Town Square

Post a New Topic

Cannot Pay Dick Price's Retirement Ultimate Cost

Original post made by TAX Payer on Dec 29, 2012

Sorry Dick, but the revelation as to what you will ultimately cost us has given me the sad feeling that the firefighters are in a path we cannot sustain. Do you not recognize this? Just curious how you and others in leadership feel about the unstainable path you have left us? We want to hear from you on this subject...and no nonsensene about PULSEPOINT...this is about the resposibility you had from a fiduciary standpoint on keeping us safe. One Hundred Bucks says he will not respond on this topic...Dick Price...Fire Board...what are you going to do? We are now aware of what your Board collusion has created...and don't be smug about obout our recourse!

Comments (8)

Posted by JRM, a resident of Vista Grande Elementary School
on Jan 2, 2013 at 7:42 pm

I agree....seems like the Fire Board is hiding their head and hoping we will not notice as we grease the skids for their relatives. What is up with this?


Posted by re-engineer the service, a resident of San Ramon
on Jan 4, 2013 at 12:25 am

It isn't just the Chiefs compensation that is at issue. Literally 50% of the department is earning over 200k per year. This has all the makings of yet another "special district" fire department run AMOK while not thinking twice about gouging current & future tax paying residents.

I forget, how many fires did we have last month?


Posted by Nepotism Supporter, a resident of Diablo Vista Middle School
on Jan 5, 2013 at 8:22 pm

Jennifer Price is a sweet girl and I cannot believe she is a part of the fleecing of us...the firefighters are not really ripping us off...are they??? Board Members please respond...I hope our previous virtous view of the firefighters is not tarnished. Every time we see them at Lunardi's buying food at 2:00 P.M. will now piss me off. We are now aware of your rigging the system. Shame on you all...!!

























Posted by Hoser, a resident of Montair Elementary School
on Jan 8, 2013 at 9:26 pm

I propose a NEW FINANCIAL MODEL, let's hve 2 stations, pay each firefighter 400K per year, and allow them to retire at 45 after 20 years of service....WHO IS WITH ME ???


Posted by Policy of Truth, a resident of another community
on Jan 15, 2013 at 4:39 pm

It sounds to me like a few posters here have been misled by the rumor mill and/or the CCTimes. Time to start paying attention to the facts.



Dan Borenstein's Crusade Against Public Pensions Gets the Best of Him and Misleads Readers
January 12, 2013

Dan Borenstein is one of the few columnists that understands many of the complexities of public pensions but his personal bias and crusade against public employee pensions once again got the best of him, thus misleading your readers, in his January 11 column ("CalPERS planning to gut a key cost-control provision of new pension law").

He attacks CalPERS preliminary interpretation of the new pension law that went into effect January 1 and the types of compensation that can be used toward calculating pensions. Contrary to Borenstein's snide comment that CalPERS operates "in a parallel universe," our interpretation of this provision is the agreed upon intent of those who wrote, passed and signed the bill into law. What he neglects to tell readers – a fact which CalPERS explicitly shared with him during multiple attempts to try to help him get the facts straight, which he nevertheless failed to do – is that during the legislative process, CalPERS worked with the legislative committee consultants to answer their questions and enable them to write the bill according to their intent. They agree that the intent was to eliminate some special compensation but not all of it. Further, as we prepared our preliminary interpretation in recent weeks, we based it on conversations with officials in the legislature and the administration. In spite of Borenstein's most fervent personal desires, the legislature's intent was never to limit pension calculations to base pay only. Additionally, CalPERS will seek broad public input on the issue of compensation before any interpretations or regulations are finalized.

Borenstein's view that our interpretation of the law will lead to pension spiking is both shortsighted and wrong. The abuse of pension spiking, by significantly increasing an employee's base pay in the final year of their career, has been addressed in changes CalPERS instituted years ago for public agencies and school employees. In fact many of the items specifically called out in the new legislation have not been reportable to CalPERS. Pension spiking is also addressed in the new law through a cap on compensation that can be used to calculate a new member's pension as well as requirements to use the average of an employee's highest salary over three years of their career for public agencies and schools.

Lastly, Borenstein is again wrong when he condescendingly claims that CalPERS "absurd interpretation of the new law will … erode untold billions of dollars of savings that … CalPERS previously claimed the new law would produce." The only absurd interpretation here is Borenstein's complete ignorance or disregard of what CalPERS actually said in our cost analysis of the bill. CalPERS never claimed that the restrictions on what is included in pensionable compensation would result in significant savings, let alone "untold billions." Instead, CalPERS wrote in our cost analysis: "We have not reviewed or been able to assess the potential impact of any such changes. To the extent that savings are realized as a result of additional restrictions on pensionable compensation, the savings will be greater than quoted in this analysis."

CalPERS is committed to implement and administer the laws as they were enacted. Borenstein has done nothing more than rush to judgment and yell fire. If his readers believe his rhetoric, they will likely only get burned by the misinformation.


Posted by CalPERS Crooks, a resident of San Ramon
on Jan 15, 2013 at 7:33 pm

Dan Borenstien gets it right and CalPERS, as well as the county pension fund managers, get it wrong. CalPERS is one of the most crooked and corrupt organizations in the state. It should come as little surprise that those benefiting the most from this organizations fleecing of taxpayers are the public employee unions. It should also come as little surprise that the CalPERS Board of Directors is dominated by former public employee union leaders.

CalPERS need to be overhauled and neutered before they help destroy the state, and drive even more cities & counties into bankruptcy. This organization has transformed itself from a public employee union pension fund manager into a corrupt organization which provides political cover and financial muscle to the unions. And they are very engaged in the process of screwing the taxpayers, as Dan Borensteinn points out.


Posted by Policy of Truth, a resident of another community
on Jan 16, 2013 at 10:09 am

@ CalPERS "crooks",

Sorry Charlie but the facts and all experts state otherwise. Not only did Borenstein get it wrong, but CalPers exceeded returns projections DESPITE of Dan Borenstein and Kris Hunt's doom and gloom projections. Claiming that a return of 7.5 percent was unrealistic. Since you appear to be fond of relying on newspapers as your source of information you might want to read and weep;

"According to the Sacramento Bee, the big pension fund said Monday it earned a 13.3 percent profit on its portfolio in calendar 2012.

That's significantly higher than the California Public Employees' Retirement System's official investment forecast of 7.5 percent."

Personally I would rather trust financial experts and those that administer multi BILLION dollar funds, than a journalist with a chip on his shoulder who suffers from a severe case of pension envy. But that's just me.

Maybe you should be looking into Mr. Borensteins qualifications when it comes to comprehending finance and economics. Just a thought....




Posted by San Ramon Observer, a resident of San Ramon
on Jan 19, 2013 at 12:42 pm

San Ramon Observer is a registered user.

Read my interview of Richard Price to find some answers to your questions. Web Link

Price's pension is prorated based on years of service in different districts. Since most of his service, 27 years, was in San Mateo County, they will shoulder most of the pension costs. San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District is responsible for about $45K a year of Price's pension.

Roz Rogoff
San Ramon Observer


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Circumstances without Pomp
By Roz Rogoff | 3 comments | 1,067 views

‘Much Ado’ or is it Adios for ObamaCare?
By Tom Cushing | 28 comments | 783 views

Political posturing about water
By Tim Hunt | 3 comments | 657 views

trAction Painting Summer Camp
By John A. Barry | 1 comment | 71 views