Boston may learn its Olympics fate on Thursday
15-member USOC board to meet in Denver to break four-way tie
"Boston vaults into an unfamiliar, high-profile position on the international sports stage. During the next two-and-a-half years, it will be part of a competition that could include some of the most significant cities in the world: Paris, Rome, Hamburg or Berlin, Budapest, and Istanbul. There could be competition from South Africa, from Doha in Qatar, from Baku in Azerbaijan, and from other cities or regions attracted by new rules intended to make it easier to host the Games. A winner will be chosen in 2017."
At least Bain got what it wanted.
Let the dialogue begin:
Across Boston, mixed views about being an Olympics host
A new Olympics
Instead of saying no, let’s try being open to Olympics possibility
On the way to get the Globe this morning, the sports talk guys were tearing into her. The traffic is bad enough, they said, and the city is maxed out. They were talking about the cost overruns from the other Olympics, and how disconnected people like Leung and Patrick are from everyday Boston. One even commented about the carbon footprint of the motorcade that escorted Patrick after he was not even governor anymore.
Boston will win by losing Olympic bid
For Mayor Walsh, success, caution in first year in office
He's king now, even if he lost a member of his court.
Boston sues panel to try to halt Everett casino
Crews begin demolition of Long Island Bridge
Boston officials at home living in residency loophole
He's Golden.
"Group opposes pension bump for city retirees; Warns of impact on Boston’s pension liability" by Sean P. Murphy, Globe Staff January 05, 2015
A budget watchdog group is attempting to head off a request for a slight increase in the annual cost-of-living raise for 15,000 city retirees, saying the extra money should not be awarded until the city shores up its pension-fund finances.
The retirees are already expected to get an annual cost-of-living increase of $360 this year, but they are urging the city to approve a further $90.
Over time, a $90 bump could add as much as $70 million to the city’s overall pension liability, according to calculations by the Boston Municipal Research Bureau, an independent watchdog funded by businesses and nonprofit organizations.
Interesting number. Now let me do the math:
Boston School $y$tem Thinks You Are Stupid
So does the city government!
On Dec. 31, the research bureau urged city officials to deny the additional increase.
“We shouldn’t do anything that would increase the pension liability,” said Samuel R. Tyler, president of the research bureau. “We must be vigilant. Discipline is extremely important to make this work.”
The request for the extra $90 sets up a potentially contentious issue for Mayor Martin J. Walsh, the City Council, and the city retirement board. Ninety dollars a year may seem a modest amount, barely enough to pay one month of a cable television subscription. But 15,000 city retirees are eligible for the increase over the span of a lifetime, with another 20,000 current employees looking forward to public pensions in the years and decades to come.
City Councilor Stephen J. Murphy said he is convinced that the city, after running budget surpluses in recent years, can afford to be generous to retirees “who served the city well for many years” as teachers, police officers, firefighters, and in other positions.
The city is running surpluses yet cutting schools?!!!!
“In the interest of fairness we should give it to them,” he said.
Related: Boston City Council OK’s higher staff budgets
Does that look fair to you?
Richard Stutman, Boston teachers union president, was among dozens who testified at a City Council hearing last month in favor of increasing retiree payments. He said even with inflation running at a relatively modest pace, retirees lose about 20 percent in buying power after 15 years of retirement.
“Most retirees are living fairly modestly,” he said. “And they can’t keep up with costs.”
The teachers just as $elf-$erving as the rest!
A 3 percent cost-of-living increase has been approved by the five-member city retirement board every year since 1997. That is not expected to be contested this year. The cost-of-living increase, however, is not applied to the full amount of a retiree’s pension. It is applied to only the first $13,000; current city retirees average about $36,000 a year.
Retirees are asking for an increase in the base used to calculate the cost-of-living increases, from the $13,000 to $16,000. That is the issue that Tyler and the research bureau are contesting. While giving retirees an additional $90 a year, the increase in the base would swell the city’s liability by about $70 million, Tyler said.
Like most public pension plans in the country, Boston got itself into a deep financial hole in the past by repeatedly incurring new pension liabilities without setting aside money to cover them.
Wall Street looting by selling them bad mortgage-backed securities didn't help.
The city reversed that trend in the 1990s, and now makes annual appropriations that not only cover all of the new pension obligations created each year, but also includes tens of millions of dollars more to pay down the unfunded liability built up in previous years.
Now you know why schools need to be cut.
The unfunded pension liability is estimated to be $1.5 billion. Even so, actuarial estimates deem the city to be in a relatively good position, compared with other public retirement plans. Boston has funded about 71 percent of its pension liability, compared with Springfield, for example, which has funded only 27 percent.
To reach 100 percent funding, Boston must continue to pay increasing amounts toward pensions: This year’s appropriation is about $170 million, next year’s about $186 million, and so on. If the city maintains this schedule, its pension liability would be fully funded in 2025, and its annual pension appropriation could plummet by almost 80 percent, saving tens of millions of dollars, Tyler said.
“Comparatively speaking, Boston is in pretty good shape, it’s true,” he said. “But we must stay the course.”
Meaning keep paying those money managers to sit on it.
David Sweeney, the city’s chief financial officer, said “There are competing priorities.”
Time for school, kids.
--more--"
They serve them$elves fir$t!
