PERS

NV PERS is in lieu of Social Security and was designed in 1947, and it is one of the best retirement plans in the nation. In Nevada, no Social Security benefits accrue during public service and it is one of 13 states with this kind of retirement plan. PERS is well-funded, properly managed and makes money at a rate higher than most expect. The 27 year return on investments is an incredible 9.5 percent. This is despite several recessions including the Great Recession and wild market fluctuations during that time.

Public employees are penalized by many laws, specifically the Windfall Elimination Program (WEP) started in 2006 and the “pension offset rule” which started in 1983 for those vested after time. For example, if a state employee has 40 quarters  they would likely receive no social security benefit though they earned those quarters and if they do get some benefits, the WEP can reduce them by as much as a two-thirds.

The IRS’ “normal retirement age” standards are being reworked by the IRS and they might provide a proposal this year. The changes must be proposed by the IRS and considered by Congress. So, this will be a lengthy process. Existing employees do not have to be concerned about the impact of the IRS rules because they cannot amend existing retirements plans.

About 9,000 PERS members are now classified as “lower tier benefits” employees which is a result of actions by the legislature 2009. The reforms now require a higher retirement age, increased early retirement penalties and an increased in contribution rates over all.

Retirement contribution rates will increase in the next two years based on their “5-year smoothing curve” but may drop after that. However,  I would not count on it.

The average age for retirement has increased from 61 to 64 years old. This is in just one year!

About 57 percent of public employee retirees make less than $30,000 a year and there are about 100,000 retired public employees.

The number of retired public employees re-employed under the critical shortage provisions is very low (less than 175) and most are county teachers in Clark County. Reforms were made in 2009 via AB 488.

PEBP

There are currently over $43 million  in excess reserves because of plan changes since 2009. This came about because of lower claim costs, increased premiums, poorer coverage and high deductibles. This was unexpected and the excess will be spent down to cover expected increases in health costs and will not be used to reduce deductibles or premiums.

The PEBP board will set rates in March 2012 but they are expected to be flat for 2013.

The net assets for PEBP are 5 million from a high of 29 million a couple of years ago. Most of the difference ($27 million) was taken by the legislature to balance the state budget. The result was to shift state deficit problems and make public employees pay. (State Employee Tax)

The costs for claims has decreased by almost 4 percent. This is probably because of fewer retired participants. Thousands were transferred to Nevada’s new medicare health exchange program and there were fewer catastrophic events which have high costs. Or… many public employees are not getting health care they need because it is too expensive.

The drop out rate by employees doubled and no one really knows why. They could be on another plan (spouse’s plan) or it is because the plan costs too much so they are going without insurance. The drop out rate seems to be the highest in lower paid public employees.

Generally, and despite the increased deductibles, participants are taking their medicine as before. The generic drug usage by public employees is very high though specialty drugs use is up.

Since July 1, 2010 the unfunded liability of the health plan dropped from $1.2 billion  to $947 million which is a significant decrease.

The PEBP will finally get around to Federal compliance tests/audits such as those proving non-discrimination within the plan and for COBRA compliance. They claim they could not comply because of budget cuts.

A health benefit was earned by current retirees while they were active employees but their subsidy was decreased so the employees must pay more. Public employees, both active and retired have done a lot to keep costs down and to reduce the plan’s liabilities. This is commendable.  Nevada has done more than any other state to reduce its health plan liabilities and to make it sound. State employees have been critical in that success.

The meeting will also be broadcasted live. Go to the Legislature’s Audio/Video page by clicking here.

01/30/12 9:00 AM

Interim Retirement and Benefits Committee  Room 4412 of the Grant Sawyer State Office Building, 555 E. Washington Ave., Las Vegas, NV.   Videoconferenced to 2135 of the Legislative Building, 401 S. Carson St., Carson City, NV. This is the first meeting of the 2011-2012 Interim. Please see agenda for details.        AGENDA

Gimme, gimme “Pigs at the Trough”.

For mining it is almost no taxes and shipping their wealth to Canada and for casinos it is the paying the lowest tax rate in the world and investing their profits in a Communist country.

Un-American “Pigs at the Trough”.

They have millions to spend on lavish salaries for their executives and lobbyists but for casinos that does not translate to living wages for  hotel and food service workers. They take but don’t give, they control Nevada’s governments with lobbyists and make laws to benefit themselves all the while claiming they are fighting to survive like the rest of us.

Self centered “Pigs and the Trough”.

Their squeals of horror at taxes bring out their piggy friends such chambers of commerce, political research institutes, a Las Vegas newspaper and tea-party types who think Nevada has a bloated state government. In reality, they just want more stuff from governments they don’t want to pay for.

Don’t tax me “Pigs at the Trough”.

They are indifferent to the suffering of Nevadans and feel no shame. Like a psychopath, they see nothing wrong with their behavior.

Psycho “Pigs at the Trough”.

They want no part in actually paying for services such as education, public safety, prisons, and health services they want.

I want it but won’t pay for it “Pigs at the Trough”.

They think it’s fine state employees continue to take a hit on the salaries, pensions and benefits so they can benefit with low or almost no taxes.

Pay my way “Pigs at the Trough”.

They think anything government is bad and anyone who works for one or depends on one is too but it is they who are the pigs at the trough. They just don’t see it and they do not understand that in Nevada the people who work for government are their caretakers and allow them to thrive with generous laws, low taxes and low wages. And what they don’t pay, every Nevadan and visitor to Nevada must pay out of their pockets.

Don’t care about the other guy “Pigs at the Trough”.

Don’t think so? Well consider this…. they own politicians with their donations, through their lobbyists and they write laws they want and in the end, control the governments they criticize.

They are the ultimate welfare “Pigs at the Trough”.

They even get Nevadans to belive their sob story to protect their corporate welfare.

Lying “Pigs at the tough”.

Now let’s corral those “Pigs at the Trough” and show them who is boss which is all Nevadans. This is our state, not theirs. Let’s start with no more casino or mining lobbyists at the Legislature.

The PERS attorney said they want “definitive statement”  from the Nevada Supreme Court about what the applicable laws mean. Retirement benefits are paid with tax dollars and from the PERS fund which receives employee payments and income from investments.

This issue part of a scheme to change the retirement plan for existing retirees by scapegoating and engendering public animosity toward them under the banner of “transparency” . This is simply political positioning before the 2013 Legislative session. A lot of what happens next year is decided this year.

There have already been proposals to reduce pension benefits for every current retiree (SAGE Commission). Further, retirees have already seen significant reductions in health benefits which reduces their effective income. They are in a difficult position since they did not pay into Medicare or Social Security but they did generously pay into PERS for their retirement and were promised health insurance. For example, state employees currently pay just over 12 percent of their salaries into PERS while Social Security recipients about 4 percent. The difference is staggering.

The Bludgeoning of the Elderly

by

Larry Cassidy

As pointed out in my post on your web site, the information ordered by District Court Judge James Russell to be released by PERS, pursuant to the Reno-Gazette Journal vs. PERS ruling in favor of the Reno-Gazette Journal, will be skewed and misleading, since it will not reveal that numerous retired state employees purchased retirement time with their own personal assets, not derived from their employment with the State of Nevada.

PERS was set up so that the State of Nevada would not have to pay money into Social Security for state employees; and state employees were compelled to participate in the PERS pension program, as opposed to Social Security. In light of this fact, since the Social Security benefits that people receive are confidential, PERS pension benefits should be confidential as well.

Additionally, the State of Nevada did not pay into Medicare, and many state employees will therefore never receive Medicare benefits, unless they worked in the private sector prior to or after working for the State of Nevada, and must therefore pay a significant portion of their pension income to purchase private health care insurance or to participate in Nevada PEBP. Therefore, it may appear that a retired state employee is receiving a higher pension benefit through PERS than he would be receiving through Social Security, when in actuality the retired state employee is paying for health care insurance which the private sector employee does not have to pay for, since they are receiving Medicare benefits instead.

Since Nevada is a right-to-work state, and labor unions are pretty much ineffectual in the State of Nevada, and there are no collective bargaining laws protecting state employees, the pay, benefits, and pensions of Nevada state employees were not and are not arbitrated or coerced out of state legislators by powerful labor unions, but were determined by the freewill of duly elected state legislators, who represented the will of the people. The pensions that state retirees receive were earned as part of their employment with the State of Nevada, with the same effect and legal promise as a contractual agreement.

Obviously, the reason that certain persons, organizations, and media outlets want pension related information released by Nevada PERS has nothing to do with the openness and transparency of government, but rather is intended to stir up animosity, resentment, and envy amongst the public, all for the purpose of some political agenda, which scapegoats retired state employees, as if they are responsible for the economic and budgetary problems facing Nevada.

The mere fact that Nevada PERS keeps on having to issue the same notices and corrections to distorted editorials and supposed news articles and stories, stating that PERS is financially sound, sustainable in the short-term and in the long-term, and not facing any funding crisis, is proof that certain media outlets could care less about the truth or about the facts, and are in actuality well-funded political propaganda mouthpieces for political organizations.

In an editorial in the Las Vegas Review-Journal, posted on January 17, 2012, entitled Futile court fight: PERS board should abide by judge’s ruling, it states, “These records are of vital public interest. PERS is underfunded. Taxpayers are on the hook for pension benefits that can’t be paid. They have a right to know how much money retirees are receiving so voters can judge whether those benefits should be reduced or eliminated. The only reason to deny them this information is to keep them in the dark about abuses and practices they’d consider unacceptable.”

That is the main purpose behind this ongoing assault on retired Nevada state employees and behind forcing Nevada PERS to release private information on private citizens formerly in the employ of the State of Nevada, to reduce or eliminate the pensions that they rightfully receive and was promised to them as part of their compensation, in lieu of receiving Social Security and Medicare benefits.

Though more skillful, those who are trying to steal rightfully earned pension benefits from Nevada PERS retirees are just as callous and ruthless those despicable thugs who bludgeon the elderly to rob them of their cashed Social Security checks. As a matter of fact, they are exponentially more callous and ruthless, since their efforts target thousands of retirees.

It is shameful that greed has become so acceptable and such as motivating factor in our country that it is now consider permissible, under the guise of good government and balancing budgets, to bludgeon the elderly in order to steal their pensions and Social Security benefits.

Already, the “newspaper” in Las Vegas, the one that hates state employees, is demanding the board not appeal because it would be a waste of money.

The reason the item is on the agenda is because a judge’s ruling is a valid item of  Board business … it is something they need to know about and understand. Plus, complying with the order will cost the System money. Just because it is on the agenda does not mean the board will appeal the ruling as the “newspaper” implies.

The haters in Las Vegas really need to “get a grip” and stop their unseemly attacks by trying to turn fantasy into fact. Despicable is a word for them.

————————-

See my previous post:  ”PERS Retirement Info Is Public Info”, December 22, 2011

Sorry about that!

The Appeal started its on-line subscription service late last year. The solution for me will be to no longer link to Nevada Appeal articles. The same story can usually be found elsewhere.

Steve Sebelius provides the details and reasoning behind a recent lawsuit by the NPRI (Nevada Public Policy Research Institute) a conservative “think tank” and anti-state employee organization. They sued a PC technician working for Public Works because he was also a state legislator because they believed a state employee cannot simultaneously serve in both the legislative and executive branches citing the separation of powers language in the state constitution (Article 3, Section 1).

I think they are right about this.

When Brian Sandoval was the Attorney General he opined that executive branch employees may not serve in the Legislature but local (county and city) employees could.

The lawsuit is probably moot and will be dismissed because the state employee resigned so there is no longer a  ”live controversy” for the court to consider. However, they are currently arguing the case not be dismissed and will undoubtedly file another lawsuit should this scenario recur.

It would have been interesting for the court to resolve this and I think it is in the public interest to do so.

Then, there is the legislative session next year which seems to come too soon. How about every 3 or 4 years? They seem to be more trouble than they are worth and rarely resolve anything such as the budget. Unfortunately, attacking state employees is always on the agenda.