxpayers? Every pension dollar that goes into double dipper's pockets means less funds available for state aid to SOMSD, etc. That as you know directly impacts local property taxes.

tjohn said:
I wonder what is the present value of a New Jersey pension for a worker aged, say, 45?

If they had a payout of $60k and we assumed 35 years left of life @ 3% discount rate the present value of that cashflow would be about $1.5mm

For Joe D assuming normal life expectancy and same rate it's about $900k

Jackson_Fusion said:

tjohn said:
I wonder what is the present value of a New Jersey pension for a worker aged, say, 45?

If they had a payout of $60k and we assumed 35 years left of life @ 3% discount rate the present value of that cashflow would be about $1.5mm


For Joe D assuming normal life expectancy and same rate it's about $900k

I was actually thinking that if we don't get our pension affairs in order, an NJ pension won't be worth a tinker's damn in the not too distant future.

NJ's contribution to the state pension funds is among the lowest (if not the lowest) in the country. So it's not surprising that we are looking at a $170 bil shortfall in the coming years. (That's 10 times the annual state budget). Yet we are spending at least $35 mil a year in pension payout to current public servants who "retired." (Our current sheriff Fortouna alone has collected $1.3 mil in pension to date.)

tjohn said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

tjohn said:
I wonder what is the present value of a New Jersey pension for a worker aged, say, 45?

If they had a payout of $60k and we assumed 35 years left of life @ 3% discount rate the present value of that cashflow would be about $1.5mm


For Joe D assuming normal life expectancy and same rate it's about $900k

I was actually thinking that if we don't get our pension affairs in order, an NJ pension won't be worth a tinker's damn in the not too distant future.

all the more reason to get your money out while the getting is good.

Joe D actively spoke out against double dipping and then proceeded to do it himself. This is old news. The article below is over 4 years old.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/03/loophole_allows_essex_county_e.html

tom said:

bramzzoinks said:
Its legal so what's the beef? No one has any reason to pass up any legal benefit.

I'd like to see a higher standard than mere legality. Joe D. does great work for the county, but this isn't ethical.

drummerboy said:

bramzzoinks said:
It is fully ethical because it is fully legal. ...

what an interesting concept.

They are not synonymous.

tjohn said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

tjohn said:
I wonder what is the present value of a New Jersey pension for a worker aged, say, 45?

If they had a payout of $60k and we assumed 35 years left of life @ 3% discount rate the present value of that cashflow would be about $1.5mm


For Joe D assuming normal life expectancy and same rate it's about $900k

I was actually thinking that if we don't get our pension affairs in order, an NJ pension won't be worth a tinker's damn in the not too distant future.

Had we paid the actuarial amount every year the amount would have been high but doable. Were we up to date dito going forward. The whole problem is the hole that has been dug by not fully funding is now so deep.

bramzzoinks said:
It is fully ethical because it is fully legal.

There's your problem right there.

Tom_Reingold said:

bramzzoinks said:
It is fully ethical because it is fully legal.

There's your problem right there.

To borrow from @LL_ on another thread,

" That's why the Josh Duggar thing infuriated me. Wanna have a affair? Who am I to judge? Do it while going around being the "model" of proper marriage espousing how "The Gays" are destroying civilization? Not so much."

Is it legal to do that? Sure!

So bingo, it's ethical too!

Jackson_Fusion said:

tjohn said:
I wonder what is the present value of a New Jersey pension for a worker aged, say, 45?

If they had a payout of $60k and we assumed 35 years left of life @ 3% discount rate the present value of that cashflow would be about $1.5mm


For Joe D assuming normal life expectancy and same rate it's about $900k

$60K! Unless you are a firefighter or a police officer, that's not a realistic sum. Most pensions for people of retirement age (55+) with 25 or more years are far less. The tier one formula is x years over 55 times your last three years salary (which is why many long time legislators take high paying state positions right before they are ready to retire, assuming you are 55 or greater.

I'm trying to get my head around the purported problem; but keep running into the same issue.

To wit: how would prohibiting double dipping save the taxpayers of Essex County (or elsewhere in our State) any money?

County Executive DiVincenzo qualified for a pension. He filed for his benefits and started receiving them.

Had we elected another individual to the office of County Executive; we'd still be paying Mr. DiVincenzo his pension, and the new Executive their salary, and be obligated for their pension. Plus, if Mr. DiVincenzo needs an appendectomy, he only collects once; whereas if he was really retired, we might have to pay for his appendectomy, as well as the new guy's. Where do the savings come in?

If I'm missing the obvious. please feel free to correct, chastise and/or mock me.

And as an aside, we did elect Mr. DiVincenzo to his office, after we knew about the pension benefits.

Perhaps, just perhaps, we're not too bright. Or maybe, we just don't care a whole lot.

Jes sayin.

TomR

marylago said:

$60K! Unless you are a firefighter or a police officer, that's not a realistic sum.

There are almost 2,000 retirees (including a former deputy super from SOMSD) who collect more than 100K in annual pension--and only a half of them are former firefighters or cops.

Bob has two government jobs. The salary for both comes to $90,000.

A new law is passed and there can only be one job per person.

Joan takes one of Bob's former jobs.

Now the total salary for both jobs comes to $110,000 because now two health care policies are needed instead of only one.

Taxpayers pay more to cover this outcome, not less.

marylago said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

tjohn said:
I wonder what is the present value of a New Jersey pension for a worker aged, say, 45?

If they had a payout of $60k and we assumed 35 years left of life @ 3% discount rate the present value of that cashflow would be about $1.5mm


For Joe D assuming normal life expectancy and same rate it's about $900k

$60K! Unless you are a firefighter or a police officer, that's not a realistic sum. Most pensions for people of retirement age (55+) with 25 or more years are far less. The tier one formula is x years over 55 times your last three years salary (which is why many long time legislators take high paying state positions right before they are ready to retire, assuming you are 55 or greater.

The bigger question is "why is anyone allowed to "retire" at anywhere near age 55? People can not work 30 years and expect a pension to pay for the next 30. People in 2015 should be working to near 70. Otherwise the math never works.

Some jobs such as firefighting and some types of police work you can't do until you are 70. But I would agree that office workers should be expected to work until they are 65 or more.

I think the problem some are having with this is that a State employee can continue to receive a State pension while working in a second State job. In other jurisdictions, the State employee would not be able to collect a State pension until after the employee had retired from both State jobs.

If the State employee in this scenario were to have to wait until after leaving the second State job to receive a State pension, the State employee would be receiving a higher pension based on higher base salary and greater length of service but the pension would be paid for a shorter period time because the State employee would be deferring the date by which the pension was paid. Depending on age at final retirement and life expectancy, this could end up being the less costly alternative for the taxpayer.

tjohn said:

xavier67 said:
Double-dipping public officials, including our county head Joe DiVincenzo, county Sheriff Armando Fontoura, and Fontoura's second in command John Dough (you can't make up this stuff up.)
FULL STORY: http://www.njspotlight.com/stories/15/08/31/double-dipping-tricks-cost-millions-in-new-jersey-s-essex-county/

What percentage of our property taxes are consumed by this practice? I am asking because a lot of the time, this sort of thing results in more outrage than substance.

This!

Our taxes are high for a number of reasons, but lowering the total figure that needs to be funded by taxes is probably a pipe dream. (See the frequent laments about cuts in services, increased class sizes in schools, decaying infrastructure, etc. These all cost money, so even if we find places (like the point mentioned) to make cuts, we have more needs crying for funds.)

OTOH - The method of divvying it up among all taxpayers state-wide (property-tax based vs other bases, county-by-county differences, etc) clearly needs reform, but those who have the power to effect that kind of change have shown little political will or inclination to do so.

Just because "double-dipping" is currently legal doesn't mean it's ethical or economically sound. I have no problem with state employees working in the private sector after they retire and collecting their pension benefits at the same time. I do have a problem with state employees who "retire" (sometimes in their 40s and 50s) and then take another state job and collect pension benefits at the same time. It should be one or the other. State jobs have become extremely lucrative in the last 20 years while wages have generally stagnated and property taxes have skyrocketed. Our pension system is near the breaking point and this is one of many contributing factors. Not surprisingly, New Jersey is rife with such anomalies.

Woot said:

marylago said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

tjohn said:
I wonder what is the present value of a New Jersey pension for a worker aged, say, 45?

If they had a payout of $60k and we assumed 35 years left of life @ 3% discount rate the present value of that cashflow would be about $1.5mm


For Joe D assuming normal life expectancy and same rate it's about $900k

$60K! Unless you are a firefighter or a police officer, that's not a realistic sum. Most pensions for people of retirement age (55+) with 25 or more years are far less. The tier one formula is x years over 55 times your last three years salary (which is why many long time legislators take high paying state positions right before they are ready to retire, assuming you are 55 or greater.

The bigger question is "why is anyone allowed to "retire" at anywhere near age 55? People can not work 30 years and expect a pension to pay for the next 30. People in 2015 should be working to near 70. Otherwise the math never works.

Troopers have a mandatory retirement at 55, as an example.

There are plenty of things that need to be looked at (man, seems like a lot of disability pension claims are out there! Hey, is it my turn to be top dog for the last 3 years?) but some are at least sort of defensible.

edited to delete.