Jackson Jambalaya

Soaring PERS costs? 99% of their costs are retiree benefits. Quit placing blame on the participants in the program. They played by the rules when they did their time. Put the blame on the legislature for promising benefits without a mechanism to fund the benefits. Every legislature since the automatic COLA was added is to blame for kicking this can down the road. Quit bragging about budget surpluses until this is fixed. That is outright dishonesty by our GOP leaders.

When cities and counties (and the state) pay for these PERS funding increases, the employees ultimately bear the costs because they won’t see a raise for the next five years (minimum) and your portion of health care coverage will go up, and less open positions will be filled, leaving you with more work to do.

Keep that in mind before you start howling for haircuts and reform. At the end of the day, the legislature did this to us. Not the employees. Not the cities and counties. Every legislator over the last 20 years should go to jail for running a ponzi.

Louisiana’s teachers retirement is more lucrative and less broke than Mississippi PERS. They get 2 1/2 % per year of service times their average high five years. We get 2% per year times the high four.

The difference? The 13th check that is crushing the Mississippi plan.

Toby Barker's seeking 'an honest adult conversation' about PERS is just more dishonest politico-speak.

Toby doesn't want to pay at the local level and no one at the state level wants to jackhammer the budget to backstop non-state employers (cities, counties, etc) struggling to pay their contribution rate increase.

Barker knows damn well that PERS is not sustainable because the Ponzi is upside-down as the expected rate of return is a joke, the gaming of high salary years is rampant and the ratio of retirees:employees gets worse by the month.

Nobody wants to raise taxes at any level specifically to fund PERS because they all know that short of a major reformation of the system these shortfalls never go away.

So spare us the honest adult conversation garbage Mr. Barker as you don't actually want to have that conversation because the gnashing of teeth and constituency bloodletting required to fix PERS is going to be extreme and will cost the politicos who do try to do the right thing their jobs.

I am a state employee covered by PERS and i wonder why the employee contribution isn't increasing in kind with the employer contribution. It seems only fair and to me it makes sense. I believe the employee contribution is like 9.4% and the employer contribution is 17.4%. We employees are going to get a benefit on retirement and wouldn't it be fair for the employee to share the expense??

Ok so what do we do then? As a state employee you could have given me all my money and matched it like a 401k and all is well in the world. But the state promised us we would have a retirement and PEERS is the system they set up. So should we penalize the employees because PEERS can't manage the system correctly? Personally I think the state should just make the shortfall a budget item and pay up every year. It's their fault. Everyone wants to scream and yell at us the state employee for actually thinking the state should keep it's promises. They already don't pay us enough, so I guess taking away our retirement would just be icing on the cake.

Have the local governments considered the high dollar figure, which is the result of a percentage increase, could be merely an indicator of inflated payrolls?

How many other employers are projected to provide a 3:1 retirement match?

@12:55pm - It’s PERS not PEERS.

Don't tax me to fund your retirement. You chose your career path and your system should be self funded like mine is.

12:34 is not totally correct. I retired with 36 years of service. 25 years was at 2%, 11 years was at 2.5%. You do not get the 13th check the first year but after that it is 3% compounded. I think the reasoning was in order to make a cola easy to calculate, they set 3% fixed. After 17 yr of retirement, my cola is better than 48% (compounding makes it more).

Toby Barker wants to have a conversation about PERS benefits that have been earned by his hardworking employees, but no mention of splash pads, water parks or Giraffe houses that have been built under his watch in Hattiesburg. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Yet if you listened to the politicians we have enough money to do away with the state income tax. It's simple math it's just that nobody wants to grab their calculators and do it. The baby boomer politicians wanted to kick the can down the road and then collect their 13th check before the pyramid collapsed.

1:52, enjoy that 13th check.

But that 13th check is the reason PERS is move broke than the Louisiana system even though their benefit is better (minus the 13th check of course).

it will take 50 years, but the PERS Ponzi scheme will eventually bankrupt the state.

"i wonder why the employee contribution isn't increasing in kind with the employer contribution."

Because employees vote.

You retirees are the biggest suckers.

You've blocked reform for so long there's not enough excess taxable income available to pay for even the short term fixes.

That big ol' can getting kicked down the road is headed straight in the direction of the barber shop.

Happy Haircuts Y'all.

The COLA was established under the Musgrove administration as a way to get votes. As a current retiree I understand that reforms need to happen, but we DO NOT want the legislature involved. The first thing that needs to happen is for the State Auditor to look into the cozy relationship between the PERS executives and the management firm investing the funds. How many trips to NYC, dinners, vacations, etc. have board members taken advantage of. What else is the reason for not obtaining the services of a different management group. The POOR returns over the years is totally unacceptable. I have an ETF that has returned 58% over the last 5 years and I don't do anything other than read the emailed monthly statement. Compare that to the poor returns of the PERS funds. I have written letters & emails to the State Auditors Office requesting an investigation. All current and future retirees should do so as well until something is done.

People bitch and moan about PERS. Yet, when the PERS board does something to address PERS funding needs, people bitch and moan? See a pattern?

To the person asking why current employee rates do not increase, the answer is that when employee rates increase, employees have to receive some sort of benefit in return. Rep. Cecil Brown addressed this in 2011 when employee rates were last increased by adding an amendment to give then current employees 4 hours of additional leave for each year under the new contribution rate to count as part of accrued leave at retirement. For a person working 30 years under the higher rate, it might increase they pension by .002%. It was not a benefit equal to the 2% increase but employees went along with it anyway.

For legislators, touching PERS is a death wish. They won't change PERS because they want to get reelected. They won't do something to address PERS's issues for the same reason.

There are also legal issues. PERS benefits are considered to be a contract between the state and an employee at the date of hire. The US and Mississippi constitutions contain clauses that prohibit state action that impairs the obligation of a contract. Any attempted change to the current system for current employees or retirees will generate lawsuits.

The legislature can make any changes they want for employees hired after a future date such as increase retirement to 35 years; no retirement benefits before xx age; lower annual service credit from the current 2% for first 30 and 2.5% beyond; benefits based on 5 or 6 years of highest pay; do not count overtime (a favorite among some agencies for people nearing retirement; different calculation for cost of living increases. A 401K system is unfeasible because the state would have to fund the new system as well as the current PERS system.

In FY 2023, the state collected about $700 million over estimates. Reeves brags about a $4 billion surplus. Surely there's a few million or tens of million that can be thrown at PERS.

The legislature had no problems in siphoning off $13 million from the restaurant and hotel sales tax collections to give to MDA to spend on tourism advertising without any proof that such advertising increases tourism. Give that to PERS. It's not much, but it meets a need instead of making advertising agencies richer.

As Kingfish has noted, there has been a decline in the number of PERS employees. The decrease is due to a number of factors (Republican leaders desire to cut government, low pay, infrequent raises) and is also a contributing factor to PERS issues. No, I'm not saying hire a bunch of people, but if one part of the model does not meet projections, another part of the model (employer funding or investment returns) have to pick up the difference.

Yes Sir and thank you @1:38 p.m.!!!

2:35, not enough taxable income? But we keep crowing about being a low tax state that runs giant billion dollar budget surpluses. Gonna be difficult to break contractual obligations, especially employment-related obligations without a state bankruptcy. Trust me, there's plenty enough taxable income to fix this. But no, let's go abolish income taxes.

More splash pads and zoo's, plus giant COLA checks equals votes. So do tax cuts.

This leadership stuff is easy.

@2:37. PERS uses 53 investment managers. Your conspiracy of a "cozy" relationship between the board and "a firm" falls apart right there. Try reading the PERS comprehensive annual report for enlightenment.

I also hope you don't have all of your money in one ETF. If PERS concentrated funds in a handful of investments, they would violate their fiduciary responsibility and the first basic rule of investing: diversify.

To summarize 50% of the prior posts: "I don't know shit about any of this, but here goes my comment anyway."

Please enshrine this comment made in the initial response at 12:13...

"Soaring PERS costs? 99% of their costs are retiree benefits."

Well, NO SHIT! Just damn!

will the last one in the room please turn out the lights-

@3:11 - since you've read the PERS annual report, perhaps you could share with us how many 'hundred million' dollars that PERS spent on investment fees. My cat could diversify PERS investments and get as good or better results for a whole lot less.

I respect Bigger Pie Forum for acknowledging that now is not the time for tax cuts in a state that both (1) is a net welfare recipient from the federal government; and (2) has major unfunded obligations to its retirees.

That is what was meant by "serious adult conversation," right?

The decisions are left up to folks who are direct beneficiaries of the plan. Tate and Gunn and the rest of them are not going to cut benefits that they are about to receive. Like somebody said, nothing short of a state bankruptcy will cur promised benefits. Now, new members might get a worse deal and effectively supplement older members. But promised benefits are not going away. The fox is in charge of setting the rules of the henhouse. It’s that simple.

@ 2:03 who said, "But that 13th check is the reason PERS is move broke than the Louisiana system even though their benefit is better (minus the 13th check of course).

Dude, that's like saying 2 is bigger than 5 (not counting the 3 of course).

The only loser in the PERS debacle is the Mississippi taxpayer. Retirees already getting more benefits than they ever could come close to paying for. Employees will get those same benefits when they retire. Legislators get PERS on steroids called SLRP for just a few years of incompetent leadership. The guy getting effed over in this whole deal is the taxpayer, who work and pay til they can’t see straight to subsidize PERS retirees to hang it up after 25 or 30 years.

Am I the only one who notices that Bigger-Cow-Pie is big on screaming about problems, but always short on recommending solutions?

If that jabbering group of malcontents is truly composed of learned, top one-percenters, where are the solutions?

If any of them had real jobs, they'd know when you bring up a problem, you're expected to detail a solution. Otherwise, please leave the room and take a seat out by the water-cooler.

And the local municipalities always scream "we will have to raise property taxes".

Why only property owners ?

I think the vast majority of Mississippians that interact with state employees on a daily basis don't own any property.

The PERS financial failures have had the "kick the can down the road " mentality for too long within the legislature.

Call your local rep and senator to stop this PERS crap and an increase in your property tax.

7:16
Where do you think municipalities get their money? No income tax. No casino tax. No whisky tax. No fuel tax. No cigarette tax. Sales tax, which they have no control over the % of the tax, and property tax.

So maybe you can tell the municipalities another way to increase revenue.

@3:58
A more relevent metric is the cost per $100,000 invested. For PERS that figure is $308 per $100,000. Try finding a financial adviser that will accept .00308 on actively managed investments.
And please let your cat choose your investments and let us know how that goes.

@6:25pm

"Am I the only one who notices that Bigger-Cow-Pie is big on screaming about problems, but always short on recommending solutions?"

BPF merely illuminates big problems so self-evident that any idiot can see what the solution is. Everyone knows what the solution is for PERS. Begin to disband it while there's something left to work with, or they'll be a fast run on what's left of it.

How does one go bankrupt? A slow trickle over a period of time, and then all at once.

@7:48 - 100 million dollars for investment fees is absurd - just like the realtors that are still charging 6% for selling 500k houses like they did for 100k houses. Are they working 5 times harder - don't think so, tonto. obtw, which one of the thieves do you work for? and btw, my cat does quite well, thank you.

How does one go bankrupt? A slow trickle over a period of time, and then all at once.

Retirees are just fine with that as long as the final fall comes after they are dead and gone.

Their argument is essentially that state government spending should be seen as subordinated to the funding requirements of PERS and that no amount of incremental taxation is too high to fulfill the obligation.

Their attitude when it comes to PERS is all of Mississippi can get f^%ked as long as the PERS participants get what's coming to them. There will be no reformation of PERS that costs them a plug nickel. Everyone else shares the sacrifices required to fund PERS and they will not be forced into any sharing.

How much of that money that retirees receive who were Fireman, Policeman, Teachers, Community College Staff, etc….goes back into the local community to support local grocery stores, restaurants, hardware stores, etc.
Take a look at your county and see how much money is placed back into the county/municipalities by those retirees.
Now, let’s say both Social Security and PERS disappears - where do you think those people are going to wind up? That’s right, on welfare. They will be too old to get work and Walmart can’t hire everyone as a greeter.

10:03 and others
I am not a PERS retiree and nobody in my immediate family is either. I do not understand the animosity toward the retirees. Yes they have a great retirement system, much better than mine. I could have gone to work for the government and received PERS but chose to work in the private sector. When these retirees started govt work PERS was part of the deal(just like low wages and usually easier work with little accountability). But nevertheless, they were promised that if you work x years at y salary you will recieve z in retirement plus COLA. Dont blame the retirees for demanding what they are supposed to receive. Blame the legislature for not fixing the problem long ago. They can still fix it.

@31st at 3:06 pm, there is not enough income to fix PERS. PERS is something like $20B underfunded. There are I think less than 1.2M people working in Mississippi.

The people responsible for this are past legislators and the PERS participants over the years that ensured any politician trying to fix PERS would immediately get voted out of office. Unfortunately, you can't get $20B out of them either and you're probably not going to get anything out of any of them, except for those unfortunate PERS participants that will still be in the system to face haircuts.

Going to be really interesting because there is no bankruptcy code for states so it's unclear how to handle anything when obligations can no longer be met. A short term fix would be to disconnect PERS funding from public employment and have PERS employers start at least putting enough in to stop the shortfall from growing. And then come up with a plan to start funding a voluntary alternate to PERS with less generous benefits, with a guarantee that nobody will end up voluntarily taking larger haircuts than people that stick with the traditional PERS plan, but no guarantee that the ones that forego it won't receive a worse outcome than the ones that voluntarily take haircuts.

An acquaintance who retired from one of the agencies in her late 40s told me that people in PERS need to retire as young as they can so that their 13th checks can start compounding. Any truth to that?

10:43 AM, they get both SSI and PERS? Sure about that?

Responding to 11:06am - yes, if you are retirement age 62 and a state retiree, you get social security and state retirement. I did not say SSI - they are different.

11:04 - I assume your acquaintance had 25 years in the system since she is in her 40’s. If that is the case, do you happen to know how much of her ending salary she is bringing home?
Depending on her current age - she will not see compounding for a while.

10:03, that is silly. PERS participants pay taxes also. When property taxes go up, they pay it.

You have reaped the benefits of their services. You will be required to make good on your obligation.

But we have a surplus! And we are going to eliminate income taxes.

Let's see how a bankruptcy judge smiles on that. State is going to have to pay up.

Yall are spitting in the wind. The biggest voting block in the state are the participants in PERS. By a loooong shot.

@11:04 - the compounding does not start until the year after the retiree reaches the age of 55.

"Begin to disband it while there's something left to work with, or they'll be a fast run on what's left of it."

Yep, there's another example of "I don't know shit about it but I'm gonna post anyway".

It'll be a surprise to you, but there can't be a 'run on the money' as it's not available under any circumstances other at the point of retirement.

Y’all need to all shut up, keep working and paying your taxes! My 13th check is due in 3 more months!

@3:32pm YOU clearly don't know what you're talking about.

Yes, you can request (after 90 days of separating from state employment) a refund of your contributions you made into PERS minus taxes and a penalty.

It would be interesting to see how many state employees have already requested to "cash out" now than wait to see what happens. If there's an uptick in that number, rest assured there is a trend toward a slow run... which could turn into a faster run sooner than later.

@ 7:33 - I do know what I'm talking about, but I did make a mistake in my post. I intended to say there can be no run on the system by anybody who stays in the system.

Whether leaving to retire or simply to leave, there are withdrawal options, including cashing out for a departing non-retiree. And at that point, the employee who leaves the system can only withdraw his/her contributions. Or they can let it sit there, which many do.

I'm afraid it was you who didn't know what he was talking about when you suggested a 'run on the system', assuming you meant a run similar to a run on the bank by depositors. That cannot happen.

7:33, that would be fantastic for the system. It eliminates the future liability. When you pull your money, the state’s portion stays in the plan and gets spread over the remaining participants.

If every single person quit and pulled their money, there would be zero liability. Case solved.

@8:42am "If every single person quit and pulled their money, there would be zero liability. Case solved".

That's exactly what the politicos want - so they don't have to even flirt with political suicide - and regardless of what 8:12am says - Yes it most certainly can happen.

It's no different that if/when you win the lottery - you take the lump sum up front, no matter if you're leaving a ton of money on the table spreading the payments out over thirty years. A bird in hand, is worth more than two in the bush.

Responding about retiring before age 55 and the COLA check:

I am a PERS employee and I will be eligible to retire at age 46 with 25 years of service. Yes, my COLA check will be 3% for the next 9 years. But when I reach the age of 55 the COLA was compounding behind the scene... it would then be a 18% COLA check and then adding 3% for every year after.

I intend to retire at age 46 and start a second career which depositing the retirement I have earned from the state.

I would be curious to know what percentage PERS was of the Gross State revenue at the year it was started up and what percentage of the Gross State revenue it is today?

Toby Barker ought to know this is one that will take your picture off the wall.