Thursday, February 10, 2011

50 years possible for sex offenses and between them they will not serve 3, why is Santa Barbara so soft on convicted sex offenders Peter Jeschke and Jeffery Johnson?

Sometimes I have a hard time with my own work, take yesterday for instance. Really all I was trying to do was mock KEYT and there efforts in manufacturing meaningless news. I was not trying to create a buzz with Ron Zonen and possible shake down of Michael Jackson during his trial in Santa Barbara. I was however trying to highlight the contrast in how alleged and convicted sex offenders are treated in Santa Barbara by the District Attorneys office. On one hand we have a famous person who was found not guilty on all charges at a cost of millions to tax payers. Than on the flip side we have the exact opposite with the extremely lenient sentencing of convicted sex offenders Peter Jeschke and Jeffrey Johnson. I chose to highlight this because combined these men could have received over 50 years in prison. As it stands right now they will not even serve 3 years between them. It just makes me sick that men who violate children can get away with these acts virtually unpunished.

Now the other part of my posting yesterday was dealing with the SBCERS pension fund and that has me patting myself on the back. There are still so many areas to research in greater detail but what I have already shared should be a wake up call for us all. Blindly I was able to construct a ten year model based on data I had obtained on my own to create a fund value that we can verify as correct. Even though we are talking about over a one billion dollars my fund value model was within 20 million dollars of there’s . So than I ask you all this; How can the first ten years of my model for the SBCERS fund  be spot on and the next ten years differ 2 billion dollars? Presently we are told that the pension has a value of almost two billion dollars with a future unfunded value of one billion dollars. Worse yet many experts feel that shortfall is here to stay at least until 2028( I will provide a chat that reflect just that) Yet my model and value says not only should we be 100% fund but that we should have a surplus of about a billion dollars.
We'll get back to that in just moment but for now I have some good news to share. While reviewing the California State Controllers Public Retirement Systems Annual Report for 1998 I was stunned to find at that there are actually 20 years of prior reports that are currently archived. I have already mailed the Controllers office and am in the process of finding out what is required to obtain those 20 years of additional reports. That will cover 1978 through 1997, how exciting is that? You can go to the link below to see what is currently available.

Controller for the State of California Public Retirement Systems Annual Reports
Fiscal Year 2007-08 
         Fiscal Years 1979-97 (archived)
If you are viewing the chart below @ please click on the picture and it will open into it's own window.

Why will we so freely accept a 1 Billion dollar  UAAL debt until at least 2028, and not consider my theory that the money is not missing?

No comments: