A few VERY important points of clarification:
withholding of substantial funds for projects
I understand that most people in this world do not pay much attention to municipal budgets, but over the past several years... most of the new 'spending' is in the form of debt (generally, debt is paid back over a period of time). There isn't this vast pot of money that is buried under City Hall, instead a proverbial credit card has been used. An examination of the growth of the 'banking fund' (which is a nice way of saying 'credit card') illustrates this point.
'Withholding of substantial funds' is not an accurate portrayal, as new spending is by and large coming from going into more debt. I think if most people view the city budget under that much more accurate characterization... then you'll appreciate that going into more and more debt is probably not the most prudent financial decision. At some point, that becomes unsustainable. Most people that really study the municipal budget recognize that we, as a city, are at that point.
Tachahale, what do you understand that I am not understanding? Please note, I am genuinely asking. I'm not sparring.
The more I read about it, the worst it looks. So, I'm hoping for some enlightenment from supporters of the plan
What you need to understand, is that in order to get 98% funded... the portion of current city spending dedicated to paying pension obligations (mainly ad valorum revenue) would drastically increase over the next 20 years without a dedicated source of new revenue. I apologize for not having the numbers in front of me so not trying to bring hyperbole to the discussion, but on rough numbers something like 35% of the current budget is allocated towards the pension. That increases to something like over 50% in a short period of time. Without a new dedicated source of funding, that would grow to 60%+ in the medium term... and in the long term would be much greater. Again, rough numbers... so if I'm off a little, the point is to illustrate an 'accurate-ish' portrayal of what the future holds.
To put that in perspective, if you brought your family of 5 to V Pizza in San Marco and bought an 18" pizza... 6" of that pizza today goes to someone else (the pension), 4" is going to pay for pizza you bought yesterday (bond obligations.. how municipal governments borrower money), you have to have 2" mandated by law to placed in a to-go box (mandated reserves) and then the rest you get to eat and split between your family of 5 people.
If you went in 5 years from now your same family of 5 now gets 9" of that pizza set aside for someone else (the pension), 4" to pay for pizza you bought 5 years and 1 day ago (bond obligations), 2" must go in a to-go box (mandated reserves) and the rest to be split between your family of 5 people. Those 5 people are going to go home substantially more hungry than they were 5 years ago (meaning less potholes are being fixed, less police officers are arresting bad guys, the streetlights in your neighborhood are never coming back on, etc). You may then start to worry about the ability of your sons and daughters to be properly nourished... and your wife is really cranky because she hasn't had much to eat lately.
In 10 years from now, almost 11" of that pizza is going to go to paying someone else (pension), 4" to pay for pizza your bought 10 years and 1 day ago (assuming you haven't used your credit card to start buying extra pizzas in the last 10 years... unlikely because your family is really hungry and malnourished)... and so on.
You either have to make a bigger pizza (raise property taxes)... something that the owner of V Pizza is unlikely to do, because no one would want to come into his restaurant anymore (customers respond to jacking up prices by not coming into your restaurant... much the way that voters would likely not vote for a property tax increase.. and you'd be fooling yourself if you think that voters would go to the polls in August to jack up their property taxes to pay for the pension)... or you have to create another dedicated source of food product (revenue), say a calzone (sales tax), to start giving someone else (pension obligations) so that your family of 5 doesn't end up with only 4" of people to eat.
