Win or Lose, Lawyers Get Theirs

The spoils system that passes for most government in New Jersey becomes transparent when consulting and legal fees are examined.

The rest of the story:

1) Richard Bauch is a major donor to Union County Democrats.

2) So is Robert Renaud.

3) The McGuire case has to do with an employee e-mailing at work

4) Union County maintains an Office of County Counsel which in 2012 was budgeted $1,252,031 in Salaries and Wages and $452,500 in Other Expenses.

5) I brought this situation to the attention of the freeholders but my camera was switched off (likely by me though Arthur Kobitz was within reaching distance of the on/off button) so the only video evidence of my sentiments (literally since it didn’t look like this meeting was being taped) is the reference below:

7 responses to this post.

  1. Off topic.

    My kid signed a contract to buy a condo In Union County. Is she now responsible for the underfunding and deferred funding?

    Under this crazy frigged up government pension system, I think she might be. For no other reason that she bought a place to live????

    Riddle me that.

    Back to topic:

    The lawyers who contribute, pay to play, charge less then their usual hourly fees for their private clients. However, it makes no sense when they charge government half their going rate, or close to it, plus they have to vig, so they must be making up the difference somewhere. My guess is inflated bills to the taxpayers. After all, the County or UCIA officials won’t question their butter and bread, would they?

    I bet those legal bills get paid with no questions asked.

    Linden does the same thing.


  2. Does the Renaud law firm charge $300 an hour for some cases? I’m not saying they don’t deserve it. Any attorney worth his salt, in this area, is $300+

    My question is what they are charging the County? $185.00 or so? Take off the pay to play vig and then what does it amount to?


  3. Posted by Elise on June 17, 2012 at 12:44 pm

    Am curious about your thoughts on the following paper that was released last week? Looks like the class action lawyers will be busy for years…..
    14 States have broken balanced budget clauses of their own constitutions in addition to defying the rules of pension mathematics. I contend that the ratings agencies and the SEC are enablers by allowing this partial payment culture to exist and not punishing states and localities enough for not making their Actuarially Required Contribution (ARC). The dirty little secret of at least 14 states is that politicians have misled the public as both political parties have conspired to secretly borrow $100’s of billions from their pensions.


    • Posted by Tough Love on June 17, 2012 at 12:58 pm

      Rather than forcing States to make ARC payments that fund grossly excessive Pension Plans ………..courtesy of the “you-scratch-my-back and I’ll-scratch-yours” arrangement between the Public Sector Unions and our elected representatives …………. the MUCH bigger dirty secret is that we (the Taxpayers) allowed these crooks in collusion to get away with it.

      In any event, there is ZERO justification for TAXPAYERS …. who were not only not a party to this underhanded deal-making, but were betrayed by there elected representatives ….. to pay for it.


    • I saw that and I think it’s too short. He got it all right and made two great points that need more attention:

      “Double digit returns when you have less than 30% of the assets are the equivalent of 3% returns with a fully funded plan.”

      “While the SEC wrote a scathing paper on New Jersey for not disclosing the partial ARC payments and other pension issues to municipal bondholders, the fact they make NJ pay $0 in fines sent the wrong message.”


  4. Posted by Ace on June 17, 2012 at 11:08 pm

    All the various forms of cronyism between government and various interest groups like lawyers are the biggest threats to freedom. Those who criticize free markets have misplaced their anger – it is the special interest deals given to so many through government power they should be focused on.


  5. Posted by muni-man on June 18, 2012 at 8:22 am

    Looks like NJ is attempting to do an end-run around the vaunted judiciary by trying to cobble together a bill that addresses the burning issue of having judges pay more for their pension/healthcare benefits via a constitutional amendment, even though the NJSC hasn’t ruled on it yet. It would be interesting if the NJSC upheld the lower court ruling, then got taken out by a constitutional amendment requiring them to pay more anyway, thank you very much. Hope it passes.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: