That is how Mary Pat Campbell titled her review of the multiemployer bailout in the covid bill which summarizes the situation nicely. I would only add a reason and a couple of client/actuary conversations that may be going on right now.
It was all about votes. First Joe Manchin’s vote so he would sign up for the full bill and then votes in all those states where retirees live who will be getting explanatory letters that likely will not be signed by Donald Trump this time.
There may be about 100 multiemployer plans that will get that blank check but what about the 1,300 who don’t qualify because they are not endangered according to their own calculations. Will the actuaries for the Western Conference of Teamsters Pension Plan, for example have their come-to-Jesus moment on the actuarial assumptions they have been using to make plan funded ratios look respectable?
Then there are the public plans. Are they next? I don’t think so but, just in case, maybe bringing in Cheiron to pretty up the numbers was not the way for New Jersey to go.
Burypensions Blog 
Posted by Marine1 on March 8, 2021 at 11:31 am
I don’t know about a straight out bailout for state pensions, but I could see it framed as low interest loans to States from the Feds. I believe that was what Sweeney was thinking before. What do you think of that Mr.Bury ? Obviously people won’t like that on here,but the facts are the dems are in charge of it all at this point and they don’t care how much money they print.
Posted by burypensions on March 8, 2021 at 12:30 pm
Dems are in charge and they have no show no hesitancy in funelling money to whatever voting bloc suits them but a public plan bailout will not get a united front as their are some states that don’t need the bailout as much as others
and the states that do need the bailout (NJ, ILL, NY) might not be the most popular among the Dem higher-ups.
Posted by Mary Pat Campbell (@meepbobeep) on March 8, 2021 at 1:46 pm
FWIW, NY state needs no public pension bailout.
NYC absolutely needs a bailout.
Posted by Tough Love on March 8, 2021 at 1:49 pm
NYC’s BIGGER problem is it’s $100 Billion unfunded retire healthcare promises.
Posted by Marine1 on March 8, 2021 at 5:09 pm
TL- You fought the good fight ,but it’s over. The dems are in total control and will have the WH for 8 years. I didn’t vote for Biden/Harris,but I believe you did so none of what is coming down the pike should surprise you.
Posted by Tough Love on March 8, 2021 at 11:56 pm
NOTHING would be worst than 4 more years of Trump.
He deserves to be in PRISON, not in the White House.
Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog!🐶🐶🐶🐾🐾🐾 on March 9, 2021 at 11:24 am
The dems are in total control and will have the WH for 8 years.
Maybe, maybe not. IMO not unless “President Harris” (it’s coming-TRUST ME on this one) pulls some big money covered rabbits out of her cottage cheese ridden, cellulite covered ass. I will bet 2-1 odds that the Dim Wit’s LOSE control of the Senate, and possibly the house, in the 2022 mid-terms. Then it will be right back to the complete gridlock & shutdown we saw during the 4-year Trump admin-again.
NOTHING would be worst than 4 more years of Trump. He deserves to be in PRISON, not in the White House.
TL, STFU ou Surrender Monkey 🐒, and up the dosage on your TDS medicine (the TDS Medicine NEVER gets old 😎):
Posted by Marine1 on March 8, 2021 at 1:54 pm
I could be wrong,but I believe NYS has made the majority of it’s pension payments. It’s funny how things are fairly well funded when you don’t skip a decade in payments. NJ never understood that.
Posted by Tough Love on March 8, 2021 at 2:02 pm
That, and TAXPAYER contributions many multiples GREATER than what Private Sector workers typically get in retirement security contributions (mostly into 401K Plans) from their employers.
There is ZERO justification for that, and I have stated many times that ANY (yes ANY) DB pension plans ….. no matter how great ……… can be fully funded if you throw enough money into it. In this case the TAXPAYER’S money.
Posted by A on March 8, 2021 at 2:05 pm
Or three decades.
Posted by Tough Love on March 8, 2021 at 4:38 pm
Just googled it ……………
________________
The New York State and Local Retirement System (NYSLRS) today announced employer contribution rates for the State Fiscal Year 2021-22 will increase from 14.6 percent to 16.2 percent of payroll for the Employees’ Retirement System (ERS) and from 24.4 percent to 28.3 percent of payroll for the Police and Fire Retirement
______________________
With Private Sector workers typically getting 3% to 4% of pay into a 401K Plans, what justifies this 16.2% and 28.3%-of-wage TAXPAYER contributions?
Certainly NOT lower “wages”, with Bigg’s AEI compensation study showing only a 3% Public Sector “wage” disadvantage. AND …….. showing for NY a 34%-of-pay Public Sector Total Compensation ADVANTAGE over their Private Sector counterparts.
Bottom line ………. NYS pension Plans are fully funded BECUASE they are SOAKING their Taxpayers to do so.
Posted by A on March 8, 2021 at 9:30 pm
“New York state pension systems are better funded than California state pension systems, currently take a smaller bite out of state and local government budgets, and still provide pension benefits well above the national average.”
Calpensions, May 1, 2017
They are also better funded than New Jersey, currently take a smaller bite out of state and local government budgets, and provide better pensions.
It’s not rocket surgery. New Jersey is SOAKING their Taxpayers BECUASE they failed to make even minimal contributions in the past.
You are here.
No excuses.
Posted by Tough Love on March 9, 2021 at 12:04 am
Yes Stephen, NYS does take a “smaller bite”, but (given that there is little unfunded liability) they are royally screwing their taxpayers by taking 16.2%-of-pay (for non-Safety) and 28.3%-of-pay (for Safety) just to cover the Plan’s NORMAL COST.
That sure is ludicrously excessive when compared to the 3% to 4%-of-pay that is all most Private Sector workers get in retirement security contributions from their employers.
There is ZERO justification for generosity levels so HIGH that it that costs Taxpayers 5 to 10 times MORE than what Private Sector Taxpayers typically get.
Posted by A on March 9, 2021 at 3:04 am
Still crazy, after all these years. How many times. How many ways, must you be reminded that, for public workers, benefits are a larger proportion of compensation than for the private sector. Of course their costs are higher. No one reasonably denies that. Thank you for proving the obvious.
And you know, because Biggs and others documented it for us, that thousands of public employees, -even with- those higher pensions, earn less than equivalent workers in the private sector. And thousands more -even with- those higher pensions, earn roughly the same as equivalent private sector workers. There is nothing ludicrous about that.
Higher pensions -are- justified by lower salaries in many cases. How many? How much? It varies from state to state. It varies from city to city. It varies by education level and other factors. It varies over time. We’re gonna need a bigger computer. And data. Lots of data. Otherwise, you’re just pissing up a rope.
One thing for which we do have ample empirical evidence is that most states have failed to adequately fund their pensions. Some states have ludicrously underfunded them. There is the place to begin reform.
Posted by Tough Love on March 9, 2021 at 9:53 am
Quoting Stephen Douglas ………….
“Still crazy, after all these years. How many times. How many ways, must you be reminded that, for public workers, benefits are a larger proportion of compensation than for the private sector.”
Have you ever heard of the phrase “thicker than shit” ? Look in the mirror.
It not simply a different SPLIT of the the wage, pension, and benefit components of EQUAL Public/Private Sector total Compensation…………. but Dr. Biggs AEI Compensation Study showing a 34%-of-pay Public Sector Total Compensation ADVANTAGE over their Private Sector counterparts.
Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog!🐶🐶🐶🐾🐾🐾 on March 9, 2021 at 11:48 am
With Private Sector workers typically getting 3% to 4% of pay into a 401K Plans …
3-4% TL>>>??? That is actually a BEST CASE scenario TL, BEST CASE. Most likely only from Fortune 500 employers. The Fortune 500 account for what, 15%-20% of the PRIVATE sector work force? Small business, last time I checked, accounted for around 80%++ of the PRIVATE sector work force, and the vast MAJORITY of that 80%++ get no 401K contribution, or any other contribution, of any kind whatsoever. I believe Mary Pat Campbell has stated on her website that the *MAJORITY* (that is 50%+ for our 3rd grade educated and math challenged public employees 😎) of the private sector workforce have NO employer pension, DB (haha-get serious!) or DC, of any kind at all…. 🤬🤬🤬 When I was fresh out of college and interviewing (decades ago!), I recall the very BEST pension benefit/s came from the the Fortune 500, and the typical pension benefit was a 3% MATCH, with a few offering matching STOCK OPTIONS as “pension benefit/s” that maxed out at 6% of salary, but WTF wants your pension benefit stock options mandated to a SINGLE company, even in Fortune 500 companies? No one should EVER go down that road, ask the ENRON suckers….oppsss… I mean ENRON “employees”. Take one look at the health of the Fortune 500, specifically look at GE, ENRON, Frontier Communications, Hertz, JC Penny, Montgomery Ward, Neiman Marcus, every US airline to ever be in existence! Then look at the rest and guess which of them will be in those same shoes 5, 10, 15 years down the road…. Fuck that shit, no way am I putting 6% of my salary into a SINGLE company, employer or not. No load index fund is the ONLY place to put stock market investments IMO.
Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog!🐶🐶🐶🐾🐾🐾 on March 9, 2021 at 11:51 am
It’s not rocket surgery
Oh brother … @ “rocket surgery” 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🐒
Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog!🐶🐶🐶🐾🐾🐾 on March 9, 2021 at 11:53 am
And you know, because Biggs and others documented it for us, that thousands of public employees, -even with- those higher pensions, earn less than equivalent workers in the private sector
The bullshit never stops with Dougieeeee… 🤮
Posted by A on March 9, 2021 at 12:29 pm
AVERAGE advantage. You put the accent on the wrong syllable. Again.
Quote…
“And you know, because Biggs and others documented it for us, that thousands of public employees, -even with- those higher pensions, earn less than equivalent workers in the private sector. And thousands more -even with- those higher pensions, earn roughly the same as equivalent private sector workers. There is nothing ludicrous about that.”
The ostensible 34 percent advantage is driven by the lower cohorts. Not sure how a “weighted average” works, but consider this; in Biggs ten year old study example, the high school group was overpaid by 19 percent. The PhD group was underpaid by 18 percent.
Consider this, that average leaves a lower employee “overpaid” by $10,000 a year while the PhD “underpaid” by $30,000. And yes, there are a lot more workers in the overpaid lower cohort.
And, once again, there are thousands of public workers in NJ; hundreds of thousands in the U.S., who have compensation nearly equal to the private sector. It happens that they earn less while working and more while retired, to even out their lifetime earnings/consumption. IMHO, that’s a good thing… for the individual and for stabilizing the economy as a whole. Leave them out of your reductions. By all means, leave them -in- badly needed pension governance reforms.
This is a complex situation you’ve boiled down to “public workers bad, private workers good”. Please don’t paint with such a broad brush. Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater, etc. Just don’t. You are obsessed with what you consider overpaid police, and it is affecting your judgement.
E is a windmill and you are Donkey Odie. That may, or may not be, an upgrade from One Trick Phony.
Posted by A on March 9, 2021 at 12:34 pm
“thicker than shit” ?
Posted by Tough Love on March 9, 2021 at 12:40 pm
Yes Stephen, per Bigg’s study NYS Public Sector workers have an “AVERAGE” Total Compensation (wages + pensions + benefits) ADVANTAGE of 34% of pay.
So also, yes, some have a larger advantage, some have a smaller advantage, and some likely have a disadvantage, but what that 34% ALSO MEANS is that whatever the ups and downs are, they are EQUIVALENT in $$$$$ to EVERY SINGLE WORKER (at EVERY income level) having a 34%-of-pay ADVANTAGE.
And THAT is what financially impacts the Taxpayers.
———————–
So again ………….
Have you ever heard of the phrase “thicker than shit” ? Look in the mirror.
Posted by A on March 9, 2021 at 2:21 pm
We* find it difficult to believe you allegedly work in the field of finance. Why do you think Biggs and Richwine bothered to research this topic?
“The compensation premium is not uniform across the nation. Many states pay government employees at market levels. Others pay huge premiums, and still others fall somewhere in the middle.”
“If a state offers below-market compensation to its workers, the state may have difficulty attracting and retaining the workers it needs. By contrast, paying above-market compensation to public employees imposes a needless cost on taxpayers.”
That’s Biggs (and/or Richwine, of course)
This is I (A)…
IF… It is important to pay the various states at market level (for that state), to “attract and retain” the workers it needs; and not pay above-market compensation, imposing needless cost on taxpayers…
THEN… Is it not equally important to pay each cohort within that state at market level? Beware the flaw of averages.
I would ask anyone, especially you, to please read the entire study, not just figure 6 on page 67. The data is old, but the underlying concepts, as someone said, “change very slowly.”
*We = I (My mirror is fine, BTW. Gray hair, laugh lines, notwithstanding.)
Posted by Tough Love on March 9, 2021 at 2:36 pm
Quoting Stephen Douglas ………….
“We* find it difficult to believe you allegedly work in the field of finance.”
Lol ………….. I DON’T find it difficult to believe that your career responsibilities included the changing of light bulbs.
Posted by A on March 9, 2021 at 8:43 pm
A. Read the study.
B. Fund the pensions.
C. The underlying premise of Biggs calculations is that pensions are -guaranteed-, therefore should be valued at the risk free rate.
D. If you don’t fund the pensions, the math is moot, and Bob’s your Uncle.
E. “Just fund the damn pensions you one trick phony.”©
Posted by burypensions on March 8, 2021 at 3:19 pm
NYS may look funded on paper but I hears the state does not always get their numbers right.
That was one reason for including them. The other is (I suspect) not much love from other Dems for Cuomo.
Posted by geo8rge on March 9, 2021 at 9:34 am
My understanding is New York State and New York City have separate pensions schemes. I don’t know about places like Yonkers NY. For example:
BLUE TRUTH: Yonkers Pension Padding Abuse – Proof of Political Subterfuge
By HEZI ARIS
https://www.yonkerstribune.com/2019/05/blue-truth-yonkers-pension-padding-abuse-proof-of-political-subterfuge-by-hezi-aris
During the NYC pension crisis a financial control board took over and Upstate New York State, then home to a huge chunk the nations high tech industry, kind of bailed out NYC. If NYC get’s into trouble the bailout will need to be national as the Upstate NY economy has collapsed into rust belt status.
I personally thought the feds would string the Multiemployer pension bailout out with mini bailouts over a number of years to keep the voters in line and voting for the bailout congresspersons.
The trouble with a bailout of NJ is each state will want money too, which means states that don’t need a bailout will get a huge windfall they can use to lure NJ businesses to their state, while NJ government retirees take their pensions to the South and even out of the country. It is possible the feds told ILL and NJ there will be no bailout soon, which is why Murphy needed to borrow $6B to solve a NJ emergency and then spend it outside the state of NJ (all most all NJ pension investments are outside the state of NJ).
Posted by Tough Love on March 9, 2021 at 9:47 am
So pension funds investments should only be (or mostly be) in NJ ???
Do you think doing so would meet the ethical (and perhaps fiduciary) obligations of those choosing the investments?
Posted by A on March 8, 2021 at 3:55 pm
“How do they do it?
Part of the answer seems to be that the New York systems, following state law, more quickly pay down the debt or “unfunded liability” mainly created when pension fund investments earn less than expected.”
Calpensions.com. Posted 1 May 2017
Elizabeth Bower covered this last year
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ebauer/2020/12/19/why-are-new-yorks-state-pensions-fully-funded-because-they-have-to/?sh=99d851a6fd18
Posted by joellfrank on March 8, 2021 at 1:23 pm
The 7.5% statutory rate has be paid since 1989. Is there another voluntary DC plan in the nation where the plan sponsor borrows the retirement savings of its employees? To get this rate you must be a member of the TRS Qualified Pension Plan. Most City employees are not and save via the Deferred Compensation Plan of the City of New York where all investment options are market driven.
Q.: Why doesn’t the City use the municipal bond window and borrow at 1.5-2%?
Q.: By paying these rates is the City’s ability to pay TRS pensions lessened?
==============================================================
If you are looking to have your 403(b) distributions treated as a tax exempt pension just save with the 403(b) plan administered by the Teachers’ Retirement System of the City of New York.
The Teachers’ Retirement System of the City of New York administers two retirement plans; a Qualified Pension Plan and an IRC section 403(b) voluntary savings plan.
Q.: How does the 403(b) Participant report a distribution on his or her New York State personal income tax return?
A.: If the participant is younger than age 59.5 the distribution is fully taxable.
That being said, a pension and annuity income exclusion applies when the participant is older than age 59.5. This rule says the first $20,000 of the distribution is tax-free with the portion of the distribution in excess of $20,000 taxable. Examples: Paul age 53, distributes $30,000 from his 403(b) account. Paul pays tax on $30,000. Mary age 62 distributes $30,000 from her 403(b) account. Mary pays tax on $10,000 ($30,000 – $20,000). See: Department of Taxation and Finance publication 36 at page 13.
Section 13-561 of the New York City Administrative Code states: “The right of a person to a pension, a pension-providing-for-increased-take-home-pay, an annuity, or a retirement allowance, to the return of contributions, the pension, pension-providing-for-increased-take-home-pay, annuity, or retirement allowance itself, any optional benefit, any other right accrued or accruing to any person under the provisions of this chapter, and the moneys in the various funds provided for by this chapter, are hereby exempt from any state or municipal tax…”
Simply put, section 13-561 states that all amounts received from the TRS Qualified Pension Plan are exempt from the personal income tax.
Section 13-582 i 3 of the New York City Administrative Code further states: “The exemption from state and municipal tax provided in section 13-561 for return of contributions shall not apply to withdrawal of tax-deferred annuity net contributions.”
Notwithstanding the fact that the tax exemption applicable to amounts received from the TRS Qualified Pension Plan under section 13-561 does not apply to distributions from the TRS 403(b) plan, the Department of Taxation and Finance tells us it does. See: Department of Taxation and Finance publication 36, March 2015 at page 12. The Department of Taxation and Finance needs to remove: “NYC Teachers’ Retirement IRC 403(b) plan” from the list of tax-exempt plans.
Examples:
1. Michael has $1,000,000 in his 403(b) account. At age 63 Michael retires and begins to collect his $75,000 pension from the New York State Teachers’ Retirement System (NYSTRS). The NYSTRS does not administer an IRC section 403(b) plan so Michael’s 403(b) account is with the Vanguard Group of Mutual Funds. Michael distributes $60,000 annually from his Vanguard 403(b) account.
Michael’s $75,000 pension is 100 percent exempt from
New York State tax and the first $20,000 of Michael’s
$60,000 distribution from his Vanguard 403(b) account
is, also, exempt from New York State tax. $40,000,
representing the balance of the $60,000 distribution, is
taxed by New York State. Michael is in full compliance
with the tax laws of the State of New York.
2. Mary, also, has $1,000,000 in her 403(b) account. At age 63 Mary, also, retires and begins to collect her $75,000 pension from the Teachers’ Retirement System of the City of New York (TRS). Mary, also, distributes $60,000 annually from her TRS 403(b) account.
Mary’s pension is 100 percent exempt from New York
State tax and contrary to law, Mary’s distribution of
$60,000 from her TRS 403(b) account is, also, 100
percent exempt from New York State tax.
The TRS 403(b) Plan began in 1970 and has been, historically, referred to as the “Tax Deferred Annuity” or “TDA”. Treating TRS 403(b) distributions as tax exempt income changes TRS 403(b) contributions from being tax-deferred to being tax-free. There is no such thing as a tax-free retirement plan. How could such a colossal violation of New York State tax law persist for decades? Who is watching the store?
Result: Mary has paid no New York State tax on her TRS 403(b) contributions nor on the profits those contributions have generated and will continue to generate. Moreover, she will pay no New York State tax on her 403(b distributions.
Posted by Mary Pat Campbell (@meepbobeep) on March 8, 2021 at 1:45 pm
Yup, nobody likes to be played for a sucker.
First to belly up to the trough gets the winnings!
Posted by MJF on March 9, 2021 at 11:47 am
So riddle me hypothetical this… I work at a fast food place. In middle age I decide being on my feet 10 hours a day in cramped quarters at high temperatures just won’t do it. So I go home and the fast food place needs to keep paying me full salary and benefits plus an annual COLA boost. So they go out of business. I just send out a bill to taxpayers, easy. Makes sense doesn’t it?
Posted by Rex the Wonder Dog!🐶🐶🐶🐾🐾🐾 on March 9, 2021 at 12:04 pm
I work at a fast food place. In middle age I decide being on my feet 10 hours a day in cramped quarters at high temperatures just won’t do it. So I go home and the fast food place needs to keep paying me full salary and benefits plus an annual COLA boost. So they go out of business. I just send out a bill to taxpayers, easy. Makes sense doesn’t it?
The FRAUD of getting OPM (other people’s money$!) bailouts ONLY go to the “connected-in” constituents; mainly public unions/employees. BUT, if they are lucky and their bought and paid for politicians, via “campaign
bribescontributions”, win the House, Senate and Presidency then the private sector unions also get bailed out with OPM. This is now the American way: “Fuck the ‘we’re in this together’ bullshit, it’s now ‘gimme gimme gimme and F everyone else’ territory”. And it is not just the Dim Wit’s constituents, but ALL politicians and the “special interest” bribery. Look at the TARP bailout of Wall Street in 2007-08.Posted by Tough Love on March 9, 2021 at 12:33 pm
Gee, some might think that those who think that way are ………. “moochers”.
Posted by E on March 9, 2021 at 1:12 pm
Some. Like you. But not this guy. And I’d venture to say MJF doesn’t feel that way about cops who put in 30 years.
And really what matters to me is that I get it. Not what some pajama lady thinks.
Ms. Non essential herself.
Posted by MJF on March 9, 2021 at 1:42 pm
No I do not at all feel that way about cops. Just saying there is a disparity in how people are treated. Anyone who drags their butt out of bed and goes to to work should be treated with respect. Not sure how to make that happen, it seems increasingly tough. I have a soft spot for stay at home moms, they work like sled dogs.
Posted by Tough Love on March 9, 2021 at 1:56 pm
I agree with the “treated with respect” part ……….. but certainly NOT the rampant over-compensation of PUBLIC Sector workers.
Posted by Tough Love on March 9, 2021 at 12:30 pm
Lol, and THIS guy CHOOSES who are the “Best and Brightest” that deserve being hired ……….
“Saddle Brook police chief ordered illegal police escorts for his funeral home, state says”
https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/bergen/saddle-brook/2021/03/08/saddle-brook-robert-kugler-police-chief-illegal-police-escorts/4633958001/?itm_medium=recirc&itm_source=taboola&itm_campaign=internal&itm_content=BelowArticleFeed-FeedRedesign-High
Posted by E on March 9, 2021 at 1:29 pm
Interesting. We do funeral escorts on occasion. Usually simply blocking traffic for an escort as we have no funeral homes in town here. But many times we also block traffic for a funeral leaving the church in our town. We’ve never charged for that. If he routinely on the taxpayers dime utilized his officers (usually motorcycles handle this) to benefit financially at his private sector business by not reimbursing the town then he should be charged. He will work out a deal. Reimburse the town and retire. Too many years on anyway. Someone dimed him out. He has had this funeral home for years. Either he has been doing it all along or maybe once or twice during this time listed he screwed up. Did he routinely reimburse the town in the past for this and even during this time and once or twice failed to do so? 20 years in prison? Lol. No way. He has owned this funeral home for a loooong time. How has he handled this in the past?
Either way, he will get his well deserved pension. As will I. While TL stews. But like I always say when someone (TL) bitches about my pay—-Fuck you, pay me!!!
Posted by Tough Love on March 9, 2021 at 1:54 pm
Quoting …………… “Either way, he will get his well deserved pension. ”
Correction ……….. he will get MUCH MUCH MUCH greater Taxpayer-funded pension than what he “deserves” ……….. as do virtually all PUBLIC Sector workers.
Posted by TL on March 9, 2021 at 1:18 pm
TL, I wonder if convicted if he will forfeit his generous pension?
Doubt it
Posted by Tough Love on March 9, 2021 at 1:34 pm
Why did you post this under my name ?
Clearly I didn’t post it ………… see the SAME symbol next to my name on ALL of MY prior posts.
—————————————————
That said …….. who knows if it will impact his pension*. But what he SHOULDN’T be able to do it retire immediately to avoid losing all or part of it.
Seems like it should for the years in which he personally benefited.
Posted by Tough Love on March 9, 2021 at 1:35 pm
ooophs ……… I now see that it’s posted under TL not Tough Love ……. but still misleading & confusing.
Posted by E on March 9, 2021 at 1:37 pm
Have you trademarked TL or Tough Love? Then get off the guys back, moron.
Posted by Tough Love on March 9, 2021 at 1:47 pm
You’re getting nasty again…………. tisk, tisk !
Posted by E on March 9, 2021 at 1:51 pm
You started. F*ck yourself
Posted by E on March 9, 2021 at 1:54 pm
And I’m positive the chief, who I admit I don’t know and some are a holes like certain finance ladies, has done more for his community as a police officer and as a funeral director comforting those in time of need than your average finance lady in her jammies. Did you go out in your yard/deck today to work from home? It’s nice out.
Posted by E on March 9, 2021 at 1:36 pm
He won’t even go to trial over this. TL likes to post this stuff. She is an anti cop flaming liberal. Fuck her. She thinks she educating people and maybe someone in authority learn from her. lol. She is a non essential, privileged finance worker. No one, and I mean NO ONE in any position of authority cares what she has to say about any topic. So In the end, she will just shut the fuck up and pay her taxes. Haha. And “vent” on here.
Posted by Tough Love on March 9, 2021 at 1:46 pm
So you just say is the first sentence ……… “He won’t even go to trial over this. ”
And then spend all of the following 8 sentences bitch-en about me.
————————————-
That Police chief should AT LEAST be required to reimburse the town for the cost of police wages, pensions, and benefits associated with all such Police escorts (from HIS funeral home) plus the expenses of the cars/gas, etc. used…………. multiplied by 2 or 3 for punishment.
PLUS a BIG fine (I liked the “minimum $150K” noted in the article) …….. sufficient to send a CLEAR message to others who might be considering similar Taxpayer abuse.
Posted by E on March 9, 2021 at 1:47 pm
He has been chief ever since I got hired in 1995. TOO LONG!!! He has owned the funeral home for decades as well. Family biz. His former deputy chief is now the mayor!! Conflict of interest there? The guy you best out for chief is now the mayor. Hmmm. But the mayor has stated that they have done this many times for various funeral homes as a courtesy to tax paying businesses. Not uncommon for a procession with lots of vehicles. As I said, we’ve done it for funerals of people who draw large amounts of people or for god forbid someone who lost a child etc.
serious enough that the bcpo has taken over day to day operations. Either way Kuhker should have retired a long time ago. When he hit 30. We ALL should.
Posted by E on March 9, 2021 at 1:50 pm
But again, for us it limited to intersections and stopping traffic to release mourners from the church here in town. Usually a 10 min thing.
Posted by Marine1 on March 9, 2021 at 2:19 pm
That guy was a Chief six months after I got out of the academy. That’s a long time. Hell I still had my Marine shape back then. Lol
Posted by E on March 9, 2021 at 2:28 pm
Marine….you guys ever charge a funeral home or church etc for providing an escort or for stopping traffic etc to let a procession go thru? Or deny a request for the same?
Posted by Marine1 on March 9, 2021 at 7:47 pm
E- We never charged when we did it. I think it was always viewed as a courtesy to the residents. One town over from where I live directs traffic for every evening viewing at the funeral home in the town. They usually have classII officers handle it though.
Posted by Marine1 on March 9, 2021 at 7:50 pm
E- Isn’t the million $ question ,did they provide the same service to any other funeral homes in the town at no cost ?
Posted by E on March 9, 2021 at 11:15 pm
I would think being that other homes were in town. I think the real question will be did he pass on the cost of the escorts on to the family. Which if he did then he was definitely wrong. A guy I work with grew up in Saddle Brook. He is kinda new 5 years or so on. He says Kugler is a genuine nice guy who never tried to screw anybody. We will see what happens.
In fact, many of our forums for traffic officers etc have guys from lots of towns asking if in fact they can do these escorts. Most towns do it as a courtesy. Usually it’s not often it’s requested.
Posted by Tough Love on March 10, 2021 at 3:14 am
What matters is that NJ Attorney General Gurbir Grewal thinks it is ………..
“State authorities charged Robert Kugler, 59, of Saddle Brook with conspiracy, official misconduct and corruption of public resources for allegedly ordering subordinate officers to work the processions between Jan. 1, 2019, and Aug. 14, 2020, Attorney General Gurbir Grewal said in a statement. “
Posted by E on March 10, 2021 at 7:13 am
https://www.foxnews.com/us/australian-man-admits-filming-taunts-of-dying-policewoman-report
Just goes to show we don’t hold the market on worthless human beings in the world. Hope he rots in jail next to the guy who pissed on the woman who was dying in front of him. I couldn’t even imagine. How do people get like this? Like the old saying “I’m an excellent judge of character, that’s why I don’t like to many people.”
And, yes, to me an individual like this is absolutely worthless and I’d rather not share the planet with him.
Posted by Tough Love on March 10, 2021 at 12:54 pm
If America had & regularly applied a chargeable offense called “outraging public decency”, more than half our population would likely be in jail.