Comments (25) | Add a comment
PERS board votes to fight ruling to reveal retired public employees and their benefits
Tools
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
The board governing the Public Employees Retirement System of Nevada voted unanimously Wednesday to challenge a ruling that the names and benefit amounts of about 47,000 retired public employees are a matter of public record.
The Reno Gazette-Journal had filed a lawsuit against the retirement system, which denied the newspaper's request for the information.
Carson City District Judge James Russell supported the newspaper, concluding that the purpose of the Nevada Public Records Act is to "ensure accountability of the government to members of the public by facilitating public access to vital information about government activities."
But Chris Wicker, the attorney for PERS, said the law is not that clear.
"Since the 1970s, PERS has interpreted (state laws) as treating employee files as confidential," Wicker said.
He said members of the retirement system board decided to lodge an appeal with the high court to answer this question: "Is the statute right, or is the judge right?"
"Judge Russell is a well-respected judge," said Wicker, "but he's not the Supreme Court."
He said PERS wants to comply but needs a "definitive statement" from high court justices on what the law means.
Wicker said the PERS board, and many current and retired public employees, are concerned that making the information public could lead to identity theft.
"The Gazette-Journal acted in the public interest, but there are others out there who may have different motives."
Scott Glogovac, the newspaper's attorney, doesn't agree.
"Nobody has ever shown any connection between access to this information and an increase in identity theft," Glogovac said.
He said PERS will have to provide more than "hypothetical generalizations" to overcome the public's right to know.
Glogovac also said state laws do provide confidentiality protections for certain aspects of an employee's file "but not the information the Gazette-Journal asked for."
The newspaper sought the information as part of an investigation into employees who "double dip" in the state's payment and retirement systems.
A portion of retirement funds is paid with tax dollars and a portion is paid through PERS' $25 billion investment portfolio.
The newspaper's representatives were supposed to meet with PERS officials to discuss how to best obtain the information, but Glogovac said PERS has requested the matter to be put on hold pending a Supreme Court decision.
"We'll decide that in the near future," Glogovac said.
"You would think the law would be on our side," said Mark Vincent, chairman of the PERS retirement board. "I'm not sure we even know how to respond to some of these issues."
Contact reporter Doug McMurdo at dmcmurdo@reviewjournal.com or 702-224-5512.
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Simply more harassment of public sector employees by small-minded, mean-spirited people. The simple fact, as has been pointed out over and over, is that for a particular job and a particular level of training and education, the total salary and benefit package for a private sector worker is 7% MORE than for a public sector worker. And still, small-minded people scream about how those evil public sector people are "bleeding the system".
I'm sure they don't want to release this info so the public does not find out how much their retirees are bleeding the system. While many will be reasonable, their will DEFINITELY be some outrageous payouts that will have the public up in arms. How will the government employees claim how mistreated they are if this info gets out?
The names/amounts of NVPERS beneficiaries should be published. It's a matter of public record.
The names/amounts of FICA beneficiaries should ALSO be publicized. It's a matter of public record.
That's right.
Wouldn't it be nice to see how many NVPERS recipients are also receiving FICA checks?!
Please don't tell me that FICA is some sort of "private sector" retirement plan. It is not.
FICA is a tax. Recipients are collecting a form of welfare.
Abolish NVPERS.
Abolish FICA.
Small government now!
Martel is absolutely wrong that releasing the name of the agency, position and years of service would protect the privacy of the retiree. Some positions are unique enough to give the identity of the former occupant away. If all the newspapers want if information on the double dippers (though it was done legally), then all they really need is the gross amount of each annual pension placed side by side. By the way, double dipping can come in various forms. A person who retires, then goes back to work for a PERS agency has his/her pension benefit suspended. While either, a) a new pension benefit accrues, or b) the original benefit is augmented. Somehow, the newspapers want to show that something is wrong if that person resumes receipt of the first pension and also collects a second, earned pension. The TRUE double dippers were those who worked at accruing a new pension while at the same time collected a pension! Showing everyone who is collecting two pensions as double dippers would be unjust, libelous and defamatory!
As a current retiree, I have no problem with releasing the amount paid to retirees. I do have a problem with my name being released just as most people would. My solution is to release the name of the agency, the position held, years of service and the amount paid by PERS. This would provide the public the financial information they deserve while protecting the privacy of the individual PERS pensioner. If the RJ and its sister papers insist on getting and posting the names, they are all about intrusion , not providing information to the public.
I have often wondered why those who whine incessantly about the wages of public and/or union employees don't apply for these jobs that they feel pay great wages and retirement benefits but these small minded people never answer these questions!
I guess that they don't want to lose their food stamps and other assistance program funds!
If you shrink government, and you privatize state retirement pensions in the future, then none of this will be "a matter of public record". So which do you want:
1). Transparency and accountability, which the government must provide by law.
or
2). Privatization in which case there is no accountability or transparency required by law??
You can't have it both ways.
Another lack of critical thinking ability by ideological conservatives. The problem is not that state employees have (had) good retirement benefits; the problem is that everyone else, doesn't. That's an issue for them to take up with their own employers.
where's the letter writer that wrote that public drone wages and benefits didn't come from the public ? again, taxpayers or buyers of any product or service are entitled to know what they're buying. to be consistent then taxpayers shouldn't be allowed to know the cost of any gubmit expenditure, infrastructure improvement, or employee wage & benefit cost. what happened to "transparency" ?
PERS contributors pay into the system from their earnings. The contributions belong to them from work they do. The funds come from the public dollar- but the public is compensating the person for their labor. Pers investments and the managment of money invested for the employee is taken not from the public source, but from the contributions ofthe persons who contribute to it. Further claim on the money could pose a dangerous threat to any contractor who takes public money - even if they are not official employees of the state. All state salaries are public, and the Pers retirement formula is also public. The paper does not need the salary information if they have the position title and years of service to calculate an individual retirement amount within a few hundred dollars. I work in a public aencyand we use consultants who are retired from other agencies. The fact is that the contracts are significantly cheaper than hiring new state workers to do the work. It is like outsourcing and does not put the state in a the position of vesting a new state worker. Mot of the contractors are people who have not reached retirement age but have over 30 years of Pers service. There is no retirment veting for contractors, no union, and no pension beyond what they already have. They get paid when they work and do not when they are not working. Be careful with all the hollering about contractors... if agencies like the one I work for does not contract we would need to hire more Pers contributing workers who would eventually retire and draw a state pension - which everyone seems to want to miniminze.
If it IS allowed to become public information a lot of us who DON'T get these payouts are gonna be screaming THEFT, and demanding an end to double and triple dipping.