Like Americans for Prosperity, Illinois Policy Institute is just another front for the Koch Brothers,
http://charleskochinstitute.org/libertyatworkroles3

Dan Proft is one of the main players with the Illinois Policy Institute, and they are in trouble
http://illinoiscitizensforethicsreform.wordpress.com/2012/04/09/conservative-illinois-policy-institutes-dirty-campaign-finance-shell-game-jeopardizes-tax-exempt-status/

They pretend to be non-partisan but are just another mouthpiece for the Koch Brothers.

Jerry Moore as a journalist (who is paid to be an unbiased source to report the news) should be ashamed of himself to be affiliated with this but it is no surprise since the Lemont Reporter has become the bottom feeder for local news.

Amanda, may I suggest you research a story of why the Lemont Township is spending our tax dollars on hosting all of these the non-stop meetings for the tea party, Americans for Prosperity and now the Illinois Policy Institute. Other taxing bodies in Lemont don't allow political organizations to use their facilities why does the Township have different rules? I would love to know how many meetings the township has hosted for these political groups, and would love to hear from some of the board members why they feel the need to promote partisan political organizations that are hurting the Village.

It should also be noted that the "moderator," Ron Sandack, has publicly voiced his position on diminishing pensions as a means to resolve the funding problem. His third biggest campaign contributors to date (donating $5,000 each) are Stand for Children, an "education reform" group hell bent on breaking up teacher unions and public ed, and We Mean Business, a PAC with a publicly stated purpose of destroying pensions. This wasn't so much a forum or debate, but an attempt to shift the public opinion towards this idea of "education reform." Thank goodness for retired and active teacher activists for challenging this effort last night!

I attended the meeting and I did "look for the gentleman in the woodpile" to see who was pitching what. I took handouts and read before I decided. It seems like the IPI tries to educate the public on issues in a fair way on an overall basis. The pension meeting was over run with teachers not only in attendance but as presenters pushing local School Boards taking responsibility for pensions. All they care about is guaranteeing they get their money...and don't care from who. Some ideas for saving district money, like making teachers pay for their own retirement funding, and then advancing those "savings" into the cost per pupil were simply attempts to try and divert attention from the bigger issues. Not one suggestion reflected the desire to cut those extravagant $100,000.00 plus pensions. No one seems to understand that the tax payers are tapped out. We expect cuts, deep cuts all over the State and County as well as local to fill budget holes. Do that, then ask for more taxes. Before I would agree to taking the responsibility for pension I would want to see the teachers union decertified, existing pension funds prorated and sent to the Districts for dispersal, conversions to private plans and buy outs, to name a few. This is not as easy a transition as it sounds. I can't get excited about seeing this happen! Tax payers need to follow this. Next they will want to change the State income tax to a graduated tax ...why? To pay the pensions and get more money to waste.

Is this intentionally biased, or just sloppy?

"TRS pension covers certified employees including teachers, administrators, social workers and counselors. Currently, a TRS employee pays 9.4 percent of his or her salary into the pension system. By comparison, typical U.S. workers pay 6.2 percent of their pay into Social Security."

This makes it look like TRS pensioners are contributing so much more, but getting a raw deal.

The average TRS pension is $46k per year, vs. the maximum social security payout of $28k per year at age 66.

http://www.championnews.net/2011/06/14/4882/

Bob, it's not biased or sloppy. It's just presenting factual information.

FACT: Lemont teachers do not contrubute the 9.4%. The taxpayers pay for it. Check out the contract. Page 22.7.4: Teacher Retirement System Contribution "As reflected on the salary schedule for all other credible earnings, the BOARD SHALL PICK UP AND PAY FOR EACH TEACHER 9.4% OF THE TEACHERS SALARY, AS SALARY IS DEFINED BY THE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, to the Teacher Retirement SYstem of the State of Illinois to be applied to the retirement account of each teacher." Even better, healthcare single coverage is $40/mo. and family coverage is $110/mo. Now ask the teachers if they would be willing to give up their TRS for social security. We all know they won't. The reality is the private sector taxpayers not only contributse to social security, we pick up the tab for teachers retirement. How is that fair? No wonder they were so vocal last night. They know they have a sweet deal and want to protect it. Now ask yourself why you find retirees working at Home Depot. They will tell you they can't afford to live off their social security. Some will even tell you that their former companies went backrupt and lost their entire retirement accounts. These school boards need to stop caving in these unions. Upcoming 2013 contract negotiations need to stop giving everything away to these teachers. They need to start contributing to their own retirement. I am tired of paying for both.

Sorry that happened to you, we also lost our IRA. It is upsetting that corporations and financial services consider something that is reliant on the stock market as "pension accounts"....they should be only what they were originally planned to be, supplemental, or retirement "bonus". My grandmother only had a savings account she invested in. No, she wasn't a millionaire, but she owned her home, paid her bills, and enjoyed her life.

Now, how to fix this pension mess? My idea would never be popular, but putting the entire TRS liability on local school districts is disasterous!!!

Here is my idea:
1. Active employees pay an extra 2.5% into their retirements.
2. Retirees start paying state income tax.....2.5% into their retirement organizations (TRS, SURS, IMRF, etc.), and 2.5% to state of Illinois.
3. State employees and teachers retire at 62....no early retirements, the system simply can't maintain that, especially with the baby boomers now retiring.

Once again, wrong Ann. High school teachers in Lemont pay their own 9.4%. Plus, I'm sorry, but soc sec was never ment to live on, supplement only. Also to ask a teacher if they want to switch checks with someone on soc sec, why would I, I've paid more in out of my own pocket, (6.2 comp. to 9.4), being invested over 35+ years, kind of a no brainier which one I would take, the one I contributed more.

No matter how you look at it Edward, because teacher salaries are paid out of real estate taxes, the retirement contribution is ALWAYS paid for by the taxpayer. It is not an add on. It is taken out prior to taxes, but it is not an add on. When I was teaching, I was given a salary, and 9.4% of that salary was deducted for TRS.

I am not being disrespectful, but Illinois needs help with solutions to this pension mess. What is your proposal, and what do you think of mine....I think it would work, but I don't have the hard numbers to see how much it would bring in.

Ann Paul you seem to work really hard at being wrong all the time and you also seem to get a ton of enjoyment from lying. Being wrong and lying appear to be what brings you a great deal of joy and happiness, how sad This is such a dumb argument on your part as to who pays for TRS. Taxpayers pay for total compensation of all State employees. So teacher salaries may be lower in some districts but those teachers might have better benefits or greater contributions made to their retirement package. In other districts it may be the other way around. If you did some simple research you would see that teachers in neighboring districts are consistently paid more than Lemont teachers - Downers Grove - $5,000 more, Orland Park - $7,000 more, Hinsdale - $19,000 more. These disparities will be even larger with all of last years retirements.

Ann Paul, the Lemont tea party, AFP,, Heartland Institute, Illinois Policy Institute take their marching orders from the Koch Brothers. As long as the Koch Brothers keep giving them money they will continue to wake up each day and put on their clown suits and embarrass themselves. Ann, you come across as a bitter shrew who seems very jealous that she didn't choose a positive career like being a teacher. If you are so worried about your own retirement may I suggest putting down your video camera and apply for a real job, earn some money so you can stop worrying about your retirement, as well as the retirement of people who have actually earned it.

Food for thought...if we locally take over the pension fund who makes up the shortage? Another good question is why are we liable for any shortages in the first place. So many have lost money, and in some cases their entire pension out in the real world. What makes these folks sacred? It looks like the fund is short about 43.4% of meeting it's obligations. If I took over these liabilities I would want the pensions reduced by that amount. Before you all go nuts on that comment...the pensions run high and most I have seen were about $144,000 per year. Reducing them by 43.3% would still leave these folks with a pension of $62,496.00 a year.
That is more in line with the real world. And how about this factoid...the State took over the school system and distributed monies so that all kids got a decent share spent on their education. Poor District kids would have missed out so the State equalized the spread of money. Now, our "lifers" read Madigan, want to give the pensions back to the districts. Does that then mean that a rich district with better pension offers attracts the better teachers? You bet. Don't the poor Districts/kids then get the very screwing the system was set up to avoid! I'm no fan of big government but in this case I say leave it with the State and let them cut those pensions by 43% and rebuild the fund after filing a mannaged bankruptcy. We tax payers in Lemont do not need the State's icky stick! If they are looking for a place to put it, I have a suggestion.

http://illinoispolicy.org/uploads/files/teacherpensions10-13.pdf

The numbers don't lie. I could care less where the data comes from. The data is what it is. if there is data out there to prove otherwise, show it. Keep your heads in the sand just like the union wants you to do. There are plenty of hard working people that make meaningful contributions to society and pay into their own retirement. I agree Ed, when so many people have lost their entire retirement, what makes these folks so sacred? We can't afford it anymore. Period.

Ann, numbers don't lie but YOU do! You have proven that time and time again. I heard that one of the entertainers at Kops and Kids was overcome with heat exhaustion. Do something good for the kids and jump in your clown suit and go to Centennial to help out. Your clown act is getting old and stale here, so go entertain the local kids for a bit. Dunking the clown would go over huge, just make sure you tell everyone you are Ann Paul. I predict the lines would be twice as long as Chick-Fil-A's! Make sure you get someone to videotape it! Even better, you video tape it, a first person video of you getting dunked would be awesome.

Wow Scott. Pitiful post. You can't even stay on topic. Prove the data is wrong. You can't. I won't stoop to your level either. If this is the best you got, I feel sorry for you.

Don't worry about me Ann, I am all good. Get over to Centennial ASAP. There is a huge crowd of kids now screaming We Want Ann Paul, We Want Ann Paul. Do something good with your time for once!

To my fellow posters...please stay focused here. This is an important issue. It matters not if you are Libertarian, Democrat or Republican...tea party or anything else. WE need to do our best to present facts...check each other and correct errors or misconceptions as needed. This so we can be better informed and lead the discussion in our comminuty so, in the end, Lemonters make the best decision they can. Keep the personal attacks and political ideologies out of this. This is a numbers issue! Thanks.

Too bad the 113a school board president was a no-show at the meeting (he was scheduled to be there at the debate table). If you ask him or any other BOE member, they will tell you that the 113a teachers do not pay one cent into TRS. It is clearly stated in their contract. I don't buy the argument either that thisTRS is the teachers only retirement option. THere is nothing stopping them from buying stock or opening other retirement accounts they can contruibute too. The only difference with that is the taxpayers can't be on the hook for those.

Ann Paul, I heard the school board president saw your podmobile in the parking lot and decided to bail on the meeting, he realized if you were in attendance it probably would be a waste of his time. John points out above that the Illinois Policy Institute knew their data was bad but they still went ahead and published a biased, partisan, 41 page report. If they wanted to get 100% accurate data they could have done so, but they were lazy (and biased) and they chose to base their arguments around false information. It is shocking that a Koch Brothers funded think tank would publish something that they knew was untrue. Oh wait, Americans for Prosperity and the Tea Party do it all the time. Ed if you are demanding facts from people you may want to stop attending these meetings. The Illinois Policy Institute, like other Koch Brothers funded groups is highly biased and extremely partisan, and like Ann Paul they like to lie a lot. However, I think you probably enjoy any meeting where there might be union bashing so my guess is you will probably still go to these meetings in the future.

There is a big difference between "missed payments" and "not paying the full actuarial shortfall every year". Illinois has always annually paid into the pensions, much more so than the employees' total amounts, but its only sin is that it failed to pay enough to cover the constantly expanding actuarial shortfall that would make the plan 100% funded.

Bill Zettler accurately documents how the taxpayers have contributed 230% more than the employees to TRS since the start of this century.

http://www.championnews.net/2012/03/26/taxpayers-have-contributed-230-more-than-teachers-since-2001/

You may say that we are only now trying to catch up, but looking back over 30 years, for TRS you will find that the taxpayers have still contributed over 160% of the employees ($25.1 billion taxpayers to $15.5 billion employees).

So, no, Illinois has not "missed payments". But it is guilty of not catching up to a rapidly accelerating train, the train representing the additional pension obligations from benefit enhancements, end-of-career pay spiking, unrealized investment returns, and general pension abuse that the taxpayer must cover 100%.

Henry, the Champion gives correct information on salaries.

@Kerry.....all of their salary information for me is wrong, and I have my old W2 to prove it.

Exact verbage from teachers contract, Page 22.7.4: Teacher Retirement System Contribution "As reflected on the salary schedule for all other credible earnings, the BOARD SHALL PICK UP AND PAY FOR EACH TEACHER 9.4% OF THE TEACHERS SALARY, AS SALARY IS DEFINED BY THE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, to the Teacher Retirement SYstem of the State of Illinois to be applied to the retirement account of each teacher." . It is for all to read on the district website.
The contract is up for 2013. Things need to change.

Devil in the detail...lets say the local School Board and Lemont buys into local control and funding etc. That would mean that future contracts with the teachers union would be locally negotiated. So every District would have a seperate contract. If that isn't the case and one negotiation takes place for ALL teachers...where the hell is all that local control they say we will gain? If locals control the pension payouts and fund who ,in each district, invests the monies to see there is reasonable growth to pay future draws. Someone from every District? Wow. How transportable would each pensioneers account be? What if they transfer to another District? How is that to be covered in the labor contract. Who then will coordinate the retirees payout when it could involve several school districts holding a piece of their contributions? And, who pays the retiree back the insurance premiun collected as part of that 9.4% which is "callable" in cash at retirement time. The detail is what we need to see. There are a lot of unanswered questions here aren't there. It would seem that the final plan is what we need to digest...when ever it is made public information. I find it hard to believe the lawmakers can and will present something that makes sense and keeps the promise of "local control" and savings. They can't run the State...we are broke! You want me to rely on their "plan"...I can't get excited about that. This might just be a hidden plan to let the Union hold ALL the money. Ugh!

Indeed I forgot that fact. I also don't recollect negotiating a union contract while on the Board either and I was it's Secretary. But then that was a very long time ago when we were a single unit School District here in Lemont. I believe the only one in the State at that time. So I guess passing pensions to the localities then just is "cover" for the shortfall. Sounds like everything administratively regarding the teachers pensions would stay the same just the liability and debt would be passed off to the taxpayers locally. That would be like me signing over my checking account to someone else after I have overdrawn it and expect them to cover all the checks. Am I getting it yet?

Yep....you are. Now, I am not an expert, but this is what I do know......teachers have a 9.4% deduction (pre-tax) from each paycheck that goes into their TRS. The part that Madigan wants to roll over to the local school boards is what the state puts in for each teacher. Now the state came up with what they wanted to put in, that wasn't pressure from unions. Unfortunately, the state of Illinois never made a payment to TRS, but spent it in other areas, like "save the dragonfly project" that held up the 355 extension. Fortunately, TRS has made very good investments over the years with the 9.4% payroll deductions from employees, and that is helping right now, but it simply can't sustain the system now with the baby boomers and the amount of folks taking early retirement. I would imagine early retirement will be a thing of the past, and really should be. I am very concerned about the local school boards having to take on this liability, especially for 113, who is just now having fund balances. If they have to do this, they will have to cut so many more teachers, and now we are talking class sizes of over 50.

I still think there are better answers out there, but I haven't heard any other ideas coming out of Springfield. I read everything that comes my way, but is seems as if the only thing they are looking at is moving then entire state portion over to the local school boards.

Also Edward, I was just looking at the Lemont history books, and looks like there have always been at least two school districts, and three until District 65 was consolidated with District 113. District 210 has always be seperate from 113. Where were you secretary? Would you do it again?....it seems as if board members have a tough job, a type of "love/hate" relationship with the public.....a "darned if you do, and darned if you don't". Anyway, thanks for your service. Lemont is the community built on volunteers!

Again Ann Paul (?), no matter how you look at it, you do pay that 9.4% deduction, antything that comes out of our paycheck is paid out of taxpayer dollars. Can you please respond to this, I have asked you to before, and you won't do it.

So if teachers take money out of their paycheck to invest into a 401K, that is being paid for by the taxpayer....what do you think of that? Sounds like you are really jealous, Ann of those of us who decided education, why didn't you go into education?

You better read my posts as i never stated that.

Henry, snipet from Jorg Manteno above post: If the district changes this, the teachers in all fairness would be entiltled to a 9.4% raise (to make up for the pay increase they did not receive when the board negotiated that they would pay into TRS), costing the taxpayers more money when the teachers retire with a salary that is 9.4% higher.
I never suggested giving the teachers a 9.4% increase, Jorge did because I am suggesting with the new 2013 contract negotiations it should be reconsidered taxpayers paying the entire 9.4% TRS contributions. Read the post above. Going forward things need to change.

And I have every right to express mine.

How about some ideas! Do you like this one...we fire all the teachers after we rewrite to school policy book to define a full time employee as one who works 2000 man hours a year. We immediately offer them their jobs back as sub contract labor, essentially part time employees but at a decent and fair wage. If they choose to save for their pensions they can make their own contributions to the State Teachers Pension Fund or, they can pay into Social Security and claim that at retirement or, they can open a SEP IRA account and make their own contributions and save and manage their pension money for their future. They would pay their own medical premiums, There would be no accumulation of sick and personal leave days. Simply said, each of them would be a private contractor providing teaching services to the School District. Their current pension fund could be capped and held if they choose something different or they can continue to pay into it. The local District incurres no liability for anything more than their current contract labor salary. Each and every one to be reviewed and offered a new contract every year, or not, depending on their performance. Anybody like that?