The Taxpayers contribute about 80% of the money to fund the Police and Fire Pension system.  That’s right 80%!  Police and Fire participants in the pension plan ONLY CONTRIBUTE 10%.  The remainder comes from insurance premiums.

In spite of all this, Taxpayers only have a 40% say in how the Police and Fire Pension Fund is managed.  Of the five members who oversee  Police and Fire Pension Fund (PFPF), only two are appointed by City Council on behalf of the Taxpayer.  The  PFPF is poorly managed.  Administrative costs are high and the funds under perform relative to similar pension funds.

It is no coincidence that the PFPF fights every attempt at transparency as they collect high salaries and enjoy lucrative benefits.

At the very least, Taxpayers deserve to have a proportional representation on the PFPF board of trustees.  To that end, the Concerned Taxpayers of Duval County has adopted the following resolution.

Resolution adopted by Concerned Taxpayers of Duval Co. on January 9, 2012

To the Mayor and City Council ofJacksonvilleFL:

WHEREAS, the City of Jacksonville (“City”) provides about 80% of the funds that are contributed from all sources to the Jacksonville Police & Fire Pension Fund (“PFPF”), and this percentage is projected to increase; and

WHEREAS, the employees participating in the PFPF provide about 10% of the funds that are contributed from all sources to the PFPF, and this percentage is likely to decrease; and

WHEREAS, the remaining contributions to the PFPF principally come from premium taxes collected by the State respecting Duval County properties, and this percentage is also likely to decrease; and

WHEREAS, the PFPF is administered by a 5 member board of trustees, which invests assets, incurs liabilities, hires staff, and makes various expenditures, which in recent years have exceeded $7 million per year, exclusive of benefit payments; and

WHEREAS, employees participating in (benefiting from) the PFPF elect 2 of the trustees of the PFPF, while the City Council, on behalf of the City, appoints 2 of the trustees of the PFPF; and

WHEREAS, those 4 trustees of the PFPF choose a 5th trustee, who the City Council must by law appoint (ratify) as a ministerial matter; and

WHEREAS, the City thus directly appoints only 2 out of 5 trustees of the PFPF, and thereby lacks the power to control the operations of the PFPF; and

WHEREAS, the City needs to have, and deserves to have, the chance to exercise control over PFPF operations, because the City provides 80% of all contributions to the PFPF, and thus all decisions by the PFPF trustees principally affect the City and its taxpayers; and

WHEREAS, State legislation adopted in 2011 empowers the City to modify local law to directly appoint 3 of 5 PFPF trustees (see Curtis Lee’s letter to City Council et al dated Dec. 7, 2011); and

WHEREAS, such a change is not only fair, but proper because the PFPF has very high operating costs, substantial waste and abuse, and poor investment results; i.e., it has a poor track record;

WHEREAS, all existing PFPF trustees and executives have served at least 5 years, and many have served more than 20 years, with the result being that all such incumbents are implicated in the waste, abuse and poor financial results that afflict the PFPF; and

WHEREAS, a failure by the City to take advantage of the opportunity presented by the 2011 State legislation will result in continued harm to City taxpayers, because the PFPF has a poor track record, and is very costly to taxpayers – the PFPF costs the City and its taxpayers over 8% of the City’s General Fund Budget currently, and such percentage is projected to increase;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council and administration should obtain legal opinions and take all necessary action to effectuate such changes in local law, and then should appoint 3 new trustees of the PFPF, with the objective of replacing current management of the PFPF, reducing costs, waste and abuse, and reforming the PFPF.

The City Council Auditor has recently released the results of their audit of the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission.

The audit reinforces what we have been saying all along.  The promises made by the advocates of corporate welfare in the form of the Jacksonville Economic Development Commission are often not delivered.  With over a decade long track record of corporate giveaways, handouts and bailouts, taxpayers have little to nothing to show for millions of dollars that have been “invested” .

We applaud the new mayoral administration’s proposed elimination of the JEDC but are skeptical of the dubious effort to re-brand corporate welfare as “public private partnerships” or P3s or PPPs.  Unfortunately the P3s being touted bear no resemblance to the Navy aircraft flying over the city.  Instead, P3s are just another euphemism for corporate welfare schemes where taxpayers bear all the risk of capital financing for a project and private individuals benefit when there (rarely) is a profit.

Now Mayor Brown has promised to reform the concept and focus on Downtown.   Haven’t we heard the broken promises before? Lavilla Redevelopment?  ? Lavilla BistroRiver City Renaissance?  Courthouse?  Genovar Hall?  Shipyards?  Skyway People Mover? Our own John Winkler has performed his own investigation to summarize the just a few of the failed promises of the sages at city hall.  The investigation is featured on our November show.

We do not doubt the sincerity of those who would like to see the urban core thrive.  In fact, we would like to see downtown turn into a prosperous area where people actually enjoy going.   Unfortunately, taxpayers can not afford to lose any more money on risky giveaways disguised as “investments” for some unquantifiable and intangible public good.

We urge Mayor Brown to reconsider the public dollar giveaway to the aspiring robber barons camouflaged as philanthropists.

The following essay was written by Concerned Taxpayers of Duval County member Joe Andrews, Candidate for City Council, District 12 in opposition to City Council bill 2010-856.  To find out what you can do to stop this bill, go to the meetup on the Concerned Taxpayers of Duval County meetup group.

I do not understand why City Council is so hell bent on repealing the Law of Supply and Demand.  Throughout history, governments around the world have tried this and they have failed every time.  The closest to succeed were the Communist governments of the Soviet Union and China, but they only managed to drive their free economies underground where supply and demand flourished.  Eventually, even these governments realized the folly of their efforts and returned to at least a partial capitalist free market system.  Now our city government is trying to perpetrate the same foolishness that those governments did.  And this is not their first attempt: It was tried with 2005-091, the seafood Bill, again a couple of years ago with the Local Preferences bill and this past year with the Residency Requirements bill.   All of these bills were ultimately withdrawn.

The Law of Supply and Demand cannot be repealed  because it was not legislated into existence.  The Law of Supply and Demand is manifested by the actions of people who produce, trade and consume goods.   Passage of 2010-856 will be nothing more than a disruption of a working market system, causing higher prices, reduced production, reduced trade and reduced consumption, none of which, does one want in a down economy.  Think about it.

I call on this City Council to abandon this legislation and then advise those constituents who initiated this movement that they are now free to compete.

Joe Andrews
Candidate for City Council, District 12

Two City Council Bills that will likely come up before the full City Council on January 13th have caught our attention here at Concerned Taxpayers of Duval County.  The first one is bill 2008-1021. This bill appropriates $109,000 from the Special Council Contingency/PSG/Cultural Council account to pay for the Jacksonville Symphony Orchestra’s rental of Jacoby Symphony Hall at the Times-Union Center for the Performing Arts for the 2008-09 orchestra season.  So the Jacksonville Symphony Orchestra cannot pay its rent.  It provides a valuable service, right?  Why not let the taxpayers help it out of its financial bind?

As Councilman Stephen Joost pointed out at a recent Finance Committee meeting, the number of people attending performances by the Jacksonville Symphony Orchestra for the past budget year was 110,000+.  If one more dollar had been charged per ticket, there would be no need to burden the Jacksonville taxpayer with this bill.

The second one is bill 2008-1055.  This bill sets a graduated point system for evaluating the proximity of businesses seeking city government professional service contracts to Jacksonville.  The pecking order for favoring contract candidates is businesses that have headquarters in Jacksonville followed by businesses with branch offices in Jacksonville followed by business with branch office elsewhere in Florida followed by business with no offices in Florida. So isn’t favoring local businesses who pay local taxes a good idea?

Read the full story