Mayor A. George Pradel is optimistic about the state of the city for the upcoming year. Despite weathering some hard times, the mayor says investment in the community brings long-term gain. Where do you see the city headed in the coming year?
State of the city upbeat for 2011
No TrackBacks
TrackBack URL: http://blogs.suburbanchicagonews.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/8277
Sate of the City very upbeat now.....now that Tricky Dick Furstenau just went down in flames!!!!!!
Just thought of something. Sun, if you went back three years, would Pradel havebeen upbeat about the state of the city every year? My guess is yes. This guy isn't predicting anything. In fact, I would say that the Finance Director writes that part of the speech. So, did someone fail to predict something that was obvious? My guess is yes.
Perfect rationale, Anon. The private sector has certainly proven to be the most ethical, practical and responsible at doing what's right for people and this country. You got us. Uncle. Let's open the borders, pay 25% less in wages than we did a year ago, zero benefits and no such thing as a pension or retirement plan. What the hell were we thinking? As long as grandma can get out of her chair, she shouldn't get a free ride! What did she do to deserve such a silly thing as retirement? Why she can still paint a fire hydrant or two! To think your solution has been right there in front of us all for decades and nobody else caught it is just mind-boggling.
Most of these pension "liabilities" are totally unnecessary and could be completely avoided. All we have to do is stop hiring employees and instead outsource these jobs to the private sector. The private contractors would be responsible for any pension issues just like any other profit making business and the taxpayers would be completely off the hook in terms of any pension liability. All the taxpayer would be responsible for funding is the current fair market value of the work being performed under contract. When we consider the fact that the private sector is able to hire fewer workers at a lower price and get more productivity out of them we have to wonder why we would want to hire any government employees and for those that are an absolute must we need to keep it to the absolute minimum.
We don't need to wait for Springfield to fix the public pension mess we are in. We can do it all on our own. And we can do it immediately. The government bond rating companies haven't been aggressive enough about demanding government workforce's get in better order if they want better/higher bond ratings. This is a great public sector issue that the private sector could drive change on and would be a fantastic turn of events considering how heavy handed government has been to business in terms of regulation and taxes. I say bring it on!
Does George Pradel have a problem collecting his pension? What about Bob Marshall? Tricky Dick Furstenau?? All hypocrites!!!!!!!
Peggy, Sorry if I offended you. I agree completely that current pensions are contractual obligations. You have never seen me post anything to the contrary. You have never seen me post that pensions should be abolished. As for averages, please keep in mind how they are calculated. By definition, the composition of the pool of current pensioners contains a large portion of participants who earned benefits at much lower salaries than the levels being paid today. So, today's average pension benefit reflects prevailing wages from many years ago, not the benefits that will be paid to today's workers. . Second, the idea of "spiking" benefits is, I believe, relatively new.
My comments comparing salaries to pensions were intended to draw attention to the specious argument governments make that we have to pay exorbitant salaries to attract talent. I believe the fact that school superintendents are now working for far less than they made here proves my point.
Further, I stand by my demand that public sector employees and retirees shoulder a proportion of health care costs that is consistent with those in the private sector. (and the Federal government.)
Finally, I understand that the responsibility for the current situation rests with those in charge, not with the employees. Taxpayers should demand accountability. Again, in the private sector, pension plans are and have been for many years monitored and funded much more responsibly. Ironically, because the government requires it. The decisions are going to be painful, but action has to be taken and taken soon. The situation is not financially sustainable. If I have my numbers correct, every man, woman and child in this state is already on the hook for $42,000 worth of pension liability -- and, others would argue that the liabilities are much higher. I don't know about the rest of you, but our family can't afford that, much less more.
The Average IMRF pension is $19,000 a year, so you're absolutely right, completely sustainable if managed competently. Those attacking the average guy for his City/State pension are being taken in by those leaders using the current economics as their excuse to take, but give up nothing themselves. I wonder how many tenants would say that Furstenau's rent increases are sustainable?
Quick, hire more planners and inspectors. We're in a growth mode!!
Sam, the pensions that are a committment to the existing employees are sustainable. You only have to look beyond how they are managed now. That does not mean every taxpayer has to pay an outrageous amount of money more or even any increase at all. Why they have been paying all along! Where is that money? You and I could figure this "problem" out. People only have to want to do it. Attacking these pensions now with the fury of a pack of hungry dogs is just an opportunity that won't be lost by our leaders using the current economic situation as their excuse. They can get away with far more attrocities now and people think it is just fine.
First start with the new hires like the state did. They are coming in knowing what their RETIREMENT plan is. That's a different situation. You're not lying to anyone then. All I'm saying is if you paid for 20 years for a $500,000 life insurance policy and when you needed it, is it appropriate to hear that you didn't pay enough or the plan wasn't sustainable in the first place? I think they call that a crime. Fraud. But somehow when things get tough this behavior is permissible and people actually feel it is appropriate for some reason to call the buyer of the policy spoiled or entitled. Some idiot calls these "buyers" "pension lovers." That's like calling a diabetic an insulin lover. Idiots. The buyer now becomes the criminal. That makes no sense at all to me. We're all hurting. We shouldn't make irrational decisions. Unless we're cannibals. Pass me some of that arm and leg please. You're better than that, Sam. I know you are.
One other thing. Just because you read about two or three public employees receiving a $140,000 annual pension, don't believe that the lower 99.9 percentile is getting even half of that. Most IMRF employees won't get $40K a year in their retirement. Not sustainable? Only if you're all caught up in the slop being poorly conveyed.
Ah, yes. The state of the city is upbeat, especially when you lay more employees off and force others to retire early. Very upbeat.
The one Anon who thinks everyone else writing in is uneducated and foolish is quite a special human being. Just can't or won't see another point of view. That Anon obviously should be in charge of nothing because he/she can't understand any other rational thoughts. Anon's thoughts are clearly too tainted by his own anger and loss. There is no reasoning with people like that. There's a good bagel shop waiting for a good solid American taxpayer like you to employ, Anon. Next!
Oh yes, those rates are going to skyrocket - and 99% of that increase will sit squarely on the shoulders of your City Council, the worst City Manager in the history of municipal government, and this inept group of Managers and Directors he surrounds himself with.
We as residents have to demand Krieger be fired, and that he take his "leaderhip???" group out the door with him. Once that's done, we have to get some people on the City Council who have some ethics and intelligence. If this isn't done, this City will crumble (it's already started ..... take a drive along Ogden Avenue sometime - impressive isn't it?)
No one is going to want to live in a place that is as corrupt as this City is becoming - or as run down as it soon will be if Krieger and his lot keep pocketing workers salaries in the form of raises and bonus's for being good little yes men.
I sure wish the owners of the Sun - the Sun Times would do a little investigating - wouldn't take very much to see that Naperville has all the money it needs to run well, that is if it is managed ethically and not with lies, greed, and ego.
The Smart Grid, the Bell Tower, the Childrens Museum, the Dick Tracy statue, the Test Track, the new City Garage...it goes on and on and on.....poor spending by the Goofball (Krieger) and his eight stooges!!!! I bet withing 5 years, we will rank below Bellwood for places to live......
Glad to see I'm not the only one that has read the reports of those who have analyzed the IMEA plant -- there is a considerable body of thought that expects our electric rates to increase dramatically due to the costs associated wiht this project.....at some point, soon, I'd like to see our staff stick to local issues and let real experts deal with power generation.....we're stuck with the costs of their decisions for our lifetimes and maybe the city is correct that it will save us money, but there are expert opinions to the contrary.....
If they get stuck for any portion of that 11 million, we will all be paying for their ego's for years and years to come (not that we aren't going to anyway, this will just make it worse). Combine that with the mess they made by chosing that IMEA energy plant that is now a multi million dollar over run, and watch the electric bills in Naperville quadruple!
It shouldn't be the tax payers paying the price for these decisions - we had no say whatsoever in any of this - it should be the Managers, Directors, City Manager, and Council that are responsible for this who should pay the price. Why does that never happen in Naperville???
The state of the City of Naperville may not be so great, depending on whether the Republicans are successful in passing the massive budget cuts they are talking about. Would this include cutting obligated (but not yet spent) energy stimulus funds? Note the below link to an article regarding a warning from Steven Chu, the Secretary of Energy, during a recent discussion.
Specifically from the article: At yesterday's meeting, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu offered his praise and continued support for the program, but he also urged the mayors to both spend the money that had been granted and to submit their receipts to the government. I still encourage all of you to invoice as quickly as possible those bills," Chu said. "Don't wait for a month, certainly don't wait for a quarter because we do not want that [authorized funding] rescinded. ... As soon as you've paid the bill, invoice it to the federal government."
Does this mean the federal government might not pay their half of the bill for the Naperville smart grid project, sticking Naperville ratepayers for the entire cost? If so, is it wise to be issuing contracts for the work that Naperville can't get out of if the federal government backs out on their share? Can the federal government really back out with the work in progress just because Congress passes a bill to remove the funding for the project?
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/01/20/20greenwire-mayors-scramble-to-preserve-block-grant-fundin-70540.html
Except Superintendents are from the School District, and that is a different topic.
Hogwash??? lol...... Well, it sure is hard to argue with THAT! Actually, there is no point arguing with you are all, because you haven't got a clue what you are talking about. I've worked for 10 companies since the early 70's, 5 of them were fortune 500 corporations - so I have a quite a bit of experience to draw on, and for every Naperville company you can name who has long term employee's, I can name 5 corporations that are twice their size where it is unlikely 1 in 500 ever reach a 30 year anniversary. Doesn't matter of course, because your mind if made up.
None of the City workers I referred to went to another government job, so guess what? They didn't get to take a pension with them - well worth it mind you to make 30% more salary - but your misconception that everyone in the City just job hops from City to City only shows your ignorance on the topic.
Get over yourself please..... you're clueless, and your embarrassing yourself with your total lack of knowledge and inability to consider the fact that you are indeed wrong. Just reaffirms my original thought that we must have a member of Management or the Council having one of their little hissy fits. They are equally stubborn and stuck in a position that will only serve to destroy what is left of what was once a nice place to live.
Anon Jan 28 4:21,
Hogwash! You haven't worked many places then. You should check out Edward Hospital... they have plenty of employees who have stayed with them quite some time. Then take a drive past Phoenix Closures on 59 who constantly change the names of employees who have much, much more service than the City does. I'm willing to bet if you compare the average years of service at Phoenix to the City of Naperville that Phoenix will come out way on top. Those are just two quick examples locally. There are others.
Let's not waste our time talking about police or fire jobs because everyone knows they are lifers in the system and can't wait to get that first retirement check as soon as possible. For the rest of the city department for every employee you can come up with with more than 25 years of service there have been dozens of others who cycled through. AND unlike the private sector folks who start over when they change jobs city staffers have fully portable pensions when they job hop. Private sector workers have to consider a bunch of factors when they change jobs to make sure it is going to be a good career and financial move on their part. For city hall staffers all you have to do is dangle a few more dollars and they are gone because nothing else changes for them.
"How is it that a superintendent is willing to work for less than his/her pension? You have the same person, doing a similar job for far less salary than when the same person worked in Illinois"
Good questions for sure.
More importantly though is the point that the retired superintendent is receiving more money in retirement than another person would be earning doing the same position which also means these retirees are helping to contribute to the unemployment problem by filling jobs that should be going to people who are not supposed to be retired.
Retired means leave your job and you cease working. Someone who is still working is not retired. Period. The rules simply need to be changed to give retired persons the option to collect a pension or continue to work. Pick one or the other. Not both. If you choose to continue to work you can still get a pension when you finally retire. If you work long enough at a second job to earn another pension so be it. No pension should be paid to anyone who is still working. Pensions should only be paid when people cease to work.
Given the examples you are using, you are correct. There are extreme pensions out there, and there are people who milk the system - that absolutely has to be stopped. The one thing you have to remember though is that those are top executives - they are the one's who are now crying about how unsustainable the Pension system is for the average employees.
There simply has to be a difference noted between those who retire and bring in a pension that pays them well over 100,000 every year (then continue to work, often in the same City or County, be it as a consultant or an employee) and make still more off the taxpayer, and the average worker who retires after 20 years with a modest pension ..... the average being $19,000 a year.
When you are talking about someone like our Mayor, or our Asst. City Manager, who retire with good Police pensions, then work for the City and earn ANOTHER pension .... all while crying about how the employee's who work for them have unsustainable pensions - that is wrong on every level. But it happens, every single day right here in Naperville, and what is anyone doing about it? Nothing - not a mention is made in any Council meeting - they don't carry that information with them when they lobby in Springfield - instead they cry and cry about how the system that a worker paid into and depended on for the last 20 years isn't sustainable, and try to take away that $19,000 a year.
Pension reform? Sure, I can see that - but it had better start at the top, with those who have taken advantage of the system - the top levels of government who knowingly underfunded Pension funds can give theirs up first - followed by the hypocrites like our Mayor and Asst. City Manager who are using the system to their advantage. Then, how about a cap on distributions? Something livable without allowing for the excess.
Sadly, nothing that reasonable will ever pass, because the decision makers lose their 6 digit incomes, and we just can't have that. Nope, far better to stick it to the workers out there who have done NOTHING WRONG - who have paid their share, gone to work every day for 20 some years, making less money than their buddy over in the private sector did all those years. Let's take his 20 or 30 thousand a year away from him - let's all kick him around a bit in the newspapers and the blogs. HE IS NOT THE PROBLEM!!!! Differentiate! There are problems, but it isn't your neighbor or the guy who plows your streets or the person who takes your utility payments at the cashiers desk.
It's insulting as a working resident of this City to watch those with more than they need (Mr. Furstenau, Mr. Wherli, Mr. Boyajian, Mr. Krause) decide that the average employee is paid to much, or get's too many benefits, or shouldn't be entitled to the pension they have paid into for years and years - yet it is NEVER mentioned that perhaps the Management Team who has participated in the decision making that caused so many of the problems sacrifice nothing. These councilman aren't jumping up and down to give up ANY of their City benefits either. They feel entitled, but somehow feel that the people who work in the City are not.
Want to bring it all into line? That's a great idea. BUT please, start with the people who are the problem, and quit punishing the average worker who is just trying to get by day to day and do a good job for the people of the community.
I think a little fact checking is in order. How much are state and city workers and teachers paying toward the cost of health care? In the private sector, the norm is between 25% and 35%. Federal government employees pay that much and have for some time. How much are teacher, city and state retirees paying for health care? In the private sector, it's often 100% and rarely is it free. Federal retirees pay about 33% of the cost.
Are the current pensions sustainable? The facts would suggest they are not. Perhaps the state's failure to live up to its obligations are a major reason. The recent performance of the financial markets is another factor. But, benefit levels are also a factor.
On Sunday, the Tribune ran a front page article about retired school administrators taking second jobs while earning a pension. I'm not certain I agree that double dipping is a problem, but pay and pension levels certainly are. How is it that a superintendent is willing to work for less than his/her pension? You have the same person, doing a similar job for far less salary than when the same person worked in Illinois. They are doing the job for far less money than their pension. I'm sorry, but anytime a pension exceeds the current market rate for the job, something unsustainable is happening.
The City of Naperville is going to hell in a handbasket...FAST!!!! It is a real shame to go up and down Ogden Ave, and see it full of pawn shops. I guess next will be tattoo parlors then peep shows. The morale of most city employees is at an all time low, due to the goofball (Kreiger), Hitler (Furstenau) and Napoleon (Wehrli).
Say what you want about the police department, but this group has done a fine job of keeping the residents safe, but their jobs are getting tougher by the day. Violent crime is right around the corner due to the economy and ever changing demographics.
Doug Kreiger is nothing more than a puppet/yes man for the city council, and under his leadership, the ship is sinking...FAST. Get out and vote at the next election and lets get some real leadership on the city council before it's too late.
Pension haters. I don't get that. These people that believe that government employees are the only ones who have worked all their lives for a pension and planned for their retirement that way is insane. Sure, more private sector companies pull the rug right out from under the employees they initially made a promise to than public sector employers, but then who is right? Should our public agencies act with the same carelessness as the private sector NOW because, well, the private sector has failed to own up to their committment in many instances? Is that how the public sector should fall in line? Just answer this, how do you want your son's or daughter's employer to treat them, Anon? &*^%$# 'em? There are plenty people waiting to take their jobs too? It is simply wrong. We can all do better. Public and private sector. We can all do better, City Council. Employees of the public sector NEVER asked for any more than what was happening in the private sector. They were GIVEN what they have because it made sense in comparison to the marketplace. It still makes sense. It can work as previously planned, it IS sustainable, you only have to stop believing the first bit of news you hear that it is not sustainable and that government employees have ransacked the bank with pitchforks and torches. Use your heads. Our society will never get anywhere with your type of rationale.
About as well said as I've seen it. For the pension haters out there, and the politicians looking to get your votes by pandering to you, quit talking about the outliers. Yes there are some 40 year employees making $140k/year in pensions-and they deserve it. My god, 40 years! That is far, far, from the average, or norm. Most people, like anon's example are getting small pensions for doing the dirty work none of you wanted to do. Now your 401 has tanked and someone has to pay. Just a thought, if they cut pensions, you're not going to get a check back from the City of State that revives your investments. But again, I don't think you want a check, just to be smug knowing someone else got screwed too.
Awesome response. Good luck in the coming years picking up your own leaves, Brush, and driving over snow packed roads, talking to a live dispatcher when you want to complain, getting water and sewer services and hoping your electric stays on in a storm. Be careful what you wish for Naperville.
So nice to hear from a member of the City Management! lol........ Shame you have your facts wrong, otherwise this would be a GREAT argument! For starters, I'm a resident - I've known a few City Employee's through the years, but I have no vested interest in seeing them or anyone else take the City or it's tax dollars.
Start with a few truths however. The City has more long term employees than any company I have ever seen! 10 year, 20 year .... even 30 year service awards are common place. I believe a Director retired recently with 38 years of service???? So saying that City Employee's treat Naperville as some sort of temporary stop is as far fetched as you can get! If there were a few young professionals who worked there when they used to have a tuition reimbursement plan (they don't anymore) who took their experience, and left - that would likely be because someone with a higher degree in Engineering or IT was/is able to make 10, 20 or even 30% more in the private sector or at another some other nearby municipality. Look at them with disdain if you choose to, but if someone was willing to pay you 30% more to work somewhere else, how long would you stay in your current job?
You sound a wee bit bitter that ANYONE has a job working for the City, and that is your right, but keep in mind, that if no one worked there, or they only hired minimum wage workers - your services would reflect just that. City government is far from perfect (understatement around here for sure), but your services are already suffering under the 10% personnel cuts this blind City Council and ethics free management team have instituted. If people like you, who clearly have issues where you can't stand to see anyone else have ANYTHING (you sure you aren't on City Council???) have their way, we will all be living in a City that resembles your local McDonalds. Personally, I am glad there are people out there working at McDonalds, it's an American institution, but I don't think I'd want to live in a City where everyone's resume consisted only of experience with asking "Do you want fries with that?".
Maybe you think your property taxes are too high and that's why you have so much hatred for people you don't even know? You might want to review your tax bill if that is your reason - because your City taxes are less than your friends who live in Aurora, and most other neighboring communities. The School Districts are where the vast majority of dollars go. Is it worth that to have the schools we have? That's another argument - but overall, it probably is if you compare your quality of life to that of people living in sub standard school districts.
In the past, there were some advantages to working for the City - that is the reason so many people stayed there so long. It used to be that even though they made less, they did get a better than average benefits package and the pension everyone cries over these days. No one was complaining about any of this when their 401K's were flying high or when they were getting double digit raises and bonus's - but now that everyone is suffering, suddenly making less than average to go to work everyday, isn't enough for people like you. My neighbor retired from the City last year (more like was forced to retire, but whatever) ...... her pension was/is $18,000 a year at the age of 64 ..... she doesn't have a 401K or the kind of savings some of my other neighbors had when they retired, but she does have that wildly extravagant pension that you have now decided she doesn't deserve because you don't have the same thing.
If people like you - and those $150,000 a year plus City Management Egomaniacs, or wealthy City Councilman have your way - and continue to make sure you all have yours, and those who do the work in this town, state, country, continue to be dismissed as insignificant, you are all going to be shocked to discover that without skilled Police, Fire, Water, Electric, Streets, Engineers, Planners, Accountants, Assistants, and Maintenance workers - you will all have to get your hands pretty dirty maintaining this town. You won't have a clue how to do any of it of course, but you are all too important to become involved in such low value work.
I can assure you, I will be following those who do these jobs you feel are so overvalued where ever they go if you and yours win out. The workers places will be safe, and clean, plus the residents will be decent human beings. The place you see as so desirable is going to be a mess, and the people you will find are your neighbors will be just as self centered and integrity deprived as Management is now. Sounds a lot like Gotham before Batman - and you can keep it - I'm sure you and yours will be very happy together.
Peggy,
Have you considered that the city gave away way too much to city employees over the last decade when they should have been more fiscally responsible?
Even the small cuts we see now are too late and too little and only support the argument that city council and city hall administrators need to be replaced because they don't have what it takes to make the hard decisions that are so long overdue.
We simply need to hire all new city administrators and department heads who grasp the concept of lean management.
And just for the record we don't owe city administrators or city staff anything. They take and take and take as much salary and benefits they can suck out of Naperville and then walk away to another job in another town without a second thought... often after having gotten a bachelor or masters degree paid for thanks to us. Oh, and let's not forget that those state pensions are fully portable, unlike the private sector, and they don't have to worry a bit about a new waiting period or vesting requirement, etc.
City employees treat us like a temporary stop in the road and we should reward them accordingly. Plus in this down economy we should actually encourage a bunch of them to move on. There are hundreds of more qualified people out there who are willing to do the same job for less and work harder at it to show their gratitude for even having a job.
Those positions that can't be sacked or replaced should be outsourced.
I find it curious that the Mayor speaks so highly of the near future and recent reports share very positive information regarding city sales projections, yet if you watched the City Council workshop on Monday they couldn't have been more committed to taking more away from their valued employees. Sure, in this economic climate you don't start right in with high raises and expanding benefits, but they are Hell-bent on beating down their employees even more. They don't care what data is provided to them to support their subsequent decision. They come fully equipped with economic expertise. They don't need no stinking study! Not unless it looks EXACTLY like their perception of what the private sector is paying or enduring. And in that they only care to hear about the worst case scenario of the private sector woes. If they read a column in the paper, it must reflect the way life is altogether, right? So convenient.
Agreed La C - speeches are nice, and Mr. Pradel is great cheerleader, just isn't about to do anything about any of the real problems we have in this City. So long as the Mayor, City Council, and Sr. Management team stay the same, the City will go nowhere but downhill.
These guys have no clue because they never listen to anyone - they tell the residents what they need and what they should want, they tell the staff they aren't worth a fair salary, and they reward themselves at every opportunity for all their "great work".
If nothing changes this year, instead of being #56 on the list of best places to live (behind Bollingbrook etc....) we won't even make the top 500. People have to vote, they have to tell the Mayor it is time to retire, they have to tell Furstenau that he can't personally cost the City a million dollars because of his ego and still pretend to be a budget watchdog (or is it that only YOUR money - just like only YOUR opinions - count Mr. Furstenau??? We have to send Mr. Wherli and his little temper tantrums home to grow up and discover there are other people in the Naperville who don't have the advantage of a family name to live on ..... and so on.
ONLY then can we hope to get rid of the worse City Manager in history, and only then can we hope to cut off the free flow of money to his buddies and those who support his integrity free leadership style.
If and only if these things happen, Naperville can begin to move forward and begin again to pay attention to the residents it is supposed to be designed to support.
I see it going nowhere with the current Mayor and City Council. They are useless blowhards. How about plans to get Ogden Ave. going again? Do something. We don't need speeches and press releases, how about some action?