-- 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
Another $569M completely wasted. There will never be any oversight or accountability for this money – ever. These districts will do little more than pay their people more and provide “training” for these highly educated-overpaid administrative and teacher staffs. Some may buy more internet services…but what for? The no one knows if the students will be back in the buildings. The federal Erate program already covers large percentages of the internet and IT costs for districts…so, again, this will do nothing but provide “training” for teachers and more money for administrators.
The article doesn’t explain the issue of legal interpretation involved. The CARES Act specifies that “local educational agency receiving funds shall provide equitable services in the same manner as provided under section 1117 of the ESEA of 1965 to students and teachers in non-public schools.” While Section 1117 of the ESEA of 1965 does restrict distribution based on the proportion of low-income students in private schools, the CARES Act nonetheless requires providing those equitable services “to students and teachers in non-public schools”. As such, Devos’s likely position is that “student and teachers in non-public schools” negates the narrower low-income restriction… Read more »