Reader comments
In our opinion: Double bonuses poor form

Bonus ? | 2:28 a.m. Oct. 31, 2009

It was very poor form for SITLA to take the bonuses in this economy. I have always raised my eyebrows at the way they have conducted business and have yet to understand how they opperate in the bounds of the state schools. This stunt has me questioning what is going on.

Saddened & Mad | 6:57 a.m. Oct. 31, 2009

This couldn't be our fine breathren that attend the temple on a regular basis? If they don't get their just dues in this life for abusing the public's faith - then they will in the next go round. Oh, and I hope the church is watching for their 10% of the bonus money!

Anonymous | 7:39 a.m. Oct. 31, 2009

What I don't understand is we criticize a government entity for this behavior, yet laud a corporation which has requested government assistance for doing the same except to a more extreme degree, shouting "socialism" if the government intervenes. What hypocrisy!

Comments continue below

dj | 7:45 a.m. Oct. 31, 2009

yes it does look big - like a big slap in the face.

RichE | 7:53 a.m. Oct. 31, 2009

Governor Herbert is reported by other news organizations in Utah as having changed his mind and now says that the double bonuses these scoundrels received is fair and appropriate.

I'm not sure why your paper is behind the times, or if your editorial staff is ignorant about what goes on outside your insular walls, but I was under the impression that a newspaper was supposed to accurately report the facts.

In any event, I hope the legislature overrules Governor Herbert and mandates the return of these excessive and double bonuses back to the school children of Utah, who the money really belongs to!

Clair Ellis | 10:43 a.m. Oct. 31, 2009

This editorial is a fine example of demagoguery. Aspiring journalism professors should file it away.

Unemployed | 12:55 p.m. Oct. 31, 2009

Who is lauding big corps?! All this money comes out of one pot (the taxpayers) and in these times any bonus should be banned in public or quasi public entities. Those who have already dipped into the pot should be fined. About double the amount received would be about right. Or fired (without a payment!).

re: unemployed | 3:46 p.m. Oct. 31, 2009

Your ignorance is showing. SITLA made over 150 million last year. They are a self funding agency. This means they fund themselves with their own revenues and don't spend tax dollars. Any agency or business for that matter who can show a profit and a vast profit at that should get bonuses. The real problem isn't to bonuses it resentment that some are still making money while others aren't. Those that have been laid off (I'm one of them) have the option of resentment and hatred or feeling glad that at least our children have an agency that can make money not matter the political or economic climate.

Anonymous | 4:50 p.m. Oct. 31, 2009

This doesn't come from tax dollars at all.

When will the "stop spending MY taxes" people learn to think for themselves?

Utah Dem | 9:30 p.m. Oct. 31, 2009

re:unemployed - so profit means they are entitled to the bonuses, give me a break! Their bonuses ranged from 17% - 21% depending on the individual - their salaries range from $119,000+ to $164,000+. I find it interesting that anyone would support of bonus for these guys since they cut the schools distribution of LAND trust money by over 20%.

re: Utah Dem | 9:54 a.m. Nov. 1, 2009

Get your facts straight. SITLA has very little to nothing to do with the LAND trust money that is paid to schools. SITLA earns the money that is then invested in the state permanent fund. That fund is managed by Richard Ellis our state treasure. That fund generates interest and dividends. The interest and dividends from the permanent fund are what is sent to the schools. The amount is a function of the market. Blaming SITLA for diminished interest and dividends is, to say the least, disingenuous or shows exactly how ignorant about the topic you are. Get a basic understanding of the facts and how they relate to reality before passing judgment.

Matthew | 8:05 a.m. Nov. 2, 2009

Perhaps not "tax" dollars, but they are "PUBLIC" funds. They are not private funds. Therefore the public should have a say in how they are used. A similar problem occurred here in Oregon. Personally I find the idea of bonuses to be abhorrent (public or private). The main reason is that the person truly responsible is very difficult to identify and almost never is the one that gets the bonus.

Token gifts, as a pat on the back, in acknowledgement of stellar work on a singular, unusual task, are as much as I can stomach. Otherwise, you are paying people twice for just doing their job. The idea of bonuses in the thousands (or millions) of dollars for people with already high salaries is obscene.

Neighbor | 12:48 p.m. Nov. 2, 2009

Unless they work for free and are fully transparent, there is no such thing as a "self-funding" agency of government. Agencies use public resources that are not free.

The entire group should be fired - today!

@Saddened & Mad | 2:24 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009

What would any article in Utah be without blaming the LDS church? As a recent move-in I'm amazed at the weird comments people make. The paper delivery guy threw my newspaper in the bushes yesterday. It's a clear case of religious interference.

Not a problem to me | 2:49 p.m. Nov. 3, 2009

#1... What the heck does this have to do with the Church? Gimme a break!

#2. I have no problem with it (as long as the money to pay the bonuses comes from the savings or earnings produced by these employee's wisdom or hard work). If we had to raise taxes or cut something to pay the bonuses... I would have a problem. But the bonuses SHOULD be covered by the GREAT work these employees did to increase the fund and it's earnings for the people... right? If not, they didn't really EARN a bonus in my mind.

#3. I plan to get a bonus this year, because my hard work has helped my company realise all time record high profits. So... Am I supposed to not get the bonus I EARNED, because some OTHER companies are having tough times?

How does this make sense... "I know you did a great job and did what we told you would be rewarded with a bonus... We can afford to pay the bonus because of your hard work, but we're not going to PAY you the bonus because OTHER companies are strugling".

It doesn't make sense.

re: Not a problem to me | 8:20 a.m. Nov. 4, 2009

Welcome to the rest of state government employment, too. Do your job well, take a cut. Do it better, take a bigger cut! No merit raises since 2001. Welcome to Utah, where we continue to "do more" with less and less, and less........................

Unemployed | 8:23 a.m. Nov. 4, 2009

Aren't Utah's public schools still over-crowded? I remember they were when I attended. Why are we even paying out bonuses in a recession. The money would be much better spent to reduce class sizes.

To "Unemployed | 8:23 a.m." | 10:12 a.m. Nov. 4, 2009

Unemployed | 8:23 a.m.

You obviously don't understand how bonuses work.

They are set up in ADVANCE to help MOTIVATE the employee to achieve some specific result.

For instance... "If you sell $2 Million in widgets in 2009 we promise to give you a $2000 bonus, or a cruise, or whatever".

So when the employee works extra hard/smart and does the prescribed accomplishment... You can't then just say, "We know you did what we challenged you to do, and your over-achievement made the company record profits, but we're NOT going to pay you the bonus we promised you because OTHER companies are strugling".

You don't promise a guy in a totally different department a bonus if he does X and then say, "Ooops, class sizes are to big (something HE has no control over) so we're not going to give you your bonus until someone ELSE changes that".

IF his bonus was somehow tied to tax_revenues or something (which it wasn't) then I can see using the tough_economic_times ploy to not pay the bonus. But THIS bonus is completely paid from the extraordinary investment_earnings from the extraordinary work HE did.

@ unemployed | 12:21 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009

I agree schools are overcrowded, but to think that SITLA and their bonuses has anything to do with it is beyond belief bordering stupidity. SITLA makes the money and puts it in the permanent fund, that's it, they don't invest it, they don't send it out to schools. Dipping into the permanent fund is the soul responsibility of the legislature. They make the funding choices. They can if they want spend all $970 million in the next session if they choose. If they wanted they could build all the building the state needs with the funds, they could pay teachers more, they could reduce class sizes (which is the same thing as building more schools in many instances). It is a legislative decision. SITLA is an independent agency. They don't have anything to do with schools other than making them hundreds of millions dollars without costing the tax payers one penny. We should be thanking them as a model of government efficiency and productive, not spilling our ignorance and hate all over them. Thanks SITLA for all you do for our children under difficult conditions.

Re: @ unemployed | 12:21 p.m. | 12:52 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009

You are seriously uninformed. The legislature CANNOT spend any amount in the permanent fund. That's why they call it PERMANENT. Only the interest earned on that amount can be spent. SITLA manages that fund. They DON'T make the fund hundreds of millions of dollars. The money comes from profits from the sale or lease of lands that the federal government gave to the state for the schools. The fund has been seriously MISMANAGED over the years. Compare Utah's fund with the identical funds in New Mexico and Arizona. Then, let's see if you thank SITLA.

re: Utah Dem | 9:54 a.m. | 1:18 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009

You wrote 'SITLA earns the money that is then invested in the state permanent fund.'

True ... they EARNED the money by selling prime school trust lands to their buddies at 10 cents on the dollar or by 'leasing' prime lands at a fraction of their worth.

Good call ... they should be commended and rewarded with double bonuses.

School trust funds | 1:25 p.m. Nov. 4, 2009

Utah's school trust fund is valued at approx. $970 million and contributed $8 million to Utah schools through interest and dividends.

Arizona's school trust fund is valued at approx. $1.9 billion and contributed approx $96 million to Arizona schools.

New Mexico's is at approx. $10 billion and contributed $269 million to N.M. schools.

Whew ... NICE JOB of managing Utah's trust fund SITLA. You guys rock! I propose TRIPLE BONUSES for all!

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.