On Wednesday, we reported how a pension reform bill intending to save the city money was affixed with a union-crafted amendment that would actually cost San Francisco more than $13 million annually.
The notion of pension reform actually costing the city more in both the short- and long-term is bad enough (as we've put it before, it's like gaining weight on a diet). But, naturally, this gets worse — because the city controller's office didn't include all of the relevant numbers in its first calculations. When you do, labor's pension idea would actually cost the city $15 million a year. And those are just the near-term costs.
Well, what gives? Here's the situation: