California County official not only gets paid $423,000 a year, but will also receive same for life

reply to post by snarky412


Dear snarky412,

Yes....but I wish teachers, police, firemen, etc. were paid like her. As I'm sure they do too.... unfortunately, they're not. They are the ones that help educate, shape and maintain a city.

We don't improve anyone's situation by pulling everyone down.

reply to post by groingrinder


Dear groingrinder,

The person in question is not a politician.

Reply to post by AQuestion

The PD and FF do pretty good in CA. Average CA cop makes $97K. FF and city engineers make $118K. Hit captain and they bank $164K for PD and $148K for FF.

Highest paid cop in CA? CHIP Division Chief Talbott, who pulled in a whopping $484K.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by AQuestion

Accuse me of whatever you want and avoid having a real conversation. She took jobs for which she was promised compensation, she did her job and wants to retire and now you want to change what she was promised. How is that fair? Either you believe in capitalism or you do not, either you believe that governments should keep their commitments or you do not.

You, having a real conversation???????
No, all you have done is question me about Capitalism and slamming me when I don't give you the appropriate answer.
You have never engaged in a conversation.

If you are so hell bent on discussing that particular topic, open your own thread and debate the issue there.
That is not what this thread/article is about.

Sorry to disappoint you but you seem to be the only one here that doesn't see the problem with city officials getting paid outrageous salaries when the county/state really and truly can't afford it.
It even states in various articles about the overpaid city officials and that being one of the problems for the financial ruin.
California is in serious trouble.....

That is what this is all about.
Over paid people and whether or not it's reasonable and affordable.

Go create your own thread and quit trying to derail this one.
The other poster is right, you must work for the state or something.
You are seriously obsessed about Capitalism

reply to post by snarky412


Dear snarky412,

Please tell us how much she should have been paid, please tell us what she was offered and why you think it was wrong for her to take the job. And by the way, I have never worked for the State or anywhere near Alameda county and I don't know the woman at all. This woman did not cause the economic troubles that are worldwide. The crooks in the City of Bell and Vernon cheated the system, there is no claim that this woman did. Get a grip on yourself.

Originally posted by GreenGlassDoor
Reply to post by AQuestion

 

The PD and FF do pretty good in CA. Average CA cop makes $97K. FF and city engineers make $118K. Hit captain and they bank $164K for PD and $148K for FF.

Highest paid cop in CA? CHIP Division Chief Talbott, who pulled in a whopping $484K.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

Dear GreenGlassDoor,

While those numbers sound impressive, the fact is that most cops and firemen in San Francisco cannot afford to live there. Northern California is incredibly expensive. You cannot compare costs in California or New York to costs in others states. You left out what amount of their pay was overtime, it sort of makes a difference.

Reply to post by snarky412

It is a little more muddled then that. Back when Reagan was governor (with help from Brown on his first go around as gov) California implemented this monstrous CALPERS system. It's fine California was doing well, but coupled with 40 years of disastrous business legislation the initial assumptions proved to be wrong.

Each time the State legislature goes to gore that sacred calf the public union throws a fit and ties the thing up in court, so what's the point? The only remedy they've managed to pass is for new hires to be under a new pension program, while the people in place keep their old ones.

Like Officer Talbott, people under the old plan don't have a "use or lose" benefits program (when the Federal government passed theirs it was retroactive) so when they retire they sell back all their unused leave and sick days. For people on the job for decades that comes out to quite a sum. Also, the retirement pension program is based off the average of the highest years pay, so as guys approach retirement they start doing a lot of overtime to shore up those numbers (Transit guys are notorious for this).

So unless the legislature is willing to weather a # storm and lose the support of the public union, nobody is willing to tilt this windmill. Ans those guys, sheesh, there are stories to tell about what they're willing to do to keep that job.

The alternative would be to pass a public initiative Proposition, which if it passes requires to the state to legally defend in court. Of course it takes a bit of coin to get one of those things out there, meanwhile the Public Employee Union will start one of their media blitzes along the lines of the proposers hating policemen, teachers, and firemen (which has already been done in this post). Nobody wants to be accused of that.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

This is what has sparked fury among many people:

Using taxpayer money, the county’s supervisors are rewarding Administrator Susan Muranishi with a minimum annual salary of $423,664 for the rest of her life – including the years of her retirement.

Even though the county is struggling financially, it pays Muranishi significantly more than other US counties pay their administrators. In 2011, Washington County reported paying its administrator $120,228, which is the most it paid any of its salaried county employees.

The average salary for a chief administrative officer is $94,992, the International City/Council Management Association reported in 2008.

[color= orange]By giving its administrator more than four times as much money than the average American in that position, Alameda County has come under scrutiny for wasteful spending. Locals who heard about Muranishi’s pay have responded to the situation with shock and anger, infuriated that their county is being forced to slash its budget while the richest Americans continue to receive their pay – plus bonuses.

Call it what you like, I feel for those people in that county.

Reply to post by AQuestion

Don't conflate the issues. For starters the policemen get all kinds of incentive pay like putting on a uniform.

Also, it's the law that a police officer has to live in the muncipality they work in for the first three years or something like that. After which they can move.

Plus, the new hires are paying more out of their own pocket for their benefits because they're under a different program than the old guys. If the old guys gave a damn they'd take a cut and have a little more in the kitty for the new guys so the burden is less.

So don't boohoo me about those poor munis not affording to live where they work. Change the law.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by snarky412

 

Dear snarky412,

I read what you posted in your OP. Answer my simple question, do you believe in merit pay, do you believe in capitalism? Simple questions, not tricky. Say what you believe and I will say what I believe.

A government salary is not Capitalism. It is based on taking money from the governed forcibly thru taxes and supposedly spending that money for the betterment of the general population and tax base. Calif used to be one of the shining jewels of America and many said "what Calif does the nation follows". Now what Calif does makes many just shake their head in wonderment. I would say $400,000 for life is a great gig if you can get it!! That is more than the president makes on Paper.....Someone voted or approved her making that much so it's not all her doing but I have to side with the "shake your head crowd" on this one.
Isn't Calif complaining about being almost bankrupt? Just goes to show you we all should have been pencil pushing bureaucrats feeding off the largess of the herd; kinda makes one feel like a milk cow..milk, milk, milk, keep them dollars a-rollin...something like that.....I am sure she believes she deserves every cent of their tax dollars...Wonder if she lives in a gated community and has a licence to carry a firearm or body guards; after all she is $400,000 important to the state....I am impressed...I agree it is not her fault; she worked and that was the conditions of her accepting her furtherance at her job sight. Kinda like taking all your tax deductions; you are generous or a fool if you don't.

reply to post by 727Sky


Dear 727Sky,

A government salary is not Capitalism. It is based on taking money from the governed forcibly thru taxes and supposedly spending that money for the betterment of the general population and tax base. Calif used to be one of the shining jewels of America and many said "what Calif does the nation follows". Now what Calif does makes many just shake their head in wonderment. I would say $400,000 for life is a great gig if you can get it!! That is more than the president makes on Paper.....Someone voted or approved her making that much so it's not all her doing but I have to side with the "shake your head crowd" on this one. Isn't Calif complaining about being almost bankrupt? Just goes to show you we all should have been pencil pushing bureaucrats feeding off the largess of the herd; kinda makes one feel like a milk cow..milk, milk, milk, keep them dollars a-rollin...something like that.....I am sure she believes she deserves every cent of their tax dollars...Wonder if she lives in a gated community and has a licence to carry a firearm or body guards; after all she is $400,000 important to the state....I am impressed

You are confusing two different issues. This woman did not raise taxes, she was offered a job. Bureaucrats don't set taxes, politicians do, the same politicians that set salaries and compensation. Capitalism allows people to choose which jobs they take as they sell their services, which is what she did. The City/County of San Francisco could offer people $10 an hour to work as police and fire personnel, they might not get anyone that they want; but, it is a choice they could make and I would be good with that.

As for California's being bankrupt, it's budget is in the billions and there are plenty of services that the state could cut, that is a political decision. This is not the face of evil, she was a respected administrator that gave 38 years of her life to government service. I doubt very much she ever thought 38 years ago that she would have gone as far as she did.

As for your making $400,000 a year, all you have to do is find someone willing to pay you that much, same as me, same as everyone else. Should she feel bad that she stuck with it, they liked what she was doing and offered more as the years went by? We don't get to renegotiate contracts already made when one party has already fulfilled their part of the bargain and she did.

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by snarky412

 

Dear snarky412,

Please tell us how much she should have been paid, please tell us what she was offered and why you think it was wrong for her to take the job. And by the way, I have never worked for the State or anywhere near Alameda county and I don't know the woman at all. This woman did not cause the economic troubles that are worldwide. The crooks in the City of Bell and Vernon cheated the system, there is no claim that this woman did. Get a grip on yourself.

You seem to fail to understand that I don't have a problem with a person's salary IF the city/county is able to afford it.
California has a spending problem when it comes to the higher officials salaries. They think very highly of themselves evidently.

So, instead of setting salaries at a reasonable amount for a particular area according to what is normal and affordable, being the key word here ---affordable--- they don't care what the outrageous salaries are costing tax payers as long as they are set for life.

It's called 'budgeting'....which ironically is part of the duty of a county administrator's job ....preparation, monitoring, and execution of the county budget, which includes submitting each year to the council a proposed budget package with options and recommendations for its consideration and possible approval.

Many towns have cut jobs & have given pay cuts to the lower workers but not for themselves. They are untouchable even tho their lack of management has caused this fiasco.

In a word.......GREED!!!!!!
And to hell with the little people.

If you can't or won't understand that, well, you must work for the state/government.
Only the regular folks see the hypocrisy of all this BS.
And the lack of concern when it comes to the citizens.


--------------------


By the way, you have never stated your thoughts only question every one here.
What do we think about this or why that????

So, Mr.Conversationalist, what are your thoughts and what would you suggest to fix the financial problems??
Some would say that these town officials could start by cutting their own salaries back for starters.

-------------------

To compensate for these salaries, some cities and counties have been forced to lay-off city workers, slash public services, reduce the number of employed firefighters and police officers, and hold off on construction projects. San Bernardino filed for bankruptcy in Aug. 2012, after having awarded some of its employees with unusually high salaries. Former San Bernardino police chief Keith Kilmer, for example, receives $216,581 a year while also working another job.

The city of Chico became California’s latest to undergo government restructuring and reduce the number of city departments from 10 to 5. Facing a $3.5 million structural deficit and dwindling resources, the city has been forced to downsize.

While struggling with a massive deficit for years, the state of California has repeatedly been forced to cut its spending at both the local and state level. But as long as county administrators make more than $400k each year, taxpayers will continue to bear the consequences as the money is channeled to those at the top

Time to re-evaluate their salaries.
Surely they can live on $125,000 if others are able too.......
Maybe put a 'cap' on it until the state is financially stable.

reply to post by snarky412


Dear snarky412,

Excuse me, this woman is not responsible for the downturn in the economy and most government employees are taking cuts.

You seem to fail to understand that I don't have a problem with a person's salary IF the city/county is able to afford it. California has a spending problem when it comes to the higher officials salaries. They think very highly of themselves evidently. So, instead of setting salaries at a reasonable amount for a particular area according to what is normal and affordable, being the key word here ---affordable--- they don't care what the outrageous salaries are costing tax payers as long as they are set for life. It's called 'budgeting'....which ironically is part of the duty of a county administrator's job ....preparation, monitoring, and execution of the county budget, which includes submitting each year to the council a proposed budget package with options and recommendations for its consideration and possible approval. Many towns have cut jobs & have given pay cuts to the lower workers but not for themselves. They are untouchable even tho their lack of management has caused this fiasco. In a word.......GREED!!!!!! And to hell with the little people. If you can't or won't understand that, well, you must work for the state/government. Only the regular folks see the hypocrisy of all this BS. And the lack of concern when it comes to the citizens.

You seem to fail to understand what I am saying. The county can lower her salary, she is not represented by a union. In fact she is retiring and the next person will probably make less. I don't have a problem with lowering salaries. The residents of Alameda are free to set the salaries as they will. I have two problems with what you say, one is blaming her for taking a job when the county chose what to offer her as compensation, that is capitalism. She sold her services to the county. The second problem I have with what you are saying is that you think the government should be able to go back on their promises to her after she has already done 38 years. In law they call it "the benefit of the bargain" and the county already got what they paid for, now they have fulfill their part.

reply to post by AQuestion

I have two problems with what you say, one is blaming her for taking a job when the county chose what to offer her as compensation, that is capitalism. She sold her services to the county.

I never once blamed her for taking a job that offered her that.....

I said it was absurd for a salary to cost more than the county can afford. Basic math there where the budget is concerned.
If you are not bringing in enough money to pay the bills, you cut back INCLUDING salaries that are already unusually high according to many sources.
Nothing is written in stone.

And part of her duty was to monitor and plan a reasonable budget as County Administrator.
So yes, she is partly to blame for the county's demise.

The second problem I have with what you are saying is that you think the government should be able to go back on their promises to her after she has already done 38 years. In law they call it "the benefit of the bargain" and the county already got what they paid for, now they have fulfill their part.

Promises, promises.....

Tell that to the working class people who had their pay cut or lost their jobs for that matter.
And don't tell me it's not the same 'cause many like me believe it is.

If a salary can't be afforded, it can't be afforded, that simple.
Why is that so hard for you to understand?
If the money is not there, it is not there.
Oh wait, that's what the tax payers are for, to fulfill the 'promises'.

---------------------

Boy, all you do is have 'problems' with what I say.
Feel for you....

Let's see....
You have called me 'wrong and ill informed'
'Vague and deceitful'
'My responses are irrational'
Nagged me about Capitalism [off-topic]
And you misinterpret my comments.

In other words, any one who doesn't say what you want to hear is a problem to you??
My apologies sir, I will never be able to satisfy you.


Respectfully,
snarky

reply to post by snarky412


Dear snarky412,

Your responses are irrational and completely miss what I am saying.

Promises, promises..... Tell that to the working class people who had their pay cut or lost their jobs for that matter. And don't tell me it's not the same 'cause many like me believe it is. If a salary can't be afforded, it can't be afforded, that simple. Why is that so hard for you to understand? If the money is not there, it is not there. Oh wait, that's what the tax payers are for, to fulfill the 'promises'.

Firstly, I said I am fine with cutting salaries, I am not fine for breaking agreements when one party has already received what they bargained for. If the county could not afford her salary, they were free to let her go. I am not using complex words or thoughts, why are you so unwilling to understand me? If the money is not there then they should let people go, it is quite simple. It is also for the county and it's residents to decide who to keep.