I have found in my research there can be 4 or 5 different valuations in a given year for the SBCERS pension and how is one to know which is the true value? In this example I have found two reported values for our pension 06/30/2006 one at $ 1,628,958,290 and the other at $1,992,337,000.
My first source of data comes from
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:a_pj_FipeuQJ:www.countyofsb.org/uploadedFiles/SBC/RPAAC/2006%2520SBCERS%2520CAFR.pdf+sbcers+2006+invetment+retuns&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&source=www.google.com
From the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2006 we get
JUNE 30, 2006
Total Investments
1,665,262,008
Total Investments Including 1,861,508,982
TOTAL ASSETS $ 1,963,838,997
LIABILITIES
Accounts Payable $ 164,180
Benefits Payable 1,128,497
Collateral Held for Securities Lent 196,246,974
Due to Brokers for Security Purchases 137,341,056
TOTAL LIABILITIES $ 334, 880,707
Are these real liabilities or is this a form of netting? What do I mean?
"Netting" in simple terms is the appearance of exchanging value for value to hide or reduce true value. Netting is a form of fraudulent accounting for Wall Street, because the Mafia would call it money laundering. So I ask is 334,880,707 a real value reducing liability as it is shown here or just an example of netting? Right before your eyes they make it appear and or disappear both at the same time. If you look closer at the 196,246,974 figure one might say that the securities lent are guaranteed why would we remove that value from having to perform and produce investment returns? The bottom line is Santa Barbara County reported it was holding $ 1,628,958,290 IN TRUST FOR PENSION BENEFITS 06/30/2006
Now in my second source of data below there is no report of 334,880,707 as a liability anywhere! They way the Pension assets are presented here one might assume that the value is almost 2 billion dollars.
http://www.city-data.com/county/Santa_Barbara_County-CA.html
County population in July 2009: 407,057
· Employee Retirement - Total Other Securities: $358,259,000
Other Investments - Other: $238,015,000
Earnings on Investments (calculated): $163,142,000
Total Federal Securities: $123,282,000
Benefit Payments: $71,018,000
Total Cash and Deposits: $43,176,000
Local Employee Contribution: $15,058,000
Withdrawals: $1,475,000
· Employee Retirement � Corporate Bonds: $313,686,000
· Employee Retirement � Corporate Stocks: $795,953,000
NET ASSETS HELD IN TRUST FOR PENSION BENEFITS $ 1,992,337,000 06/30/2006
You have to understand that even the company’s hired by SBCERS (Mercer) to audit the books have voiced numerous concerns for years now, about the practices by our elected officials with the pension fund. See some examples below;
“Some practices and policies could jeopardize funding status in the future.
In current form there is a lack of transparency of the Pension Plan.”
Further into the audit.
Funding Policy; “This practice distorts funding status and as we will note later makes benefit improvements appear free.”
In current form there is a lack of transparency of the Pension Plan.”
Further into the audit.
Funding Policy; “This practice distorts funding status and as we will note later makes benefit improvements appear free.”
Please feel free to review my source for the above comments yourself @ http://www.countyofsb.org/auditor/publications/SantaBarbaraReportFinal.pdf
One last contradiction (contradictory - confounding: that confounds or contradicts or confuses) Local Government Compensation Reports Calendar Year 2009
Reports the County of Santa Barbara
Population: at 431,312 (as of June 30, 2009) yet below the report shows only
Reports the County of Santa Barbara
Population: at 431,312 (as of June 30, 2009) yet below the report shows only
407,057Santa Barbara County population in July 2009: as reported at
Now one is a Government site and I am sure the higher population translates to greater Government funding. The second site is not but the question is why the two different population totals?
Oops somebody is not telling the truth in these next two pictures, why is there a difference in performance and value from Picture 1 to Picture 2?
Oops somebody is not telling the truth in these next two pictures, why is there a difference in performance and value from Picture 1 to Picture 2?
 |
| This graph shows a pension that has all 3 lines cross and grows to be 100% funded |
 |
| This is the same exact time frame as the picture above, yet all three lines never meet. So are we to believe Picture 1 or Picture 2? Contradiction after Contradiction! |
No comments:
Post a Comment