Jackson Jambalaya

Good job, study commission! Action is required by the Governor-Elect and the legislature to institute the recommendations so the state's credit rating is preserved and the program made sustainable. The return rate on PERS investment should be around 6 percent instead of the 7.5 % which seems too rosy. The head count of state workers needs to be reduced and the traditional patronage system of government reformed. The latter would mean consolidation of counties and state colleges.

I did my 25 years and at times for very little pay. Myself like many others stayed for 25 to receive the COLA each december. Dont believe for one second that they will reinstate it after a few years. That is fiction If the legislature takes it now it will never come back. DONT LET THIS HAPPEN PEOPLE

So John you believe it is fine for the annual COLA to exceed the corresponding CPI rate? Exactly how did you earn that?

8:43. Get your facts straight. The changing status of PERS does not affect the State's Credit Rating. You obviously know nothing of the bare-bones position funding that exists in state agencies. What's up with your tossing apples into an orange barrel by lumping the discussion with county government consolidation, patronage and college reform, none of which have jack to do with the discussion at hand.

I believe it was a fellow name of Bryant who during his campaign said four or five times that 'the 13th check is not in any danger'. Barbour is history but he waited till he got state employee votes twice and had one foot out the door to approach this subject. Bryant will be reminded of his statement by thousands upon thousands of voting PERS members.

I do support the whacking of the SLURP debacle as a first measure, although Barbour carefully left it out of the commission's charge. As Dave Ramsey might say, start by whacking off the heads of the smaller suckers first, then move on. SLRP should not be a sacred gubment mule.

The 13th check is indeed not in any danger.

The COLA freeze is absolutely appropriate. These guaranteed increases are literally draining PERS. You think 62% funded is bad, wait until next year. I predict somewhere around 55% by end of year b/c of COLA increases and the continued soft economy due to election year and, frankly, Democrats and their sanctimonious high horse of protecting entitlements despite their drain on the majority. To that end....

9:23AM you are incorrect about the State's credit rating by the National Rating Agencies. PERS is now hitting their radar screen and it will mean that borrowing for the entire state at the benefit of the entire population will cost more.

10:26, so, you're basing your claim of fact on your projection of what might happen, coupled with something you call the radar screen? You should set up a palm reading trailer down on 49. Meanwhile, please give an example of a time when the state's credit rating has been affected positively or negatively by PERS or any of the multiple systems under its umbrella. We'll wait....

The number of state workers is part of the equation and is, in fact, the main multiplier to determine if the retirement system is funded. I should not have to illustrate that fact. The number of state agencies, counties, colleges, etc has a bearing on the total head count. Colleges and local government have a mighty role in the duplication of services and potential economies of scale. They must be examined for that fundamental reason. Some municipal and county governments could be combined. We obviously do not need (82) county governments.

Indeed, 1:27 pm and the reduction of state employees from budget cuts will have an impact.

And, having been on the Board for Community and Junior Colleges,your observation on the waste resonates to me.

Once upon a time, I nearly got tarred and feathered for being angry that the child of a Mississippi taxpayer that transferred from a junior college to an IHL would have to pay again for a basic course, like English 101, that had already been passed with a C or better.

I learned, to my dismay, that the junior colleges faculty and IHL had been meeting for a decade at the Broadwater to " work this out".

After my hissy fit, it was worked out in less that 3 months for the basic courses but a few may still linger.

In the end, I resigned as any drunk on the street could have shown up and rubber stamped whatever the junior college presidents wanted.

Also, the fact that I didn't have a " dog in the fight" ( meaning that I didn't attend a state supported school ) was " interpreted" to mean I was " arrogant" rather than objective.

That I only gave a " rat's behind" about efficient use of taxpayer dollars was lost.

That said, the situation improved over time with better appointments and new leadership, but if anyone thinks the MS Board for Community and Junior Colleges has oversight responsibilities, they are sadly mistaken. Like other boards , their FUNCTION is as an "advocacy" board and their very limited responsibilities were politically trumped by a group created and supported by the junior college presidents.

Legislators , rather stupidly , in my opinion, believe that junior college presidents can " deliver" their students and staff. Given the complaints from students and staff about administrative mismanagement, I doubt that.

And, I've often wished KF would do the math on junior college president's income after accounting for " perks". And, that he would look at how junior colleges can tax without elected representation...was 17 mil a YEAR in my day, but could be worse.

Susan Purdy

I imagine, as Susan Purdy knows, most of the waste in position overage exists at the so-called state-department level, rather than at the desk level and street level where people serve the public, pound the pavement and stand in front of a classroom.

Junior/community colleges are bigger culprits than are the insane system of school districts. I've heard and witnessed all my life that a junior college president's job is the best job to have in the state. A close second would be the multitude of vice presidents in the junior colleges with multiple titles (and fatter checks) who also have their wives on the payroll. There is no such thing as an anti-nepotism clause in the junior college system.

However, while position numbers factor in the equation, the system needs examination and change with or without the conversation about fat in the job budget. I agree with the posters who say SLRP is the first piece of fat to whack off the belly of the sow. Next is the State department of transportation, the state department of education, the state corrections department, the state employment security department.....hell, just list them all and cut them in half at the state office level.

Shadow,
I don't know what the equivalents are today, but when I was on the board in the mid-eighties,if one put value on the " freebies" , one of the junior college presidents made over $300,000 a year.

When I succeeded in getting funding so that salaries would be closer to the southeastern average for faculty, at more than one junior college, it went, yet again , primarily to administrative salaries. When I objected , one president actually argued successfully, that since he paid some teachers more and some less, the " average" wasn't relevant.

Since he had a PhD and I assumed that he averaged his grades at some point as a student, I think he knew that he could say anything, no matter how foolish, and his political clout was enough...especially when up against " a housewife".

I'm sorry I couldn't have been more effective as a strong junior/community college system can be an important partner to economic development. And, a strong, efficient system can provide a high value education for our taxpayers and children.

Susan

December 15, 2011 12:29 PM

Well, if you want to continue to operate under assumptions that have brought you to the brink of insolvency by putting your head in the sand and calling me a palm reader. So be it. You are the one with everything to lose, not me sir, not me.

And have you read the actuarial reports? Or are you attacking the messenger? Homer Your Promise was pretty good at that.

This conversation needs to move to the newest post. Bashing Junior Colleges and ignoring the reality of PERS situation is a strawman.

This conversation needs to move to the newest post.

/\/\ Control freak /\/\

^^ Shadowfax ^^

^^ Shadowfax ^^

Nope.

Nope.

Ain't Shadowfax.

The recommendation to use a 7.5% rate of return is also problematic as most pension funds are overweighted in fixed income securities. Given that interest rates are at all time low and will not be rising even in the intermediate term, the math for state retirement systems nationwide is grim. Barbour's anaology comparing our budget/retiree problem with Europe should not be taken tongue in cheek.

What's this silliness of posting ^^Shadowfax^^? I post under the moniker Shadowfax.

9:25 Allocation for equities is almost 70% so its not accurate to say PERS is overweighted in fixed income. It had almost 20 % in non-US stocks. The return on investments last year was a rocking 25 % but I think the allocation in equities should be reduced given the uncertainty in Europe.

Be clear , I was not bashing junior colleges which are a vital part of our State's educational system and, I think the faculty and staff do a remarkable job with resources that are often far too limited.

I was reporting FACTS about the lack of oversight and waste of taxpayer dollars at the administrative level that I discovered while serving on the state board.

I understand, quite well, that the junior colleges are loved by their alums and seen as politically untouchable by elected officials. Sadly, that makes poor use of funding and fiefdom building easier.

And, when we are discussing PERS, aren't state employees,how many there are and how they are paid a part of the equation? And, doesn't it matter that appointed, not elected,boards of trustees get to raise county taxes?

I got my SS cost of living notification in the mail yesterday. 3.5%. So what's the big deal with state retirees and 3%? Obama froze mine for three years while he went golfing.