November 21, 2016 5:11 PM
With investments soft, CalPERS eyes higher contribution rates. What does that mean for workers?
By Dale Kasler - The Sacramento Bee
CalPERS is preparing more pension rate hikes, and they could cost government
agencies billions of dollars.
With consultants predicting long-term declines in investment earnings, the
big California pension fund is considering substantially higher contribution
rates for the state and the thousands of municipalities and school districts
that rely on
CalPERS to serve their retirees. Workers could get hit with higher
contributions, too, although that would depend on contract negotiations.
A decision isnft likely until February, but CalPERSf deliberations are
already causing anguish to employers, employees and the pension fund itself. The
move will surely cause more budget strain for government agencies, particularly at the
local level, even though the higher rates are likely to be phased in over a
number of years.
Union officials worry that higher pension contributions will leave less money
for pay raises – and could increase political pressure for major reforms in the
pension system. Dave Low, who runs a group called Californians for Retirement Security, told CalPERS board
members last week not to fall for pessimistic financial forecasts.
gWe donft see enough data that shows us an immediate change is warranted,h
said Low, also executive director of the California School Employees
Association. gI think the train needs to be slowed down.h
But several CalPERS board members, speaking at a meeting of the fundfs
finance and administration committee, said the fund needs to face up to its
financial realities.
gThe most important thing we can do is shore up the funding,h said Richard
Gillihan, who serves as representative of Gov. Jerry Brownfs Department of Human
Resources. gWe canft wait to do that. Itfs pay now, or pay more later.h
Said board member Priya Mathur, a BART official who represents employees of
local government agencies: gWe all find ourselves in an uncomfortable
position.h
CalPERS collected $13.8 billion from employers and employees last year, with
the biggest contribution – $5.4 billion – coming from the state. The pension
fund raised contribution rates two years ago, largely because of forecasts
showing retirees are expected to live longer. Unlike CalSTRS, the teachersf
pension fund, CalPERS has the authority to impose rate hikes without permission
from the Legislature.
This time around, itfs the pension fundfs own troubled finances – combined
with predictions of a gloomy investment climate – that is pressuring the board
to raise rates.
The $300 billion pension system is 68 percent funded, meaning that while it
has enough cash for the foreseeable future, it has only 68 cents on hand for
every $1 in long-term pension obligations. Over the past year, CalPERS has
become gcash flow negative,h meaning itfs taking in fewer dollars than itfs
spending on pension benefits.
A rescue from Wall Street doesnft seem likely. While historically CalPERS
gets about 60 percent of its money from investments, the most recent results
arenft strong. The California Public Employeesf Retirement System earned just
a 0.61 percent return on its investments in the 2015-16 fiscal year,
following a subpar 2.4 percent the year before.
The latest investment returns mean CalPERS has earned an average of just over
7 percent over the past 20 years. Thatfs below CalPERSf current gdiscount rateh
of 7.5 percent.
The discount rate sounds arcane but plays a crucial role in pension fund financing. It serves as an
official forecast of yearly investment earnings and generally guides how much
investment risk CalPERS is willing to take. Lowering the rate means charting a
more cautious approach, which usually means lower returns. That forces CalPERS
to demand higher contributions from the state and other employers.
Now, outside consultants are urging CalPERS to lower its investment forecast.
CalPERSf investment adviser Wilshire Consulting said last week that CalPERS can
expect to earn just 6.2 percent a year over the next decade as global economic
growth continues to slow. Andrew Junkin, the firmfs president, told board
members to expect ga very painful decade.h
CalPERS has been cautious about adjusting the discount rate. Last fall it
adopted a complicated mechanism that could reduce the rate to 6.5
percent – over 20 years.
Brown blasted the plan as girresponsible.h The governor said CalPERS should
have slashed the discount rate in five years, despite the budgetary pain it
would cause.
Local officials, mindful of recent municipal bankruptcies in Stockton and San Bernardino, are
nervous about more rate hikes from CalPERS but said they want the pension system
to be financially sound.
CalPERS officials indicated the higher contribution rates are likely to be
phased in, although it isnft clear how quickly.
Pension politics could play a role in the decision. The CalPERS board
generally has a pro-union tilt; six of its 13 members are elected by public
workers or retirees. Another big cost increase could provide ammunition for
those advocating major pension reforms. Although Brown signed a law that cuts
benefits for new workers starting in 2013, critics note that it doesnft touch
benefits for those already in the system.
Dan Pellissier, the head of a group called California Pension Reform, said
the CalPERS board is struggling with the looming decision.
gTheyfre confronted with their system being substantially out of whack,h
Pellissier said in an interview. gThe consequences of doing the right thing are
going to be significant.h
Those sensitivities were on full display at last weekfs meeting. Board member Theresa Taylor, a vice president with Local
1000 of the Service Employees International Union, which represents thousands of
state workers, was among those warning that CalPERS was in danger of rushing to
judgment.
gWe need to step back and breathe,h she said.