| |

San Diego (and maybe California) gets a lesson on the letter C

The City of San Diego just discovered that the C in a DC pension stands for Contribution. Actually, it stands for immediate Cash Contribution.

San Diego was the poster child for bad defined benefit pension management even before the current pension crisis in California. However, a potential ballot measure in that city that would switch over to a defined contribution plan is raising questions.

The discovery of what C means is good for UC even though we have nothing directly to do with San Diego. Among the various pension changes that have been floating around at the state level as ballot propositions are proposals in one way or another to move away from defined benefit plans (such as UC’s plan) to defined contribution. So-called hybrid plans fall into this category since they reduce the define benefit component and substitute defined contribution.

What is often neglected is that you actually have to make the contribution in a defined contribution plan. There is no deferring, no underfunding, no gradual “ramping up.” It is cash now. This fact should be obvious but apparently it is not. So San Diego may help get that lesson across to folks in the legislature, to the governor, and to those who push defined contribution plans as initiatives.

From the Voice of San Diego, 6-5-11:

It’s almost accepted as an article of faith that killing pensions and replacing them with 401(k)-style retirements for most new employees will help the city of San Diego’s budget woes. The plan is the centerpiece of a high-profile ballot initiative planned for next June that its proponents, Mayor Jerry Sanders, Councilman Carl DeMaio and other Republican and business interests, touted as saving more than $2 billion when they announced it two months ago. But an inconvenient detail has hovered over the measure for a while: 401(k)s may not do anything to affect San Diego’s massive pension deficit, and in the short term, force the city to pay more to fund it. That detail has become more inconvenient recently.

Closing the pension system to all new employees except for police officers and offering 401(k)s to everyone else would force the city to speed up its pension payments, said Mark Hovey, head of the San Diego City Employees’ Retirement System. It would cost the city $94 million more over the first six years, a new retirement system analysis says, at a time when the city’s budget continues to face incessant strain from its pension and other debts.

“The colossal problem for the city is trying to pay off that $2.1 billion pension liability,” Hovey said. “The 401(k) plan doesn’t address that.” For now, backers are insisting 401(k)s will save money, but aren’t saying much else. They still have a year to make their case. When they do, they might not have to prove how much 401(k)s save, but whether they save anything at all.

To be sure, 401(k)s aren’t the only thing in the measure. Its other aspects, including freezing employees’ pay, likely will reduce the costs the retirement system is predicting will come with 401(k)s. But those changes could happen without adding 401(k)s to the mix. Further, 401(k)s, not pay freezes, are the measure’s crown jewel. Over the past two months, the measure’s proponents have promised detailed cost savings estimates, which includes pension changes beyond 401(k)s. They aren’t ready yet. “Developing long-term projections is a little bit more complicated than I anticipated,” said Lani Lutar, president and CEO of the San Diego County Taxpayers Association and a key supporter of the measure. “We are working on it.”

Should the measure qualify for the ballot, as is expected, it will be one of the most significant issues facing voters next June…

Full article at http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/government/thehall/article_6275e4d0-8e48-11e0-921f-001cc4c002e0.html

But wait, San Diego! Help may be coming from afar!

Similar Posts

  • | |

    Academic Senate Rejects New Pension Tier

    Representatives of UC faculty on all campuses delivered a strongly worded rejection of the proposed 2016 pension tier. Reports from the campuses were extensive and overwhelmingly negative (link to PDF). Berkeley faculty called the proposal “imprudent and potentially fiscally irresponsible.” Davis faculty said, “It is a myth that UCRP is too generous,” and went on to detail a long list of likely negative outcomes from the new tier. Irvine faculty noted “the level of disappointment and depth of passion expressed from all quarters about the negative impact that the imposition of the PEPRA cap has on the future of the…

  • |

    Faculty Voice Opposition to Pension Proposal

    On Friday, the UCLA Academic Senate hosted an informational meeting that explained in clear terms that this is a bad, bad plan for faculty. What to do about it was less clear cut. Shane White gave a deeply detailed account of financial aspects of the plan (Slides here: Pension Presentation by Shane White). Among the things we learned: Last year’s budget deal introduced the “PEPRA cap” to UC retirement benefits. This is not a limit on retirement pay-outs, but a cap on the earnings that are used to calculate retirement pay-outs. So any new hire after July 1, 2016 who…

  • | | |

    Pension Changes Proposed: lower benefits, little savings, weaker UCRS

    The University of California will soon have a third pension tier if the Regents approve a plan put forth by the Retirement Options Task Force on Friday. UC President Janet Napolitano charged the Task Force, which included management and Academic Senate representatives, with finding a way to implement her agreement with Gov. Brown to set a cap on pension benefits in exchange for state funds to support the pension system. Over the weekend, as faculty activists read the task force report and a second report produced by Senate leaders (Guide to reviewing the recommendations of the Retirement Options Task Force)…

  • | | |

    The Degradation of Faculty Welfare and Compensation

    Colleen Lye and James Vernon (UC Berkeley Faculty Association) UC faculty need to wake up to the systematic degradation of their pay and benefits.  In 2009, when the salary furlough temporarily cut faculty salaries between 6 and 10%, faculty were outraged.  Yet since then our compensation has been hit by a more serious, and seemingly permanent, double blow. First, despite modest salary rises of 3% and 2% in October 2011 and July 2013, faculty take-home pay has been effectively cut as employee contributions to pension and healthcare have escalated.  Faculty now pay more for retirement and healthcare programs that offer less.  Secondly, faculty are…

  • | |

    PBS’ Hot Potato May Not Be on California Stations

    As far as yours truly can tell, the major PBS affiliates in California have so far taken a pass on the hot potato program described below.  That decision could have been because the threatened pension initiative that would have swept in UC was originally aimed at the November 2014 ballot.  With it apparently off the ballot for now (see earlier posts), some stations might air the program.  On verra. The Wolf of Sesame Street: Revealing the secret corruption inside PBS’s news division On December 18th, the Public Broadcasting Service’s flagship station WNET issued a press release announcing the launch of…

  • | | | | | | | | |

    Tradition!

    The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) has issued a report on UC and CSU funding.  LAO is usually viewed as a neutral agency.  But it is a component of the legislature.  So it tends to favor approaches that add to legislative control as opposed to, say, gubernatorial control.  This report is no exception. LAO seems to want to return to what it terms the “traditional” approach to funding, but with bells and whistles added to monitor legislative goals.  The traditional approach seems to be one focused on undergraduate enrollment.  But in fact the tradition – such as it is – has…