| | | |

Governor’s Pension Symposium of July 8


Governor Schwarzenegger ran a public pension symposium on July 8. It was essentially a panel of academics, legislators and former legislators (including former assembly speaker Willie Brown), local officials, past CalPERS members, and academics. You can see a video of the roughly 1-hour symposium by going to the governor’s website: www.gov.ca.gov and clicking on “multimedia.”

The symposium concentrated on CalPERS and, to a lesser extent, CalSTRS. UCRS was mentioned in passing at roughly minute 39, but was not explicitly discussed. In particular, the important $2-for-$1 issue that separates UCRS from other public pensions in California was not discussed. (Approximately $2 out of $3 of any employer contributions to UCRS would come from non-state sources.) On the other hand, at roughly minute 44, the Regents were held out as a better model for running a pension system than the CalPERS model which has elected employee representatives. The latter was depicted as a conflict of interest.

The so-called “Stanford Study,” was periodically mentioned but most of the data shown came from a similar study. The academic rational presented for using a low discount rate (which enlarges the measured unfunded liability) was that since the pension promise is ironclad, the discount rate should be a riskless measure.

Slides shown at the event are at:

http://www.gov.ca.gov/pdf/gov/pension_reform2010.pdf

Below is the text of the governor’s announcement of the event:

Governor Schwarzenegger Hosts Pension Roundtable

Gathers Academics, Elected Officials, Opinion Leaders to Discuss Comprehensive Pension Reform

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today hosted a pension reform roundtable with academics, elected officials, students and opinion leaders to discuss California’s pension crisis and the need for comprehensive reform. The Governor has been pushing for pension reform since coming into office, and recent studies by Stanford and the University of Chicago and Northwestern have reinforced the immediacy with which the legislature must act to reign in rising costs. The Governor has promised not to sign a budget that does not include pension reform and is calling for lower benefits for new employees, increased employee contributions, truthful financial disclosure and honest funding.

“Our pension crisis is a real problem that gets worse every day. California has $500 billion in unfunded pension debt that, without reform, will continue to grow and crowd out funding for programs and services Californians hold dear such as higher education, parks and environmental protection,” said Governor Schwarzenegger. “This roundtable is designed to expose the depths of the pension problem and to alert Californians of the even worse consequences should their leaders continue to ignore it. The state has a duty to ensure taxpayer dollars go to things the taxpayers care about, and that’s why I will not sign a budget that does not include pension reform.”

California has long provided generous pension benefits to its employees, but in 1999, the legislature and Governor Gray Davis significantly and retroactively boosted benefits after being assured by the California Public Employee’s Retirement System (CalPERS) that doing so would not cost “a dime of additional taxpayer money.” But since the passage of that legislation, taxpayer spending on pension benefits has skyrocketed by more than 2000 percent (nearly 3000 percent in the General Fund) while spending on University of California and California State University, parks and recreation and environmental protection has either declined or failed to keep up with inflation. This year, taxpayers are being required to divert nearly $3.8 billion from state programs and services to pay for retiree benefits provided by CalPERS, five times more than CalPERS projected in 1999. Over the past ten years, CalPERS’s projections were off by $20 billion, and now CalPERS predicts state costs will total $270 billion over the next thirty years and still leave pensions only 75 percent funded. Worse, that projection assumes the stock market will double every ten years – if not, the costs will be higher.

The Governor’s Administration has recently negotiated contract agreements with six state employee unions that include elements of pension reform that will help control costs going forward and ensure support for legislation requiring full disclosure from state pension funds and honest funding of pension promises as and when they are made. The six unions – the California Association of Highway Patrolmen, California Department of Forestry Firefighters, California Association of Psychiatric Technicians, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the Union of American Physicians and Dentists and the International Union of Operating Engineers – represent 40,000 of the state’s public employees. If ratified, these agreements will save the state nearly $1.4 billion in FY 2010-11, and, if similar agreements are reached with the state’s six other employee unions, state savings in FY 2010-11 would total $2.2 billion, with $1.2 billion from the General Fund.

The Governor’s Administration will continue to negotiate in good faith with all of the employee unions on all aspects of the pension reform measures. However, Governor Schwarzenegger will not sign a budget without four elements of pension reform that must be done legislatively, separate and apart from any memorandums of understanding. They include:
1. Rolling back the expansion of pension benefits adopted in 1999 as Senate Bill 400 (Chapter 555, Statutes of 1999).
2. Requiring a permanent five percentage-point increase in employee pre-tax contribution toward retirement benefits.
3. Calculating the retirement rate based on the highest three years of wages during employment instead of the highest single year.
4. Requiring full disclosure by state pension funds and honest funding of pension promises as and when those promises are made.

There were questions from reporters at the end of the symposium. Because the governor seemed to link his attempt to impose the minimum wage on state workers to push for a budget agreement and because he said he would not sign a budget without pension reform, he was questioned on that point. He said that with regard to pensions, he wanted a rollback of the pension increases in CalPERS that were made in 1999, presumably prospectively. Because his minimum wage dispute with the state controller revolves around the capability of state payroll computers to pay the minimum wage and then compensate workers for lost wages subsequently, the governor was asked if he believed in that capability. He avoided answering and tied the issue back to pensions.

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…