Protracted
legal battles, poorly worded initiative,
'Dark Money' from anonymous
sources.Who needs it? Not us. Not now.
On the ballot this fall is Phoenix’s Proposition 487 regarding the pension plan for employees of the City of Phoenix.
Our recommendation: No on 487
After careful review of the facts and of the opinions of leading experts both for and against the proposition, we recommend voting ‘No’ on the proposal.
We think that Prop. 487 is, as the saying goes, ‘not ready for prime time.’
About the proposition
Prop. 487 seeks to change the City of Phoenix retirement system from a defined benefit system to a 401(k) defined contribution plan. In layman’s terms, it means that the responsibility for performance of the funds rests either with the City of Phoenix (the current defined benefit plan) or with the employee (the proposed defined contribution plan).
While we think this is an argument wholly worthy of a public debate, voting in favor of this amendment is not, in our opinion, the way to do it.
Why vote against Prop. 487?
Arizona State University’s Morrison Institute for Public Policy completed a non-partisan Citizens’ Initiative Review where Phoenix’s pension reform proposal (Proposition 487) was thoroughly examined for 3½ days by 20 participants who represented a sample of Phoenix voters based on demographic criteria, according to information on its web site.
One of the things that experts seem to agree upon is a protracted legal battle if the proposition passes. From the Morrison Institute findings:
Both sides expect legal challenges due to the unclear language of Proposition 487, which may delay the implementation of the Proposition and incur legal costs to the City of Phoenix.
And…
... as written, Proposition 487's impact on police and firefighters is unclear, and may contribute to unintended financial and legal consequences for employees, the city, and taxpayers.
A protracted legal battle means that it could cost the city millions just to learn how to implement the plan. That’s not our idea of reform.
Where did it come from? Who’s paying for it?
Many experts seem to think the proposition was poorly worded. We’ve been told by people familiar with the Citizens’ Initiative Review that one of the leading proponents was asked ‘Who wrote the proposition?’ His response was that he didn’t know. Also, funding in support of the proposition remains secret, feeding the fears of untraceable ‘dark money’ flooding our elections.
We believe that we should know who wrote it and who is funding it. Many of us live here because of the sunshine; we think sunshine has an even greater place in our politics.
We have always been supportive of true pension reform
In March 2013, Citizens for Phoenix supported the pension reform on the ballot and provided an argument in favor for the city’s official voter guide. In the guide, we wrote:
“We support the plan for pension changes, but we wish the City Council would have gone further.”
We still hold that position. But this is no way to achieve it. Vote ‘No’ on Prop. 487 and encourage and continue a public debate on the issue of pension reform until what we vote on is truly ready for prime time.
American Freedom by Barbara Has NOT received any monies to post this information,it is a courtesy post.
