We know the problem but where is the solution?

 

An interesting article caught my attention today. TD's Don Drummond to rest his calculator end June.

The part of the article that amused me was that at age 56 and after 10 years at TD Bank, Drummond is eligible for a FULL federal government pension. He had retired 10 years earlier from the federal government but is still eligible for a full pension.

In an interview, Mr. Drummond, 56, said the plan was always to retire after 10 years at TD because he would be in a position to get his full pension from the federal government without actuarial penalties (under arrangements for people who reach the deputy minister rank).

Prior to joining TD in 2000 as chief economist, Mr. Drummond worked at the Department of Finance for 23 years, rising to the rank of associate deputy minister.

Some of the comments from friends that were sent to me included:

Wow, took the pension, now he will consult and double dip...or join the Caisse. (wink, wink)

He was still making contributions to his public service pension - I just about fell over. And of course he'll be working somewhere else tomorrow and have his full pension. It never ends. 

Wow, what an eye-opener.

Mr Drummond is one of the better economic minds in Canada.I have admired much of the work he has done.

But this situation points out all that is wrong with our current system. A system that need reform urgently. Mr Drummond did not make the rules he only plays by them  

Pension Reform
Reform is long overdue and everyone knows that it need to be done. However, it is a game of chicken. Who goes first?

The mayor of Chicago recognized several years ago the changes needed to be made and today he stated:

that the day of reckoning has arrived for a financial crisis that’s choking local taxpayers:... the crisis that won’t be pretty or politically popular.

“I hope it’s controversial. It has to be. If it’s not controversial, then it’s not worth anything,”

 Same Pensions, Same Problem
Across North America public sector pensions have basically the same design. It is the design of these pensions that has to change.

The Chicago Sun-Times ran a feature last fall that highlighted the problems.

The article What they get . . . shows the design of public sector pensions. They are the same across North America for all levels of government. For example, pensions at age 50 are available in Canada to "emergency workers" and in some cases like the police department in Hamilton some employees start a couple of years before 50.  

Public pensions, fat retirements  

This article shows some of the jumbo pensions. They exist here in Canada too. The only problem is that we have no pension disclosure to illustrate the problem. The Sunshine List in Ontario for example, shows over 53,000 Ontario provincial employees earning over $100,000 per year. When fully qualified these pensions will pay almost twice the average Canadian's working wage.  

Many are jumbo!!!  Take any area from the Sunshine List and you can find some biggies. In my home town the hospitals are generous with your money. One CEO earns $613,187.21 per year. If fully qualified this income will generate a pension of around $420,000 per year.  The cash or fair-value of this pension is in excess of  $ 6.4 million 

Double Dipping  

This is frequently very popular with the pension class. As the Sun -Tines writes:  Retire on Friday, start a new job on Monday -- and we pay for it al. 

The pension disclosure rules were attempting to bring these types pension double-dippers  abuses to light. California has one of the most popular lists. CALPERS pension list   

Mr Drummond is collecting a federal government pension. In addition, probably has a juicy one from TD Bank and when he starts teaching or another government job will have several years qualification towards collecting a third pension. How is that for fun... triple dipping! 

Pension Boosting or Spiking!

This is another very popular game with the pension classes. Pension boosting involves getting a pension higher than just 70% of income, the usual gold-plated pension. Pension boosting is usually done by three methods. Working overtime in the final few years before retirement helps to spike the pension dramatically. An added bonus is the overtime worked is at 1 1/2 times regular salary. The overtime goes towards pension calculations. Finally, accumulated vacation pay as well as sick time payouts. All these bonuses are not available to those outside the pension class.  

The Sun-Times articles featured a similar bonus plan. A year after retiring, Jones to get 51% boost  

Survivor Pensions   

No one can argue with this part of the plan, a survivor pension for widows. What can be done is to prevent two pensions being paid to the same family in the pension class. A teacher widow who married a teacher would get two pensions upon the spouses death. She would get her 70% pension and 60% of her husband's pension.   

On one final note about pension envy. The other day in my neighborhood, a fairly affluent one I saw a nice bright new 4X4. I thought to myself we don't see as many brand new cars around these days.  Then I recognized the driver.

 The driver of the car was a local civil servant who was in his early 50's, ready to retire. It occurred to me that he did not have to worry about saving anything for retirement. He would be getting 70% of his salary, indexed for the rest of his life. Of course, all guaranteed by me. 

The pension classes can enjoy the good life today and rest assured that I have covered their future standard of living as well.   

California Pension Dust Up!

Last week I wrote Pension Reform In California about pensions reform in California. What happens in California will have an impact on pensions across North America.

On Thursday in the Los Angeles Times there was an article called Why did Schwarzenegger bail on pension reform? The article speaks about Schwarzenegger backing out of a commitment he made to reforming pensions in California.

In the LA Times article, two advocates for pension reform address the issue. The first is an analyst with American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. The secound perspective is countered by the head of California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility. The article makes for interesting reading.

On Friday there was a follow-up article called CalPERS: a looming disaster? This article once again features the perspective on the two sides in the previous article. It addresses the huge shortfalls of Calpers, the largest California public sector pension fund.

Almost all public sector employees defined benefit pensions are suffering serious shortfalls and are perceived to be overly generous.

The articles together do a good job of describing in a comprehensive way the main issues surrounding pension reform. Pensions reform is coming to North America and the battle is on to see what it will look like in its final form.

One interesting note to keep in mind when you read these articles is that Calpers covers 1.6 million members and has accumulated $191Billion. In Ontario the biggest pension plan is Ontario Teachers and at the end of last year they had over $110 Billion but only had 284,000 members. Calculate the average amount of assets per member for each plan. You will see how generous Ontario taxpayers have been funding public sector pensions.

Dig deep and keep working there is lots more to pay!

Canada promotes double dipping when most governments are eliminating it!

As the slogan for Red Rose tea says... Only in Canada Eh!

Jonathan Chevreau of the Wealthy Boomer and the National Post recently created a video that described how the Canadian government promoted double-dipping to Canadian public sector employees. Phased retirement video

This is a scheme that was hatched in the federal budget in 2007. There was not much discussion about the deal at the time. With the new environment in pensions it has highlighted the huge gap between public sector pensions and the average Canadian retiree. The idea was originally designed to help companies deal with labor shortages. Of course the bureaucrats who wrote it made sure that there was something in it for themselves. Phased retirement article

It was an issue that I had written about before in a previous article Double-Dipping. Imagine getting your gold-plated pension at age 50 and then government telling you they want to have you back at your old job... at full pay. With the elimination of mandatory retirement we will see public sector employees eligible for 2 gold-plated pensions.

I have been advocating for pensions disclosure similar to the Sunshine List in Ontario and B.C. There is one in California that lists those pensioners earning over $100,000 per year. We need one in Canada to list those who have excessive pensions in Canada. They were after all negotiated between them and the taxpayer. the only problem was that during the negotiations the taxpayers had no-one to represent them.

Most government in North America are looking for ways to eliminate double-dipping and Canada wants to promote it.
In Arkansas - State legislator puts spotlight on ‘double dipping’ county officials
Ohio needs to rein in double-dipping by public officials
Double Dipping in Florida
Upset in Delaware about double-dipping

The great public-sector pension rip-off

The Economist published an article that reported on public sector pensions.

It is called The great public-sector pension rip-off. It is a short article but highlights the key points about what is wrong with our public sector pensions. Although it is written from the UK it perfectly describes Canadian pensions as well.

JOIN a private-sector company these days and you will be very lucky if you get a pension linked to your final salary. In Britain almost three out of four companies that retain such schemes have closed them to new employees. The cost of paying such benefits, which are partly linked to inflation and offer payouts to surviving spouses, is simply too high now that many retirees are surviving into their 80s.

Yet most new public-sector employees in Britain and America continue to benefit from pensions linked to their salaries. The pension costs facing the public sector are roughly the same as those facing the private sector; their employees are likely to live just as long. But because of the presumed largesse of future taxpayers, governments seem under much less pressure to reduce their pension costs. In 2005 a reform package in Britain raised the retirement age for new state employees, but still left existing employees able to retire at 60.

Note: In Canada the retirement age begins as early as 50 for some public sector workers and most are eligible for retirement beginning at age 55 for full pensions. Many workers in the public sector will spend more time in retirement than they did working. For many the pension income will be far greater than their working income ever was.

Perhaps the real reason why public-sector pension costs have not been tackled is that the full bill has never been revealed to taxpayers. Calculating the cost of a pension scheme depends on two key assumptions. The first is the potential longevity of the employees; the second is the discount rate applied to future benefits. The higher the discount rate, the smaller the liability appears to be. There is a lot of debate about the right discount rate to use, but the conservative approach is to take the cost of government borrowing. Use that rate, and the liability of American state and municipal pension schemes may be $3 trillion—three times the value of all the authorities’ existing debts. In Britain the liability adds up to 85% of GDP.

Even if that figure overstates the problem, there is little doubt that governments are understating their pensions liabilities. When workers in Britain are transferred from the public to the private sector, they are entitled to keep their pension rights; employers who take them on find that their pension costs are around double those estimated by the public sector. The fudge seems likely to continue. A consultation document sent out by the British government suggested that, rather than raising taxes or cutting spending, local authorities should fall short of fully funding their pension liabilities in the short term.

Note: A recent blog of mine called The need for transparency in public sector pensions addressed this issue of the real pension shortfalls that exist.
Public affluence, private penury

There may be an argument for giving some public-sector workers, such as the police or the armed services, higher pay and benefits in the form of pensions. But the cost should be fully accounted for. Today’s opaque pensions system is unfair to private-sector workers, who suffer a triple whammy. First, most are now enrolled in riskier defined contribution (DC) pension schemes, where payouts depend on investment performance. Second, employers make smaller contributions to DC schemes than to final-salary plans, so pensions are likely to be lower. And third, as well as shouldering more of the burden for their own retirement, private-sector workers pay for public-sector pensions via their taxes. There is, in effect, a hidden transfer from private-sector workers to their public-sector peers. In Britain it may amount to as much as 30% of pay.

When the full costs become apparent, taxpayers may demand reform. Cutting costs is not easy: the bulk relate to promises already made. But raising the retirement age for public-sector workers in order to reflect increased life expectancy would be a start. Moving to DC pensions for new entitlements, or to a cheaper version of a defined benefit scheme (such as an average- rather than a final-salary pension) would also help. The greying of the American and British populations will inevitably involve some costs. It would be unfair if the burden was borne disproportionately by private-sector workers.

Here is another excellent article printed earlier this year by the Economist detailing the Pension Predicament. Pension Apartheid

The Heavyweights Step In!

Today CARP, The Canadian Association of Retired Persons released a series of advocacy articles aimed at creating major pension reform in Canada.

At initial glance there are certianly some very intersting proposals and ideas originating from the articles in this month's CARP on-line forum. As Zoomers

Pension Reform: the status quo is not an option
This article has brought attention to the clamour across the country for pension reform. It notes some of the pension reform commisions that have been struck across the country to review pension issues.
One intersting note about this article is the call for universal access by all Canadians to a form of defined benefit plan. These type of plans have been the ones that have created the pension crisis we are in and would only be a intergenerational burden with the next generation picking up the tab.
The most positive call to action for this article is a Pension Summit of the First Ministers and Finance Ministers. Included is a list of the emails for all of Canada's Finance Ministers who will hear the message loud and clear over the next few days.

Need to expand the Canada Pension Plan
CARP calls for a complete overhaul of the CPP program. This is an attempt to ensure that all Canadians will have a reasonable retirement income.
One of the ambitious objectives of this article is for a replacement income of 70% for all retired Canadians. This is a great objective but would call for a doubling of contributions from 9.9% to almost 20% of income.

Pension Reform – It Starts with You
Pierot makes the case for increasing the contribution limits for higher income Canadians to allow for more accumulation into retirement plans.
Pierot makes his case by starting off by pointing out the large disparity between private and public sector pensions. This article classifies public sector plans as first class and the average Canadian's retirement plan as economy class.

"About 2.7 million public sector workers (more than 80% of the public sector) travel first-class as members of defined-benefit (DB) pension plans. After a 30-year career, a worker earning $80,000 will have an indexed pension integrated with the Canada Pension Plan that pays $48,000 per year for life and is worth about $1 million.

The 23% of private sector workers with pension plans are mostly travelling coach. Many belong to defined-contribution (DC) pension plans that don’t promise a guaranteed pension.

With no pension plans, the remaining 77% of private sector workers (10.6 million) are travelling standby."

Whatever the outcome of these articles they are sure to create a ripple throughout Canada. Let's hope for the best.

Pension Primer - Some of the concepts explained

When I began to study pensions many years ago there were some concepts that I did not initially understand and were confusing but became clearer after I studied them in action.

Pension Types
In Canada there are two types of pensions. There are defined contribution plans and there are defined benefit plans.

The best description for the difference in these is the definitions given by Oxford Dictionary of pensions.
1) a regular payment made by a government to people above a specified age... or to such a person's surviving dependents - Public Sector pensions
2) a regular payment from a fund to which the recipient has contributed - private sector pensions - Private Sector pensions

Pension Income
With the defined contribution plan the retirement income determination of this plan is easy. Whatever you have accumulated in the plan at retirement you can draw down on for income. So as a basic example if, at retirement, you have $250,000 accumulated you could draw down $25,000 per year for 10 year. Of course we have an expectation that the fund will generate investment income and can pay more over our retirement.

Most Canadians have the contributory kind while those in the public sector have the defined benefit pensions. In my opinion defined benefit plans are not really pensions at all but a guaranteed income at retirement.

In the public sector the level of defined benefits or guaranteed retirement income is set at 70% of retirement income. The usual public sector formula is 2% of income per working year. Therefore the usual retirement is set for 35 year producing the 70% replacement income. Some pensions typically for police and firefighters are accelerated to allow for retirement after 30 years.

Currently the Federal government pays an average of over$80,000 per year to it's employees. The average employee therefore will earn a guaranteed income of $56,000 per year in retirement. These plans are "integrated" with CPP (Canada Pension Plan) which is around $10,000 per year. So the pension will pay $46,000 of this income with the CPP covering the rest.

In Ontario a teacher retires in the highest income group at over $90,000. Therefore they will receive a pension in excess of $60,000 per year.

Pension Provisions or Formulas

The public sector defined benefit plan is designed to pay 70% of income during retirement. In addition is offers.

Life time - It funds "income" for the life of the retiree
Indexing - It increases every year for life. Based on "inflation" which is set at some arbitrary number selected by government employees.
Survivor benefits - The surviving spouse of the retiree is guaranteed generally 60% of the income. This is regardless of whether or not they have other sources of income, including a public sector pension.
Trips - Free trips to Florida or Arizona every year (just joking)

Pension Boosting or Pension Spiking
Public sector pensions are a continuation of income into retirement years. The public sector pension attempts to replace 70% of the retirees income. Most formulas for pension income are based on an average of the past few years working income.

We saw recently the release of the Sunshine List in the Province of Ontario. This is the list of the employee who earned over $100,000. There was a fair amount of coverage in the press over those employees who made it to the list from jobs with a base rate much less than $100,000.

Since the retirement income is based on a percentage of working income the higher the final pay rate in the final years the higher the pension. Toronto Star reports on bus drivers in the Sunshine List These employees earning overtime have discovered that 70% of $100,000 is a much better pension than 70% of the $60,000 base rate. This is pension boosting.

Double Dipping
Public sector pensions have a much earlier retirement date than the private sector. Many public sector employees retire in their early 50's. Today the life expectancy has increased to over 80 years of age. Many of these "seniors" are able to continue working and I think should be able to continue working. Take the mayor of Mississauga for example, Hazel is a prime example of a very active, intelligent and capable 80 year old.

Public employees can trigger their pensions and find a new job. When they earn both pension and working income they are "Double Dipping". Report from the Toronto Sun

Taxpayer or Pension Liability
There is a common principle for all defined benefit pensions. Employees may make some contributions but the final liability of funding the pension is with the employer. The employer for public sector pensions is of course governments that are funded by taxpayer money. Ultimately all taxpayers are responsible for public sector pensions.

These numbers are very flexible and are manipulated based on the needs of the pensions at the time.

For example, this came from a Google search America's Intelligence Wire - Mar 21, 2006 - Last week, the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan announced it currently faces a $32-billion funding shortfall. Many factors contribute to the looming crisis . This was at a time when the pension saw an new government coming into power that was beholding to them and they wanted to leverage that IOU into more cash.

A year later the political opposition to large amounts of money being pumped into the plan started to rise. The plan then used it's magic and "The Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan is cutting back on inflation protection for some future retirees to eliminate a $12.7-billion funding shortfall reported" After a large injection of cash from Ontario taxpayers the shortfall estimates were changed.

Then this year after a disastrous year on the markets. It lost $19 Billion on the markets and it lost the return for the year. The expected returns on the $100 Billion plan should have been around 6% or another $6 Billion. The shortfall from previous years $12B, last year's losses $19B and the loss of income from last year $6B turned into.... ta da... are you ready for this....
"London Free Press - ‎Apr 3, 2009‎ - Despite a $2.5-billion shortfall that will likely grow during the next four years, contributors to the Ontario Teachers"


Pension Dumping
Many companies in the private sector have found the burden of pensions unsustainable. In an attempt many companies have used whatever means available to escape from the liabilities of defined benefit pensions.
Many companies have looked for relief from their employees, union and to governments. As a last resort many companies have gone bankrupt.
Unfortunately this is not an option for public sector pensions. They can only dump onto the taxpayer.

Underfunded Pensions
An underfunded pension is one where the commitments to employees for future pension income is not sustainable based on the amount of money currently accumulated in the pension fund.

Pension and Public Sector Reform Gaining Steam

As the financial crisis worsens some public figures are stepping up to reform the system. It may be an impossible task but is essential to economic recovery.

All world citizens are faced with the same challenges in this financial crisis.

The Governor of the State of Rhode Island made a speech that will be instrumental in addressing the problems of the system. Complete Text: State of State Address

"In the midst of all the economic turmoil, tonight Id like to start out with
some uplifting stories.

First, what we need to do to get through this economic downturn. Second, how we better position our state for the future. And third, what we have already done to put in place the building blocks to create a stronger and more competitive.

First, we must strengthen our safety net for our most vulnerable citizens

we must reform our public employee pension and benefit plans so that they are fair and equitable, affordable and sustainable. And third, we must slow the rise of local spending by giving our mayors and town councils the ways and means to control spending and balance their budgets without raising property taxes.

I know that our proposed changes are difficult ones, and I know there are many critics.

But, the only alternative we hear from the special interests and lobbyists is raise taxes, because, they cant get by on less.

We need every department of every city and town to sharpen their pencils, tighten their belts, and be smarter about how they spend the taxpayers money! We need the unions to realize that our cities and towns cannot afford business as usual-they cannot afford the wages, the pensions, the health care, and the work rules that were bargained for. The world has changed dramatically. The cost of defined benefit pension plans and healthcare have spiraled out of control.

These costs are crushing our taxpayers - most of whom dont have such pensions and health benefits. This is not about picking on anyone-rather this is about picking up the burden together, for the sake of our children, our seniors on fixed incomes, and those truly dependent upon us. This is about pulling together to get us through this severe downturn.

Were not alone in this! Connecticut and Massachusetts are facing multi-billion dollar deficits.

California has an unemployment rate of 9+%, and a $45 billion deficit. Governor Schwarzenegger has declared a fiscal state of emergency. They are out of money!

They're postponing tax refunds, college tuition payments and requiring state employees to take 2 unpaid days off each month. We cant let this happen in Rhode Island.

I encourage every public employee union to sit down with the mayors, town managers, the city and town councils, and the school committees to become a part of the solution. Help your communities get through this! Some have already stepped forward and I thank them.

Our immediate challenge in the next few months will be to use the anticipated federal stimulus money wisely and sensibly. We must use the additional funding to bridge the deficit, support tax relief and structural reforms, grow jobs, and grow our economy.

Today, the pressing issue is growing jobs in those sectors of the economy that will bring money and investment to our state.

To illustrate why our state continues to be so vulnerable to economic downturns, I want to share a chart with you! In 1978, Rhode Island had 137,000 jobs in manufacturing which represented 34% of the entire workforce-today we have 46,000 representing under ten percent of the workforce.

I want to repeat that. The state has reduced employment by 25 percent, while the cities and towns have increased employment by 38 percent.

Ladies and gentlemen, thats why your property taxes are so high and keep rising. Thats also why it is so imperative that we find ways to consolidate services, and reduce the burden on our economy and our taxpayers. Government services consume our economy's resources --- they don't create them!

The competition, among states and countries for companies and jobs is intense. There are many factors that go into a company's decision about site selection-available workforce, energy costs, site readiness, over-all business climate, and, yes, taxes. We have been working hard on the first four - but now we need to make significant changes in our tax competitiveness.

Im tired of people writing stories about R.I. being tax hell, or ranked near the bottom in business tax competitiveness. We need to reverse the trend on that chart with bold, business friendly tax reforms.

I am firmly convinced that if we dramatically change our tax structure, our economy will produce jobs! What Rhode Island needs now is more taxpayers; not more taxes. This will only come from a tax policy that says to our business community, stay here and grow your business, and by the way, tell all of your out-of-state business friends that R.I. is a great place to do business. I want to send a loud signal that - R.I. is open for Business!!!!"

It will be a challenge indeed for all political leaders. Many cannot rise to the challenge but my hope is that those who do will be an example for others.

Forbes Article, Gilt-Edged Pensions - How much are they really worth?

Forbes came out with an article last week about the lucky stiff retiring on a public sector pension. The article tells the story of the stiff retiring four years ago at age 42 with a $65,000 per year pension. The pension is indexed for life, that is guaranteed to increase every year. Forbes places the value of that pension at $2,000,000 and most of that will be funded by taxpayers today and into the future.

In the article Forbes notes that America is "creating a nasty social problem as well. America, in case you hadn't noticed, is dividing into two nations. The 22.5-million-strong public sector (that includes retirees) is growing ever larger, and enjoying ever greater wages and benefits often guaranteed by state constitutions." This nasty little problem is not only occurring the the United States but in Canada and most countries around the world.

I have followed the pension world for the past ten years with a focus on the large gap between public sector plans and those of the average Canadian worker. In the UK (England) they have coined the phrase Pension Apartheid for the two nations that are developing.

The compensation levels of the public sector have been designed to compensate public sector workers based on a need to avoid political confrontation. They have powerful unions and whenever there is an upcoming election they make their voices heard.

Originally the union propaganda was that the public sector was underpaid relative to the private sector. However, Forbes points out:
"In public-sector America things just get better and better. The common presumption is that public servants forgo high wages in exchange for safe jobs and benefits. The reality is they get all three. State and local government workers get paid an average of $25.30 an hour, which is 33% higher than the private sector's $19, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data. Throw in pensions and other benefits and the gap widens to 42%."

This same analysis holds true in Canada and recently was reinforced by the Wage Watch report released by the CFIB - Canadian Federation of Independent Business.

The real bonus to public sector employment is the pension plan. The pension plan is not based on an accumulation of funds like your plan is, it is based on a continued stream of income into retirement. This stream of income is based on 70% of the wage rates at termination of employment. In the Forbes example, the worker had a pension worth about 72% of his final salary. His ending salary was $90,000 per year and he will receive a $65,000 pension indexed for life.

These type of pensions do not exist in the private sector, except for a few companies, most of which were once public sector and are now "Crown Corporations".

Forbes notes that "four in five public-sector workers have lifetime pensions, versus only one in five in the private sector. The difference shifts huge risks from government to private-sector workers." In Canada those numbers are about the same.

Check out the Forbes article it certainly will create much needed debate around this issue over the next few weeks. Gilt-Edged Pensions

Public Sector Reform Will Be Tough

The people, not the public sector, are sovereign - Independent of Ireland

At a time when all Canadians are feeling the effects of our current economic situation governments seem reluctant to contribute to our economic recovery.

It is not unrealistic to expect that cutbacks, layoffs and salary reductions should be shared by the public sector. Despite the belief by most taxpayers that changes are necessary, making any substantial changes to government spending seems an impossible task.

There are a couple of good examples of attempts made by governments to control their costs and give taxpayers a break. One of them is the City of St John NB and the other is the country of Ireland.

In St John city spending has been highlighted by a pension issues that has caused grief for taxpayers. You can follow the saga in the link on the sidebar.

Totten gives council what it's looking for

In Ireland the initiative to cut back government spending was as a result of several initiatives over the past few years. A major one was the benchmarking of the public sector to the private sector. The results were the start of bringing public sector benefits and wages back to the level of those in the private sector.
Ireland Public Sector Benchmark Report

The report lead to announcements this week of actual plans for controlling the cost of the public sector.
We Have No Option

Lets hope that these efforts are the start by all levels of government to control government spending and share in the pain to be felt by all taxpayers this year.

Bill Tufts