Round-up, 05.03.09

A few items I wanted to highlight today:

Pensacola News Journal:
“CMPA lawsuit was the result of years of frustration”

The News Journal runs a viewpoint on the Keesler v. CMPA suit penned by our friend C. J. Lewis:

The issue in the lawsuit against the Community Maritime Park Associates is whether the right “to be heard” includes an inherent right “to speak.” But the legal challenge only emerged after years of public frustration with the Pensacola City Council’s “hands off” approach to the CMPA.

As a political matter the council can, but won’t, direct the CMPA to use council rules and procedures for public participation in exchange for the privilege of spending public money. The council seems to have turned a blind eye to the fact that the CMPA exists “to operate for the benefit of and to carry out the public purposes of the City of Pensacola.”

Mr. Lewis’ overriding point is that allowing citizens to give their input when they’re putting up millions of dollars is not too much to ask; and he’s right, it’s not. As we’ve said, the CMPA has made their bed by frustrating public input, and when the Keesler appeals wins out, they’ll lie in it. We just hope the CMPA’s irresponsible, illegal actions don’t result in a tremendous delay.

Megan Pratt:
“City pensions—a couple of quick fixes”

Councilwoman Pratt sets forward two changes she feels will help the City’s pension woes: changing the way pension benefits are determined, and changing the spousal benefit.

Currently, the city pension plans calculate an employee’s salary based on the best two out of the last five years. Some employees have used this provision as an opportunity to pad their pension-basis through stepped-up overtime during their last two years … By switching to a calculation based on the average salary over the last five years, we can get a better picture of an employee’s work history and reward each employee based on his or her work.

The savings? According to our finance director, making this change in all city pension plans could save us $1 million a year.

Today the city pension is paid to an employee until he (or she) or his spouse dies. This system presupposes that 1) people marry within their own age group and 2) that they stay married … This inequity not only costs the taxpayers, it violates the fairness principle. A simple change could repair this inequity … In practice it means that upon retirement, the employees must choose whether to receive benefits only until they die or until their spouse dies. If they choose to include their spouse, then the benefit level is adjusted based on the age of the spouse, dividing out the pension expectation of the employee over the life expectancy of the youngest partner.

According to the city finance director, making this change for all city pensions would result in a $1.7 million a year savings.

Kudos to Councilwoman Pratt for taking the time to analyse the data and bring forward ideas. Whether you agree with her conclusions or not, you’ve got to be thankful we finally have folks on City Council willing to take an active role rather than rubberstamping whatever staff sends their way.

Larry B. Johnson:
“Pace Boulevard school site”

Councilman Johnson fills us in on the situation at the Pace Boulevard site where the Escambia County School District. After Councilman Johnson and others raised questions about possible soil contamination at the site, the District has agreed to do further testing to ensure the safety of the site:

Below, please see a letter sent by Mr. Dennis at the School District in response to my raising the issue at a recent City Council meeting, as well as my subsequent response.

As you can see from Mr. Dennis’ letter, the School District will be doing additional testing at the site to ensure this site is safe. I look forward to working with the School District to ensure the safety of our schoolchildren.

Again, we’re glad to see Council members taking an active role. Can you imagine Marty Donovan going to bat for inner city schoolchildren?

St. Petersburg Times:
“Little cheer for Florida legislators as they wrap up session”

The Times recaps the legislative session:

The 2009 lawmaking session — which is not quite over— will best be remembered not for what lawmakers did, but for what they went through.

The onetime speaker of the House was indicted in a political scandal that by extension condemned the furtive budget process. Not since the Great Depression had the Florida economy been so bad. Republicans were forced to raise taxes and to accept the federal largesse of a Democratic president.

It was a period of tumult and malaise at once, and it is not over yet. Unable to agree on a spending plan — their only constitutional duty during the 60-day session — lawmakers return Friday to pass a $65 billion budget that is a case study in compromise.

We’ll have a session recap of our own, or maybe even a series — depends on how angry we get while writing it — after the extended session wraps up next week.