“Any addition to the schools (rate) is likely to result in layoffs to employees,” said the board president, Rob Feckner, who represents the largest group of CalPERS members, non-teaching employees in 1,488 school districts."
This is a separate issue from what's been discussed in "Re: Pleasanton school district to end fiscal year with hefty balances" (not true): Web Link
"the Teacher's Pension (CalSTRS) is in dire straights and in need of a significant cash infusion. The PUSD also knows this. The increased cost will amount to an additional 15% of payroll (not just a 15% increase but an almost tripling of the current pension cost of 8.25% of payroll, to 8.25% + 15% = 23.25% of payroll for the tax payer portion/district portion of the pension obligation)."
Now we have CalPERS claiming a need for fifty percent increases in th pension cost of non-teaching school administrators while CalSTRS (the teachers pension fund) is set to triple the cost of the teachers retirement fund, while the Pleasanton school district is claiming "hefty balances". All of these conclusions can't possibly be true when the increased dollars all come from the school districts "hefty balances".
How can this school district/Board claim hefty balances?
This story contains 260 words.
If you are a paid subscriber, check to make sure you have logged in. Otherwise our system cannot recognize you as having full free access to our site.
If you are a paid print subscriber and haven't yet set up an online account, click here to get your online account activated.