'Outrageous' pension double-dipping triggers criminal investigation into California cops

[Demovictory9]

The alleged fraud detailed by CalPERS includes two chiefs working in the Broadmoor police district after receiving disability payouts, covering-up full-time work in order to collect retirement benefits and in one of the chief's cases, returning to active duty, then becoming an annuitant again, to enhance benefits.

CalPERS said one pensioner, identified as former Police Chief David Parenti, increased his yearly pension retirement by nearly $60,000 a year, going from $93,000 a year to $152,292 a year by coming out of retirement, working for 13 months and then retiring again.

But the pension plan said Parenti was never actually retired. He continued to draw more than $6,000 in salary per two week-pay period in addition to the pension benefits.

He also received a $100,000 disability benefit for unspecified injuries and another approximate $100,000 payment that couldn't be explained.

Parenti and the three other former Broadmoor police officials can be forced to pay back retirement benefits they collected while working. They could also face criminal charges.

The San Mateo County District Attorney's Office opened a criminal investigation into the former chiefs after CalPERS released its audit, District Attorney Stephen Wagstaffe said. It focuses on Parenti and a second former chief, Greg Love.

https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Outrageous-pension-double-dipping-triggers-16722357.php

[Baitball Blogger]

1. Double dipping is or was very common in Florida.

Lots of people claimed double pensions after retirement from school jobs. And then they came back for their second set of benefits.

There was an uproar over it some years ago, so they may have put a stop to it.

[Demovictory9]

15. What makes this case worse is that these cops oversee a town of only 4000

[EarthFirst]

2. "Could also face criminal charges..."

Uh huh.

[greenjar_01]

3. This happens all over the country

The conduct is the same as any extortion gang, which is the way police treat the local governments and legislators when it comes to pension and salary negotiations. Police pensions are clownishly out of control. They retire with salaries most people would crave to work for and they do so with often 15-20 years left on their work lives. It's a complete racket. The fact that they are so poorly trained for their jobs, operate with near impunity, and represent a general mess of corruption just makes things worse.

Also, whenever any one tells you that defined contribution plans (i.e., 401Ks) are better than defined benefits plans (i.e., pensions), ask why police officers unions insist on defined benefits, when they have the power to get pretty much any retirement scheme they want. Why?

[Celerity]

4. Lock those fucking criminal pigs up and toss away the keys.

[Hortensis]

9. Lock 'em up, put them to work, to consider release if/when repaid.

Never thought of this, but with remote work increasingly possible, who knows? As it is, inmates are required to work.

[doc03]

5. I know people that have got a 100% disability

for decades worked at the same time and get both pensions. Many public employees are double dipping. Our superintendent of education retired from his $100,000 plus job and still works his superintendent job. The company I worked for changed ownership and offered us a buyout. But the union wouldn't let us take the buyout and work under the new owner.

[madville]

10. Nothing wrong with it if allowed under policy/contracts

We have a version of DROP at the current city municipal job I have. People that have maxed out their pension contribution can retire on paper but continue to work for 5 more years and a lump sum is put in an account for them instead of adding to their pension. Not uncommon for the employee to stay the five extra years on the job after “retiring” then walk away with a $250k+ lump sum when they finally actually leave.

[SharonClark]

11. In Iowa government, executive level people have retired and then been hired back in their old

jobs as "consultants". Yes, it's a racket for the better-off or well-connected to milk the system.

[2naSalit]

6. About time.

[North Shore Chicago]

7. But make sure

to stop those SNAP benefits of 12.99 going towards formula!

[madville]

8. They got greedy and worked the system

A little too hard it seems. Nothing wrong with getting every benefit that one is entitled, as long as it’s allowed under the current policy (which it seems they didn’t follow in this case).

I get a sorta “double dip”, my active duty military time counts for both my Reserve military retirement and for my federal civilian FERS pension. Had to buy the active military years into the FERS pension but it was only a few thousand bucks to add 11 years of pension credit so it was a good deal.

[SharonClark]

12. Good deal for you, not the tax payers.

[haele]

14. What happens is that he "pays back" the amount of money he would have

Put into FERS for the years he was in service. Since the Federal government is typically the employer for most people retiring from the military, it is common practice.
The issue you seem to be concerned about is about contracted benefits rather than double-dipping.
A military person enlists with the expectation that after 20 years of service minimum, there are going to be benefits they are entitled to in exchange for that work, deployments, risks, etc...
That member could very well retire at the age of 38. If they continue work in the federal government, they are then entitled to retirement benefits also. Part of the requirement for the position and seniority they may have could very well be time and service from their military activity, especially those who transition into supervisory or management positions.
Shouldn't these members also be able to parley their military time for the federal government into civilian employment time for the federal government, just as any other transition from worker to management gets in other pension systems? And shouldn't they be able to keep the retirement that they earned in accordance with the contract they signed with the Federal Government for their prior service?
It's not as if most military retirees are making $90k a year in retirement. Most are lucky to be making $20k a year off that retirement.
The fact that they pay their military time contributions keep it from being double dipping.

It's a matter of opinion, and I'm really wishing most people can be eligible for a similar retirement arrangement if the government would start, say, a public service enlistment in exchange for education to jump-start low wage workers into more professional jobs - or a subequent UBI and other benefits for people who can't find consistent work or might want to have the economic freedom to pursue self-employment or develop small businesses of their own after retirement from a minimum public service enlistment.

Haele

[Hortensis]

13. Seems like computerized systems can be turned to

uncovering most of this stuff early on. Requires investment up front, of course. A lot of anti-corruption efforts are on budgets and tend to focus on eliminating the easy large percentage that isn't so costly to take care of and leave the increasingly difficult remainder that would cost a lot more.