Judge Strikes 'Poison Pill' from Prop. B
Rest of pension reform measure will appear on San Francisco ballot
San Francisco Superior Court Judge Harold E. Kahn has stricken what unions had dubbed a “poison pill” provision in the Proposition B pension and health-benefit reform measure, but has otherwise cleared the initiative to appear on the ballot in November.
The Monday morning decision was a defeat for the public-employee unions, which had argued that the “poison pill” — which would have effectively frozen city employee wages for five years if anyone mounted a post-election legal challenge to Prop. B — and other elements of Proposition B should keep the measure off the ballot entirely. The unions have vowed to file suit again if the measure passes.
Proposition B is emerging as one of the most contentious issues in the coming election. Its author, city Public Defender Jeff Adachi, says that the measure will save the city between $120 million and $170 million annually by requiring city employees to contribute more to their pension and health-care costs.
Judge Kahn had indicated at a hearing on Friday that he would strike the “poison pill” language from the measure. Freezing wage increases for five years, he said, would make public employees reluctant to challenge the measure in court if it passes.
In his Monday decision, Judge Kahn wrote, “[T]he poison pill imposes an unwarranted and wholly disproportional burden on the right to seek redress from the courts. Fidelity to the important right to petition demands that the poison pill be eliminated now, before its ‘chill’ takes effect.”
Judge Kahn found that the "poison pill" provision was severable from Prop. B because it was not the central point of the measure. He instructed the Board of Elections to strike two sentences and three phrases from the text of Prop. B before it is printed in the ballot.
In court on Friday, Adachi said that the intent of the “poison pill” language was to prevent city officials from sweetening public employees’ compensation packages without voter input.
Adachi was at a funeral for retired Superior Court Judge Joseph A. Desmond, and was not immediately available for comment. In an e-mailed statement, he celebrated the fact that Prop. B will still appear on the ballot: “This is an important victory for the people of this City. Now, the voters of San Francisco, not special interests, will finally have a choice on how their tax dollars are spent on pensions for city workers. By voting yes on Prop B the taxpayers will get some relief in carrying the entire burden of having to fork over more and more taxpayer dollars each year to meet the unsustainable demand of public employee pensions.”
In a statement, union attorney Peter Saltzman said: "We would have preferred that the Judge remove the entire initiative, but we expect that San Franciscans will vote Prop B down when they learn how seriously flawed it is."
John Smith
Prop B is a travesty and the worst kind of politics. The fact that the public defender had a portion of the measure thrown out in a court of law shows how poorly written and mean spirited Prop B is. It also reflects pretty badly on Jeff Adachi, the city "public defender", that he was in fact trying to violate the law and deny First Amendment rights of thousands of the citizens he is supposed to be protecting. Attacking working families healthcare is no way to run a city.
CJ Flowers
A win for democracy! Glad to see the unions could not stop this Prop from getting on the ballot.
It certainly makes sense that City residents, who in fact pay for employee benefits, will now be able to vote on the matter of whether City employees should contribute more for their generous benefits.
Stop the Insanity- Vote YES on Props B and G!
Gordon
Next year we need a proposition that will freeze all city wages until there is a budget surplus to pay for it. In other words, show us the money before we give out any more raises, show us a real profit!
Jamie Whitaker
Vote Yes of Prop B and Prop G - WE are the bosses here, folks - the politicians, in general, have just been God awful fiduciaries and managers of our money and gave away the store over the past 11 years. Time to get things back under control so that we're not cutting vital city services further and raising fees that just push more families and middle class folks out of San Francisco.
Familygal
I would like the posters to understand the reality of the so-called generous benefits that city workers get. As a self-employed wife of a teacher, we get our benefits through my husband's job. Since 2006 I've seen his employee + 2 dependents monthly premiums go from about $370/month to $945/month in 2010, which prompted us to switch to Kaiser, the lowest cost option for $628/month. Now you want us to pay even more? We've already switched to Kaiser to lower the premiums to $628/month. I wonder how much you all pay? The extra $130/month that we would have to pay if this passes means that we'd have to cut the contribution into our son's college fund, and some of our contributions to our IRAs, as furloughs have already negated a chunk of our income.
This is what you will be doing to many, many REAL MIDDLE-CLASS folks here in the city. TEACHERS ARE MIDDLE CLASS FOLKS. And BTW, none of you pay for Teacher's retirements--that's part of the state, we pay into into and by doing so teachers FORFEIT social security. And, contrary to what you all seem to believe, a state teacher's retirement (for someone who started teaching at 30) will not be enough to pay the bills for retirement. So we have to save on our own too. Adachi should worry about the rising rate of muggings and robberies and leave the economics of the city to the mayor and supervisors.
Please think about what you are doing to real people by supporting this measure. To Jamie This idea of city workers as fat cats smoking away tax payer dollars is a myth. Would you like an angry mob to tell your company how much it can pay for your health care?
Jamie Whitaker
Familygal,
The lack of leadership from our elected officials has left us with either awful choices and horrible choices while Prop. 13 remains the law of the California when it comes to property taxes that provide the main fuel for our public schools. We need more revenues.
As a son, grandson, nephew, cousin, and lifetime friend of public school employees who have filled the ranks from Superintendents to Principals to high school, middle school, and grade school teachers, I think it is shameful how relatively under-compensated our good, caring school teachers are paid when compared to many other professions. No doubt, teachers are middle class folks, and the additional $1,560 pre-tax (about $1,100 after tax) increase in dependent healthcare insurance premiums will hurt if Prop. B passes ... but without Prop. 13 getting reformed at the state level, we also have 180 teachers and 100 teacher aides sitting on layoff slips that may not be rescinded. That's 280 folks completely cut out and left unemployed by the School District right now.
How can we fulfill the potential of our young people and close the achievment gap by further crowding classrooms and reducing the number of school days?
There's no good choice at this point .. but I believe we have to make one. The elected officials who have not stepped up to the plate need to be forced to step up to the plate - reform Prop. 13, get us a single-payer nationalized health insurance system that we can all afford whether we want to try out self-employment or work for the local school district, and let's stop passing off the costs of Baby Boomers' greed of years past to our young people via ridiculous increases in college costs.
Jamie Whitaker
What can we do right now in San Francisco to stop cutting vital city services? Pass Prop. B. There's no easy way out, but this is an option right here, right now while we await the rest of California to develop a conscience and to do something about Prop. 13 to make sure everyone is paying a fair amount of property taxes.
Familygal
Teachers do not have the same deal as other city employees. They should be removed from this ballot measure until other city employees pay the same percentages for health care. Just remember, you are hurting real families in SF that would otherwise be able to take care of themselves. And it may be the breaking point to push us out of SF, which you seem to think passing this will prevent.
Passing this measure will not encourage Prop 13 reform. If you feel that's the real culprit, campaign for Prop 13 reform. This ballot measure is SERIOUSLY flawed and does not allocate the burden fairly among city employees.
ThinkingPerson
Does he mean because its on a ballot when most people don't vote?
Or that the special interests are the one who got the initiative on the ballot so they can rest now?
I ask because this guy Adochi appears to be trying to make a name for himself on the backs of public employees, another SF politician who can care only about his zip code in a city embarrassingly divided by class and race.
Isn't it astounding, first, pensions get robbed by big banks and now, guys like Adochi who probably doesn't need the retirement is trying to steal more?
I mean, isn't the claim about SSA being without funds bogus too?
How is SF any different? Why now? It really urks me to see guys coming into power by using the old 1800 California vision for the world. Take and never give back.
Its not the wild west anymore, and lots of people got without giving.
Gordon
Familygal you are pleading to the wrong people, you need to talk to the City/State managers that determine your budgets for better pay, not the voters. The voters will pass this measure because the system is broke, the politicians have enabled far too many people to milk the system for far too much pay and benefits. Granted those on the bottom may suffer the most, but they need to get the politicians to redistribute the revenues in a more fair system, certainly teachers deserve better pay, but there are so many other position on the government payroll that are over-paid. The voters can only attack the problem in one way, and we can't be sympathetic for a few, while so many others would profit through our inaction. This will be the first of many steps that the voters will take back our government, hopefully, in the long run it will be better for teachers when a fairer system is developed. So, if you want to get mad, then get mad at your politicians, not the voters.
ramona pest
Adachi is feeding all voters misinformation. There is absolutely no guarantee where any savings from this will go, if any.
The fact of the matter is that city employees only have average benefits compared to the same job ont he prvate sector. City employees do not get to self direct pension funds, these are taken from their checks and they need to pray that those hundreds and hundreds of dollars a month will be there when they retire. that is not a great benefite, think about that next time you read "generous pensions" becuase on average, pension amounts are not generouse for the average city worker. City workers, teachers or no, do not receive above average pay or benefits on the balance. you will read about certain individuals, namely police and fire and ironically PD's--- But again, it depends on the union you are in. the largest unions that employ the lowest paid workers, get the worst deal as they are asked every year to contribute the most to the budget crisis. Pay and benefits have been cut for city workers for six of the last seven years. Ironically, for the record, the union covering city public defenders (adachi himself), is a union not asked to contribute anything to the budget crisis year after year becuase of their status of "safety" employess. They enjoy the most generous benefits of all city workers, receiving 100% coverage for everything. you can guarantee that adachi's genrous benefits will not be touched by this. The average city worker with 2 dependents pays out of pocket what the average insured family does in the private sector according to our own city health providers, kaiser and blue shield...these are HMO's not luxury providers. Having worked on both sides (public and private) I am not enjoying better benefits at the city, far from it. Adachi is lying to everyone and used very devious tactics and lies to get people to sign this to place on the ballot. Grow a brain and get the facts, quit listening to propaganda. the facts are that by voting for this you are costing middle class families and children crucial benefits. money that middle class families are forced to pay in excess by some misguided voter witch hunt on public employee benefits, is money that will not be spent in the local economy and will be money out of your pocket and your families pockets as well multiplied by over 25,000 city workers. Why not go after the HMO's that are raising our rates and well as private sector rates exponentially. These costs have all been passed to the employees, the city is not taking up the slack.
h. brown
Gordon,
You're right but the SFFD and SFPD horses are already out of the barn for another couple of years. Newsom (with the help of a cowardly BOS) already extended their MOU's for another couple of years just a month or so back. Means the fattest hogs at the trough won't have to deal with a new Mayor and his negotiating team if they happen to be Progressives. Gavin and the Chiu board appear to be following 'best practices' from Vallejo.
What do you do when the chickens come home to roost?
Anyone wanna buy Coit Tower at a fire sale?
h.
Familygal
Gordon, better pay for teachers amounts to the same thing--money needed to fund them. Whether the money goes to benefits or pay, the result is the same to the taxpayer isn't it? Also I don't appreciate being "collateral damage" in your crusade to get back at this mythological overpaid city worker. If it's the high-paid workers (like Adachi himself) who are the problem, especially when those high paid workers (like Adachi) don't pay into their own retirement, then write a proposition that addresses these concerns specifically. You don't have to sacrifice those at the bottom to get those at the top if you had a carefully prepared proposition. Oh, but wait! This was written by those at the top, so of course it's mostly aimed at those at the bottom. You can't expect a billionaire venture capitalist from Menlo Park to fund an effort that only goes after highly paid individuals, now can you? Best to attack teachers who make $48,000/year who pay $628-$950 a month in health care for their kids! Separate your pension reform efforts from health care. Prop B is SERIOUSLY flawed.
Gordon
One thing you should be looking into are these health plans the City uses, the prices do seem high, with the size of the pool of employees the rates should be much lower, depending on the actual benefits of course. I imagine these plans are set-up with premium benefits, little out of pocket costs (like the rest of us have to pay), so the benefit/cost package must be pretty good.
But the bigger issue, that everyone is trying to avoid is the pensions, which every city employee should be required to pay into, after all they will be getting a paycheck for the rest of their life. That whole "future value thing" should not be forgotten...
Gordon
BTW, Familygal,I think your efforts would go a lot farther by lobbying the Mayors Office for relief. It would be very simple to develop a sliding scale for healthcare dependent coverage costs so that the lower paid employees pay at a lesser % and the higher paid employees pay at a higher %. Rather than charge each employee the same dollar amount, seems only fair the higher paid city workers should pay a larger share, sort of a tax the wealthy plan for the benefit of the lessor. There really are alternatives to solve your problem, just be creative. The voters only have one choice, and we will make it, then the City has to implement it. But, if the Mayor gives anyone besides the lowest paid a break, the voters will come back even stronger next time. The voters will be reasonable, but the city managers better realize it is time to fix the system, while they still have a chance.
Familygal
Kaiser is not really premium coverage,its an HMO, it's what we switched to keep it affordable. I'm tired of repelling attacks. Why should i have to lobby for relief? Because other citizens think I have some generous, easy street deal, when in fact I do not? Remember, teachers don't even have city pensions. After 30 years, we look forward to a luxurious 22K pension, and forfeit social security as a trade-off.22K is only slightly more than social security would have been.
When Blue shield raised our premiums $150/month each year for four years, I appealed to the them. They pointed me to the District. When I appealed to the district, they point to Blue Shield. Finally, I thought, some relief by switching to Kaiser--I can save for college now!
I found a study by UC, which shows that private sector employees pay significantly less on average than we do for family coverage. In fact the prop B would have me paying DOUBLE the premiums of the private sector. www.irle.berkeley.edu/cwed/wp/healthbenefits10.pdf.
Prop B should reform pensions only and leave health care out of it. It would have made it easier for you to pass it and give you a better PR image. This mythological overpaid public employee with the cadillac benefit package is a myth, and only applies to a select few, like Adachi himself. Really, your proposition should have been more careful about its language to protect lower paid workers and to ensure the money saved is actually spent on restoring the reduced services you say you care about. Prop B does neither.