Colin Bonini Still Thinks Governing is a Stunt
So here we have another episode of the Delaware Republican party — the Supposed to Be Governing Division — putting out news and PR bait in form of silly bills rather than actually working at the State’s problems. In other words, its reruns from these people again.
This time, we have the pathetic spectacle of Senator Bonini trying to introduce SB 288 (it is not on the website as of this writing) and Bonini’s claim that the Democratic majority would not let him talk. Notwithstanding the fact that the Senate cuts off debate and discussion as it sees fit, it looks like he circumvented the usual procedures to get this bill to the floor. But SB 288 is basically SS1 to SB 147, an effort that provides an incentive (in the form of an additional 2 years of service added to those who would retire before June 30) AND would implement a a new — less generous — tier of pension benefits for new hires. SS1 to SB 147 does have a Fiscal Note too, which I’m trying to get.
We can start with the new tier of pension benefits — this is already something that is proposed in the Governor Markell’s latest budget. So Stunt 1 is Bonini trying to take credit for work that is already underway (for better or worse).
But the early retirement scheme reminds us that not only is Colin Bonini as fully innumerate as the members of his party apparently take a test to ensure, but that Bonini is spectacularly unconcerned about the real business of governing. And once again, Bonini is only interested in a headline for his talking points but not in doing any real work to help save the state money. This counts as Stunt 2.
So let’s look at the bad math:
Bonini was on Jensen’s show recently claiming that the savings would be $75K for each job lost to this early retirement. That number does not include the upfront costs for the pension plus payouts. Except that 500 or so retirements from last year (and not replaced) saved the state $13M, for a savings of $26K each.
But remember that the key to this boondoggle (if you aren’t still trying to figure out how Bonini got those numbers exactly) is that these jobs are not replaced. Which is fine, except these jobs will include the police, correctional officers, DNREC enforcement officers, toll takers, nurses, librarians, tax auditors and others that provide some real value to the State. And you’ll notice that Bonini won’t tell you this. He will get his victim on and he’ll studiously mess up the numbers because he is in campaign mode here — not governing mode. He is spending the last days of the session trying to get some crusader cred here, not in working at buttoning down the budget and other state business so that the state can, you know, Work.
So as an example — police departments are notoriously top heavy with people who are retirement-eligible. What happens of 30, 40, 50% of State Police leadership decide to retire now? These are not jobs that will be replaced (because you won’t get your savings otherwise) and yet all of his PR complaining that Democrats won’t let him talk never mentions that he is asking you to endorse reductions in strength for the State Police. The same would be true for corrections officers or probation/parole officers or the people who take your tolls. Imagine traveling around this state if there were actually fewer toll takers.
Beyond the made up numbers (a horrifying habit for a man who is running for Treasurer), the effort to hide the real impacts to services is despicable. It is one thing to tell people that smaller government = fewer police, but he won’t be honest with you about that. He is just going to waste the time of the Senate to bring up stunt bills so he can fire off his prepared press releases on them. I mean really — how to you bring up a major financial bill 2, 3 weeks before the session ends? The JFC is essentially done its work so that the session can wind down with its budget. There is no time for any of the actuarial work that has to be done. And this bill would ask people to make their retirement decisions on or before June 30, 2010! Bonini already knows that there is no way the JFC or the GA could get this done now. But he isn’t interested in passing a bill — he is interested in a campaign prop. Count this as Stunt 3.
So if you see Bonini around the campaign trail, make sure to ask him for the backup on his cost savings here. Sensible backup won’t exist — but he will run around hyping his fake numbers (and how this individual gets away with such spectacular idiocy with numbers is beyond me). But a man willing to tell you fake numbers about early retirement will be delighted to live with fake numbers in the Treasurer’s office.
Daaaaang. Utter pwnage. You’d think CRI could have come up with a better (less transparently bullshitty) hokum for Bonini to run on.
For anybody who missed it (or doubts that this is 100% politics and zero % governing) here is a link to Bonini stomping his little feet and dragging Matt Denn through the mud.
DelawarePolitics Link
I hear circus music.
Although I could take advantage of this bill, the following would probably need to be done (and Bonini hasn’t done so) to get the real savings (if any)
1) How many people are taking the early out? (I’m guessing less than you might think with this economy)
2) Of the number above, how many are you going to replace? (When MarkelL took office, a lot of this work was done with many agencies, so that figure is easy to get)
3)Of the number of new employees hired in #2, how much less are you paying them than you were me 🙂
Wash the #’s and come up with a figure. I’m guessing that you might save a little bit, but nowhere near the figure he’s touting
The thing is that Bonini is counting on NOT replacing these workers. That is where the savings is supposed to come from. My point is that you don’t eliminate positions without understanding that you are eliminating services too. As far as savings, however, there are upfront costs for retirements too, and this scheme costs the state more in the long run, because the additional 2 years of service added on increases your payout. Apparently Mike Castle instituted an early retirement scheme and the state is *still paying for that*. And how long ago was Castle Governor?
well done Cassandra
You’re right Cassandra, but to be fair, Castle’s early out was much more generous (5 years) and the state ended up losing a lot of institutional knowledge (which then meant that they hired the retired guys back as consultants.)
To me, it’s like the whole JFC is shooting down possible efficiencies (I’m not talking about Bonini’s bill) in State Government like there isn’t a budget crisis around.
The JFC isn’t shooting down any efficiencies because there are none. The fiscal note on this is pretty clear that there are no savings. And there are no efficiencies if you are doing an unthoughtful downsizing.
In the private sector you do these early retirements by also choosing what tasks you no longer do, or what tasks you are willing to cut back on. That decision-making is completely missing here. Bonini is thinking that:
1 — People will decide to retire
2 — The state will not replace these people
3 — The initial payouts plus the extra two years won’t amount to much money
Item 2 means that you are just letting people go, without specifically choosing to not do that person’s work. So that if 20 State Troopers decide to go for early retirement — you do not start a new academy to backfill these jobs, you just live with 20 fewer police officers. I really don’t think that fewer police officers is what most folks count as smaller government.
ps. Thank you dv.
Cassandra I stated I wasn’t talking about the early retirement bill in my last comment. I’m more thinking along the lines of the JFC’s scuttling of the School Resource Officer program and other actions that they are taking that lead me to believe they don’t think there’s a budget problem.
Sorry — I agree about the School Resource Officer thing. It just never occurred to me that you’d be off topic… 😉
“What happens of 30, 40, 50% of State Police leadership decide to retire now?”
What happens if you trim the dead branches off the trees in your yard? This is a dreadful example. The state police force is the Pentagon of Delaware — lots of wasted money on unnecessary positions (why, pray tell, does the state police force need a fricking planning office? Why can’t that job be done by civilians?), and the service years before retiring on full pension need to be raised to 25, as has been done in every jurisdiction with an eye on its budget, including most big cities (where policing is a helluva lot more dangerous than it is in the Delaware State Police).
There are several reasons why Bonini’s is a sketchy idea, but lopping the dead wood out of the overgrown tree of the state police management and office support is perhaps the only reason it’s a good idea. And this might be the only way it would ever be accomplished because, you’ll notice, we NEVER include “public safety” when we cut services.
If anybody in the GA had a spine, we’d tell Sussex County to start its own damn police force instead of letting the rest of the state subsidize their rental of state cops. The fact that state police earn a good deal more than Wilmington police is a disgrace.
“What happens of 30, 40, 50% of State Police leadership decide to retire now?”
Worse, they’ll all run for office.
There are several reasons why Bonini’s is a sketchy idea, but lopping the dead wood out of the overgrown tree of the state police management and office support is perhaps the only reason it’s a good idea.
Except that this is just not how it works. The wood that goes *volunteers* to go — healthy or dead. That is one of the management flaws in this plan. If management could do the pruning approach — as in offer the early retirement to the dead wood — then you’d have a point. This plan just takes all volunteers to retire, counts those that go as savings and walks away as if it has actually trimmed dead wood. Which it hasn’t. My experience is that the people who self-select to early retire are NOT the dead wood — people with decent resumes and accomplishments may be able to run off to consulting gigs and second careers.
“I’m more thinking along the lines of the JFC’s scuttling of the School Resource Officer program …”
One of the few good ideas Markell has actually produced. At $50-$60,000 per year (not including benefits) School Resource Officers are a tremendous waste of a fully trained professional. But, by further example, so are the ones who sit on their asses all day at all the DMV offices, and at the Office of Highway Safety.
As Mark H. indicated, there are NUMEROUS positions (grant writers, personnel officers, communications and intelligence specialists, etc.) that could be performed just as efficiently by lesser paid civilians. Granted, there are several civilian DSP employees in the above positions, but every peripheral program is either directly supervised, or actually performed, by a uniformed officer who, by the time they reach a level of efficiency, are transferred, or request reassignment, to another Division or project. Not to mention, those current civilian positions are not part of the state merit system, and are paid significantly more (both salary and benefits) than their state employee counterparts.
Keep in mind, for anything that would lessen staff or jurisdiction would be a significant paradigm shift in the DSP culture, and would also require way more balls than this current administration and legislative body has.
“What happens of 30, 40, 50% of State Police leadership decide to retire now?”
As with any large agency, the DSP is top heavy in administrative positions. They would easily adapt, and it would barely be noticed by the public.
“If anybody in the GA had a spine, we’d tell Sussex County to start its own damn police force instead of letting the rest of the state subsidize their rental of state cops.”
Right. Sussex would be far better served by it’s own police force.
Wrong. Sussex uses county tax revenue to rent the troopers and, in terms of actual services rendered, we’re getting royally screwed.
“The fact that state police earn a good deal more than Wilmington police is a disgrace.”
Wrong. I’ve had considerable exposure to both agencies and, while both missions are essential, important, and dangerous, there is a significant difference in the caliber of employee between WPD and DSP.
Miscreant, I’ve run into a few of those “but every peripheral program is either directly supervised, or actually performed, by a uniformed officer” and I’ve always wondered why a Capt needed to supervise say; IT or Personnel. It’s not what the Officer is trained in, and most of the stuff they do would be more efficiently accomplished by non-uniformed personnel.
As with any large agency, the DSP is top heavy in administrative positions
Well thanks for bringing your reading comprehension. The point is not about losing the leadership, it is about an overall reduction in force strength. I don’t much care that the State Police lose some numbers — as far as I can tell they aren’t doing all that much anyway.
And it IS a disgrace that Wilmington police are paid less than both NCCo and State Police. They face way more challenges than either force and of the caliber of the ones I get to work with is top notch.
Certainly all of these police agencies could consolidate some and get uniforms out of doing jobs that could be done by civilians. In Wilmington, no one can think of why the WPD needs a uniform doing IT, when the City has an IT department a few blocks away.
“Sussex uses county tax revenue to rent the troopers and, in terms of actual services rendered, we’re getting royally screwed.”
If you say so; I wouldn’t know the quality of the services you’re getting. I do know that the price paid doesn’t cover the full expense once you factor in the higher salaries and benefits than you’d pay a local force and the extra higher-ups required for the overall administration. This situation exists in large part because the state police lobby is the strongest in the state.
“there is a significant difference in the caliber of employee between WPD and DSP”
Seems to me you have the causality reversed. The WPD doesn’t attract the best people because it’s more dangerous AND it pays less.
Other than that, we agree on this one. Though why the swipe at Markell? I should think you’d be pleased at his ability to keep the oil refinery and GM plant at least partially productive.
Cassandra: I consider the state police top brass dead wood. That’s the example you gave, so if they’re the ones who retire, good riddance. Except for the downside anon cited.
Well I’ve never worked anyplace where the dead wood was confined to the top, but hey. I don’t think that a decent pruning consists of hauling off the wood that falls off of the tree — leaving of course the dead stuff that still has plenty of opportunity to kill the tree.
And I guess I’m just always going to have to explain this, but I used the example of the top level of the police since it would be credible that there would be alot of retirement eligible people there. It wouldn’t matter if it were a bunch of the top brass or a bunch of patrol officers that take the early retirement — at the end of the day you have not actively managed this pruning and you have specifically reduced force size. Something that people should know while they are being sold this hokum.
“Well thanks for bringing your reading comprehension.”
You’re quite welcome and, as always, I’m equally appreciative of your sarcasm.
“The point is not about losing the leadership, it is about an overall reduction in force strength.”
That was just one of the points. One of mine was that DSP would never stand for a reduction in force (the actual force strength is on the road, not in the HQ), and there’s not much chance our current crop of politicos would have the courage to take a poke at that beast. Another point was that many of the administrative positions should be converted to lesser paying civilian jobs, or in some cases, privatized, leaving more troopers for the road.
“I don’t much care that the State Police lose some numbers — as far as I can tell they aren’t doing all that much anyway.”
Nor do I, but they are a first class law enforcement agency.
“And it IS a disgrace that Wilmington police are paid less than both NCCo and State Police. They face way more challenges than either force and of the caliber of the ones I get to work with is top notch.”
I’ve worked with both agencies on an administrative level, but primarily on the street level, especially with WPD. (I don’t know jack about New Castle County PD.) I would imagine your experience was limited to the administrative staff? Please correct me if I’m wrong.
It would be ludicrous to say the officers of one agency has more value than the other. I can only say, from experience with both, that DSP has better training, structure, and discipline. That being said, one of the most impressive officers I ever worked with was Capt. Nancy Dietz, WPD. That’s my OPINION. And, if the City of Wilmington had their priorities straight, there wouldn’t such a disparity in pay.
“This situation exists in large part because the state police lobby is the strongest in the state.”
Truth! Although, the Volunteer Fire Companies can’t be far behind.
“Seems to me you have the causality reversed. The WPD doesn’t attract the best people because it’s more dangerous AND it pays less.”
That’s entirely believable. I would also attribute some of it to the screening process, part of which is their respective training academies.
“Though why the swipe at Markell?”
I’m still jacked that he didn’t base the reduction of state employee’s pay on performance evaluations (I recall this being debated here at some length), and eliminate selected redundant programs, rather than the across the board reduction.
Back in the early 1990’s the US Postal Service ran an early retirement with a buyout to cut costs. They were going to eliminate the positions of those who took up the offer. Well, they didn’t anticipate the number of people who would take the offer ($25K buyout and a slightly reduced retirement if you didn’t meet the age and service requirements) and ended up rehiring about 40% of those who had just left. Without actual numbers and a cap on how many people will be able to take advantage of an early retirement offer, this plan will fail.
Also, did anyone notice than on Bozo’s campaign website he’s referred to as Senator Longshot? Check out the “about Colin” page.
“If anybody in the GA had a spine, we’d tell Sussex County to start its own damn police force instead of letting the rest of the state subsidize their rental of state cops.”
No, they’d tell Kent County to start forking over some cash, too. Sussex pays for the extra cops. Kent is the freeloader from your point of view.
Look, somebody back decades ago made the decision that the southernmost counties weren’t going to have countywide police forces, meaning the unincorporated areas would be patrolled by the state troopers. Unless I’m missing something, they also do that in NCCo, too, working with the county cops up there. That’s the situation Sussex is faced with, and they chose to contribute some money to help improve police coverage. But at least they’ve manned up and are sharing the cost, unlike their silent counterparts in Kent.
“Unless I’m missing something, they also do that in NCCo, too, working with the county cops up there.”
That’s because the state cops refuse to give up the jurisdiction. I agree with you, Kent is freeloading. I’m not singling out Sussex — I’m saying that the state police are the single strongest lobby in the state, and nobody has the guts to stand up to them.
Miscreant: Thank you for the explanation of your shot at Markell. I agree with you there, too.
One of mine was that DSP would never stand for a reduction in force (the actual force strength is on the road, not in the HQ), and there’s not much chance our current crop of politicos would have the courage to take a poke at that beast. Another point was that many of the administrative positions should be converted to lesser paying civilian jobs, or in some cases, privatized, leaving more troopers for the road.
And while all of this may be true, this is nowhere in the Bonini calculation for cost savings which is all I’m saying.
I would imagine your experience was limited to the administrative staff?
No — and Captain Nancy Dietz is one of my favorite officers at WPD.
And as of today, SB 288 still isn’t up at the state’s website, either. So it doesn’t even look like this quite exists.
Smoke and mirrors (and a quick sound bite for Bozoni the Clown).
And as of today, SB 288 still isn’t up at the state’s website, either. So it doesn’t even look like this quite exists.
Question, mainly for my edification (help me out here)…
He claimed that he wasn’t even allowed to introduce it. If that is accurate, would that be why it doesn’t exist on the website, meaning it was never filed? SB289 does exist and skipping sequence is not normal, so that’s what led me to that question.