But San Francisco Superior Court Judge Harold Kahn did strip out a particularly contentious section of Proposition B that was designed to discourage court challenges if voters approve the measure, saying the so-called poison pill provision was one of the most draconian pieces of legal writing I have ever seen.
That provision would have imposed a five-year freeze on wages or any other bargained compensation if a court invalidated any part of Prop. B, potentially exacting a high toll from any city employee who pushed a legal challenge that had merit.
Kahns eight-page ruling said the poison pill language imposes an unwarranted and wholly disproportional burden on the right to seek redress from the courts.
The judge also indicated that Prop. B may violate the vested rights of employees by forcing them to contribute more to their pensions, but Kahn said he hadnt been presented with enough evidence to show a clear violation.
Kahn rejected a series of procedural arguments about language on the petition that five individual city workers and labor unions for police officers, firefighters and others had alleged in the lawsuit filed Aug. 10.
Darcy Brown, a spokeswoman for Prop. Bs backers, the most prominent being Public Defender Jeff Adachi, said the lawsuit was petty, it was picky, it lacked merit and the judge saw through it.
Prop. Bs supporters are fine with Kahn removing the poison pill language, Brown said.
The measure still calls for city employees to pay more into the retirement system and to pick up more of the health care costs for their dependents.
City employees say Prop. B will make their health care payments spike, forcing some to stop covering children, spouses or partners.
Adachi says the initiative could save the city an estimated $170 million a year and is a needed to help rein in skyrocketing pension costs that have led to chronic budget deficits.
Elvira James, a secretary with the San Francisco Rent Board and one of the workers who brought the lawsuit, said she was glad Kahn found the initiative flawed but was disappointed it remains on the ballot.
I took a $3,000 pay cut earlier this year and now Mr. Adachi wants me to pay another $3,500 for health care. Thats not fair, James said in a statement. Mr. Adachi makes $196,000 a year and doesnt pay a cent for his own retirement benefits.
Adachi acknowledges he doesnt currently pay into the retirement system, and neither do thousands of other city employees, he said. That, in his estimation, is part of the problem.
Posted By: John Cote (Email) | August 30 2010 at 04:02 PM
article source
Now this blog makes use of BlogDominator.com which provides Automatic Blog Content to people for no cost.