Orr: "The subject was discussed that there was no ability on the state’s part to provide any assistance to the city. I don’t recall verbatim what was said. It became clear there would be no assistance coming from the state."

DiChiara later asked: "Do you consider it a conflict of interest being paid by the state and receiving housing by the state?"

Orr: "No."

D: "Are you aware of deferred compensation?"

Orr : "Yes."

D: "If you have deferred compensation, are you aware that a pension is earned?"

Orr: "It requires a legal conclusion, it might not be true."

D: "Has the pension already been earned through labor?"
Orr: “Yes."

DiChiara went in another director: Do you believe the city needs capable and committed employees to run the city?

Orr: “Yes.”
D: “Have you done any analysis on what cutting pension benefits would do to morale?”
Orr: “No."
Have you done any analysis as to whether cutting pension benefits would impact hiring in the City?
Orr: “Yes I have done my own analysis. We held a job fair and had 1700 attendees. My analysis is that during the course of the job fair ... their morale is increasing. I have spoken with city employees and despite the city’s difficulties they are working hard."

D: "Have you done analysis on what the average pension amounts are.”

O: "Ranges have gone from 19,000, to 24,000 or 35,000”
D: "Do you know of any insurance that would cover retirees in the event that their accrued pension liabilities?"
O: "Yes."
D: "Is there such insurance?”
O: "No."
D: "Have you done any analysis to determine any retirees whether at $18,000 or $24,000 under your proposal to see if they will be able to make ends meet, put food on the table, buy medications?”
Objection by city on grounds of relevancy.

Judge sustained

DiChiara concluded questioning.

Up next is Sharon Levine for AFSCME

L: "Do you recall receiving a request from Ed McNeil on March 25 inviting you to meet with a coalition of unions and wanted to work together with you?”
O: "Are you asking whether this was the request that was taped to the door?” “I think I said I was willing to meet with anyone.”
L: "Isn’t it true you never actually met with the coalition of unions
O: ”Yes that is true
L: “Is it your position that you directed someone on your behalf to meet with the coalition of unions?”
O: "Are we still talking about the request?"
L: "Yes."
O:” The request was to continue collective bargaining and collective bargaining had been suspended under PA 436.

Judge ordered lunch break until 1:30 p.m.

Before leaving the bench Judge Rhodes instructed Kevyn Orr to just answer the questions. Orr apologized.

Judge: "We’re going to be here a really long time if you insist on going on and on."

Orr: "I apologize your honor.”
Judge: "I will accept your apology if you accept your attorney’s advice and my advice."

2 PM --

Kevyn Orr has returned to the stand in the afternoon session which is only going until 3 p.m. Apparently duly chastened for expanded answers by the judge his new favored response is, “I don’t know,” as he is spending a lot of time answering questions regarding his understanding of pension benefits and their possible cut if the bankruptcy is allowed to go forward.

AFSCME attorney Sharon Levine started the afternoon session:

L: "When it comes to pension benefit cuts, how would individual retirees share in a two billion dollar note and would they have to file personal claims?"
O: "I don’t know."

L: "How would they get their pro rata shares?"