-- Connecting the dots between our economy, government and business --
Summary and audio linked here.
Chicago’s political leadership is floating a pension buyout program as evidence it is seriously addressing the city’s thirty-six-billion-dollar unfunded pension liability, but Mark Glennon, founder of the Illinois policy research organization Wirepoints, said that the proposal moves debt from one column to another rather than reducing it, and that the broader fiscal picture facing the city continues to deteriorate across every measurable dimension. Audio here.
Expect no retraction or apology. This what they do.
The state’s existing buyout program for its own pensions is the precedent for Chicago, which should be a warning: Look out for similar exaggerated claims and shoddy analysis.
Full interview and summary linked here.
SIGN UP HERE FOR OUR FREE WIREPOINTS DAILY NEWSLETTER
I am deeply troubled that members of this School Board failed to complete their due diligence when this individual was hired as their Superintendent. A cursory internet search would have revealed that he was FIRED from a previous District and that termination was upheld by the courts. The Citizens and children of Dolton deserve better.
Outside of government service this person would be hard put to make 150G a year based on student performance in his district.
Nohelty seems pleased as punch in the photo and bears a passing resemblance to old man Potter from “ Its A Wonderful Life “.
He does doesn’t he. $500K a year. $41,666 each and every month. In retirement. And as you said, He is free to go get another Superintendent job elsewhere, hired by the same type of morons who gave him this run up raise and paying him another couple of hundred thousand a year. It is beyond moronic. I’d have the same grin on my face if I knew in 24 months, I’d have $41K a month coming without leaving the house. Pathetic.
Folks – this is what is wrong with education. This grifter is getting paid $450K annually. There is NOTHING going on in ANY school District that should justify that salary to begin with, but then to add $30K each year for the next two years, puts this jackass at over $500K. Are these people stupid? They claim to be paying this guy more because he is also acting and the business manager for the district. I’ll tell you what this is, this is a pension run up, this guy is retiring in 2 years and this extra $60K is the… Read more »
He’s doing a modified version of the “ superintendent shuffle “. That scheme involves racking up a huge pension in one district and then moving on to another to further feather one’s nest. In the real world it’s called “ double dipping “. But, “ hey, you voted to be ripped off so there’s nothing wrong with them obliging you!” say the obscene pension defenders.
Yep, better – “superintendent shuffle” Nah, I didn’t vote to be ripped off, we just happen to have built a family and life in a F-ing state that is so corrupt that there is no way out – other than leaving. My children went to Parochial catholic school through high school, so I never used the public school system – thank God. Public School Districts are a major rip-off for every Illinois resident, a grift made possible by our criminal elected officials and morons (like these) on the school boards. School districts are simply a bottomless pit of ever increasing… Read more »
If you are making that kind of money you should be funding your own retirement. Not the taxpayers.
Spot on. Cap pensionable salaries. (Though that would require a constitutional amendment for those already working.)
I think that’s a great idea IF its done with the thought that inflation eventually takes a huge toll on a set pension’s purchasing power unless there is some accommodation otherwise. For example, presumably most can surely agree that today’s $100,000 annual pension set in stone surely would be expected to lose much of its purchasing power over two decades. In short, any such formula written with reasonable knowledge of that eventuality would need to self-adjust somewhat predictably over time even if not perfectly so.
Agreed.
Even then it wouldn’t be allowed. He would still have his contract. Getting rid of his pension because you or others deem as too generous definitely wouldn’t fall under the rules of altering a contract.
That’s your story and you’re sticking to it.
That’s the Illinois Supreme Courts as well the SCOTUS story (rulings) on contract law and they are sticking to it.