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.
