Pension Wars: This Was No 'Backroom Deal'
|Ed Lee will shuffle the cards right in front of you. No tricks.|
Be that as it may, billions of dollars of city money are at stake depending on what direction voters go in November. So it's worth examining the most recent dust-up between proponents of Jeff Adachi's Proposition D and the known political universe pushing Prop. C, "The City Plan."
Per the police and fire unions, Adachi's most recent campaign fliers and political messaging negate the $28 million in givebacks safety workers agreed to in July. Adachi is claiming these so-called givebacks could, in fact, cost the city $61 million.
Well, they're both right.
What's really at issue here was Adachi's use of the term "backroom deal." That implies corruption -- and, with an issue as spectacularly complex as pensions, it's a lot more likely voters may be turned off Prop. C by such insinuations than read through the 280-page plan and come to the same conclusion. But this was no "backroom deal;" it was all quite overt and pro forma.
Regarding these specific "backroom" allegations, SF Weekly noted in its recent cover story that, in order to obtain the projected $31 million in givebacks, the city exempted police and firefighters from Adachi's plan until 2015 -- which could cost the city $61 million if it passes. Of course, that union deal needs to be approved by the Board of Supervisors -- but, as the Examiner's Melissa Griffin astutely noted today, the givebacks have already been assumed when tabulating the city budget. So if the supes voted it down, they'd blow a $31 million hole in the budget. And in order to make that crazy move, they'd have to be upset about political gamesmanship advancing the City Plan every last one of them has signed on as supporting, to the detriment of Adachi's plan.
If the message isn't clear, it ought to be: Who needs a back room?
Follow us on Twitter at @SFWeekly and @TheSnitchSF