California pension politics heating up
Fri, May 21 2010
By Jim Christie - Analysis
SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Big changes may be in store for public pension
funds in California, where prominent public officials are increasingly anxious
about their growing burden on government finances.
At the state level, Attorney General Jerry Brown, a Democrat, says he would
consider overhauling public pensions if elected governor in November. Republican
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger -- in his last term -- says state pension
finances are in crisis.
He has even conditioned signing a state budget on lawmakers agreeing to
overhaul the system to reduce its cost to the state's government.
With that demand, Schwarzenegger has put one of the state government's most
important long-term fiscal challenges front and center at a time when
Californians are acutely aware of how recession, financial and property market
slumps, skittish consumers and high unemployment have slashed the state's
revenue and sent its overall finances reeling.
Key mayors are likewise concerned about pensions.
Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, for instance, says the pension system
of the second largest U.S. city is not sustainable, and San Francisco Mayor
Gavin Newsom is backing a measure on his city's June ballot that would shift
more of the funding of San Francisco's pension fund onto city employees.
In an interview with Reuters on Friday, Mayor Chuck Reed said San Jose --
California's third largest city and the biggest city in Silicon Valley -- faces
a daunting challenge from its pension funds.
"In our next fiscal year our pension obligations will be $200 million,
compared to our general fund revenue of about $700 million -- and it's going up
the following fiscal year and the following fiscal year and the following fiscal
year," Reed said.
Public pension reform is "high on the list of taxpayers,' voters' concerns,"
he added. "This year will be a breakthrough year on it."
Former California lawmaker Joe Nation hopes so. Now a lecturer at Stanford
University he oversaw a study in April through the Stanford Institute for
Economic Policy Research that estimated the state's three biggest public pension
funds face a collective shortfall of more than $500 billion over the next 16
years.
"The numbers are finally coming home," Nation said.
HELPING MAKE THE CASE
The biggest U.S. public pension fund, the California Public Employees'
Retirement System, inadvertently gave Schwarzenegger's demand some momentum this
week when on Tuesday it took initial steps toward asking for an additional $600
million in annual funding from the state government.
That would take the state's contribution to the fund, best known as Calpers,
up to $3.9 billion.
Schwarzenegger had pressed lawmakers on pension reform a few days earlier
while presenting his latest budget plan and he immediately pounced on Calpers'
move, describing it as "further evidence of an unsustainable pension system that
must be reformed."
"Every additional dollar we spend on state employee pensions is a dollar we
take from education, health, and public safety," Schwarzenegger said.
By Wednesday, state Treasurer Bill Lockyer prevailed on fellow Calpers' board
members to postpone discussion of requesting more money from the state
government in light of its fiscal woes.
California faces a $19.1 billion budget gap, which Schwarzenegger wants to
close mainly with deep spending cuts to health and human services. Among the
more controversial proposals is one to scrap the state's welfare system at a
time when the state's unemployment rate is over 12 percent.
Lockyer removed the political bull's-eye Calpers pinned on itself just in
time as California's budget politics are gaining steam, said Jim Hawley of the
Elfenworks Center for the Study of Fiduciary Capitalism at St Mary's College of
California.
"It would look to me like it has a tin ear," said Hawley. "I can't believe
anyone would raise a $600 million request this week. It's really quite
striking."
MOVING TOWARD TWO TIERS
Marcia Fritz oversees the California Foundation for Fiscal Responsibility,
which believes public pensions are financially out of control because generous
benefits must by law be paid to retirees. But retirees are living longer than
before, adding to the expenses of public agencies, which will translate into tax
increases and reduced services.
She wants Calpers to press ahead with its request because she expects that
would fuel talks within government agencies employing the $206 billion pension
fund about reducing retirement benefits for future public-sector employees.
One way to ease those costs would be to move toward two-tier pension systems,
in which new public employees receive lesser benefits, an idea gaining momentum
with officials across California -- 18 regional government groups are looking
into it including some within public-employee unions, Fritz said.
She recently met with union representatives and said they did not reject two
tiers outright as they once would have. Instead, she said they are more
concerned that government employers will cut pension costs with pink slips.
"The main thing is to avoid layoffs," Fritz said.
Investment losses by public pension funds in recent years are also raising
doubts among public-sector unions about their financial stability, said Dave
Low, chair of Californians for Health Care and Retirement Security, which
represents more than 1.5 million public employees across the state.
"Four years ago the stock market hadn't gone down the toilet," Low said.
"People are more inclined now to negotiate."
In Santa Monica, City Manager Rod Gould is preparing for contract talks next
year with 11 city employee unions amid an expected $7 million bump in 2012
through 2014 in the city's contribution to Calpers for managing pensions.
"Pension reform is going to be on the table," he said. "The increased costs
are not sustainable long term."
© Thomson Reuters 2010. All rights reserved. Users may download and print
extracts of content from this website for their own personal and non-commercial
use only. Republication or redistribution of Thomson Reuters content, including
by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written
consent of Thomson Reuters. Thomson Reuters and its logo are registered
trademarks or trademarks of the Thomson Reuters group of companies around the
world.
Thomson Reuters journalists are subject to an Editorial Handbook which
requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests.
This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. To order
presentation-ready copies for distribution to colleagues, clients or customers,
use the Reprints tool at the top of any article or visit: www.reutersreprints.com.