Judge: San Bernardino CA eligible for bankruptcy

On the heals of the Detroit bankruptcy we have San Bernardino California. This one has been coming for a while but looks to be given the official go ahead.

San Bernardino, Calif., eligible for bankruptcy: Judge

Judge Meredith Jury of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, said the city of 210,000, located 60 miles east of Los Angeles, was eligible for bankruptcy protection "as a matter of law based on incontrovertible facts."

Who do you think is going to get hammered on this one? Certainly not the secured creditors. My guess is the pensioners will get to bite the big one (again.)

The tentative ruling came despite objections by the California Public Employees' Retirement System, or Calpers. The $260 billion pension fund is the city's biggest creditor.

$260 billion and this won't be the last. City employees better start negotiating secured retirement plans in the future.

We need a Constitutional Amendment added in this nation. As I've thought about it, nothing less would do or be legal either. It would require a properly ratified amendment.

However, it should require the resignation from position of *EVERY* elected individual within a municipality that declares and is allowed bankruptcy.

I'd prefer more than just that ...but we can't outright gut the whole city or county down to the guys cutting lawns or supervising it.

NO elected official should be allowed to remain though. There is NO more definite statement of fail than a city or government of any kind to outright declare bankruptcy.

What they're saying is...when even taxing, fining and assessing fees couldn't feed the ravenous monster of spending anymore....nothing at all could. Good..their retirements should be part of the loss as well.

reply to post by wrabbit2000


Not a bad idea. At first I thought maybe this should be added to each states constitution but then realized local TPTB would never go for it. National level would work but I'm hesitant to even have our politico's monkeying with the constitution with most of the US population asleep. Who knows what they might "amend."

reply to post by Bassago


Well, a single amendment written isn't opening the whole thing up. That's a Constitutional Convention. A numbered amendment would take 2/3rds of the State Houses to approve it and send it back though.

The Blue states don't make up 2/3rds by number (38 of 50) so it would have to be a decent amendment all states generally agreed with. I've known a couple Missouri State reps up in our State House. They aren't Congress. They're normal guys and served a term, then left. Not the level to easily slide stuff by on required passage by that many. That would be the safety net.

Originally posted by wrabbit2000
We need a Constitutional Amendment added in this nation. As I've thought about it, nothing less would do or be legal either. It would require a properly ratified amendment.

However, it should require the resignation from position of *EVERY* elected individual within a municipality that declares and is allowed bankruptcy.

I'd prefer more than just that ...but we can't outright gut the whole city or county down to the guys cutting lawns or supervising it.

NO elected official should be allowed to remain though. There is NO more definite statement of fail than a city or government of any kind to outright declare bankruptcy.

What they're saying is...when even taxing, fining and assessing fees couldn't feed the ravenous monster of spending anymore....nothing at all could. Good..their retirements should be part of the loss as well.

That or a balanced budget amendment that demands all state and federal governments operate with a surplus instead of deficit in their budgets.

Well, this is interesting:

Calpers argues that it should not be treated like other creditors and must be paid in full because of California state law. Bondholders argue that federal bankruptcy law trumps state statutes and say Calpers should be forced to fight with other creditors over how much they are paid under an exit plan.

The issue, which is also likely to be central in the bankruptcy cases of Stockton and Detroit, could reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

www.cnbc.com...

This could be tied up for years if is goes to the Supremes.

Amazing to me how these cities can just decide not to pay what they owe to the Pension Funds...and then claim how badly unfunded they are.
Also, bondholders are insured...so they really don't lose anything....and they invested/gambled on they monies.

Pensioners and city residents should not be held hostage.

For comparison, the Detroit thread.
www.abovetopsecret.com...