Report Inappropriate Comments

PaulHuff, glad I'm not the only one who sees the issue with Bob Cushman's analysis -- costs for active and retired firefighters are separate, and should be treated that way.

Think of it this way: For the city to reduce retiree costs (like getting them on Medicare or lowering future COLAs), they need to negotiate with the retirees -- not active duty firefighters.

I also think it's worth distinguishing between potential retiree costs (aren't "pension liabilities" mainly estimates of future costs?) and the actual annual costs for running the fire department.

I agree with you, it's disingenuous to lump those two things together.