The difference between the new plan and the Mayor's plan and the old Council/Controller plan is thus:
Instead, it solves the problem of needing to bring the pension fund (currently 29.3% funded) to the needed 50% funded by dedicating 30 years of Parking Authority revenues to the pension (guaranteed backed by the city's general fund). The pension fund must be 50% funded by December 31 to avoid a takeover by the state. It uses the current value of these assets to cover the $220 million needed.It does not provide a windfall for Wall Street. It does not create debt -- interest payments -- for the city.
The huge question remaining is where Mayor Luke Ravenstahl stands in all this and if any action is needed on the part of his administration. If today's appearance in Council's Chambers by Finance Director Scott Kunka is any indication, he won't be with it...And according to Jon Delano he isn't.
Council's now back in session, but I'll be off to work soon. Who knows if anything will be resolved by the time I get back...
.
"If today's appearance in Council's Chambers by Finance Director Scott Kunka is any indication, he won't be with it...."
ReplyDeleteWhat he say, sorta?
"What he say, sorta?"
ReplyDeleteShort Answer: You can't handle the truth!
Long Answer: There's nothing for the Mayor or the Parking Authority Board to do because what you're proposing won't fly because you cannot dedicate parking revenue to the pension (or anything else) because it's already pledged to pay off their own debt.