Links & Other Info About County Pensions, Finances and Debt

Pension Reform in California
University of California Berkeley Library
An excellent narative on these issues with an extensive list of links to articles, legislative bills and proposed constitutional amendments, and key websites.

San Francisco Voters Make Decisions
San Diego Union Tribune
Unlike most counties in California, in San Francisco public pensions can only be changed by a vote of the people. It's been that way for over 100 years. The article concludes this has kept San Francisco's pensions affordable and under control.

Series of Articles on Marin County Pension System
Marin Independent Journal

A major series on the problems of the Pension Fund in Marin County. Topics include:

• Explanation of why Marin's pension costs keep soaring.
• Are Marin County's pensions "a lavish benefit or fair compensation?
• How the County figures out what the pensions will be.
• Why some pension payouts are so big.
• Calls for pension reform in Marin County.

Another Pension Fund in the Red
Voice of San Diego

A major 4 – part series on the problems of the Pension Fund for San Diego County. Topics include:

• Explanation of how the Pension Fund went from well funded to deficits.
• Sales of Pension Obligation Bonds.
• The looming additional major problem of retiree health care benefits.
• Putting the cost of pensions onto future generations.

Orange County Grand jury warns of 'another county crisis'
Orange County Register

Report on new grand jury report asserting Orange County is heading into another fiscal calamity because of soaring pension costs.

Editorial: Tick, tick tick: Sac County has a pension time bomb
Sacramento Bee

Sacramento county's contribution to its pension fund will jump 27 percent, from $99.5 million this fiscal year to $126.5 million next year. That does not include the debt service on $953 million the county has borrowed over the last 10 years to help pay its pension obligations.

Scale Back County's Perks, Says Grand Jury
Contra Costa Times

County retirement costs have grown from $70 million in 2001 to an estimated $177 million next year. "The county cannot s ustain these costs without major cuts in programs or staffing levels," the report states. "Changes must be made."

A billion in debt and big payments define 'success'
Sacramento Bee

... if San Diego County('s Pension Fund) is a model of success, I would hate to see what failure looks like. Dan Weintraub.

Reduce Pension Tension
2005 Contra Costa County Grand Jury
The last two Contra Costa County Grand Juries issued reports concluding that pension benefit increases threatened future County financial stability and would contribute to budget woes and layoffs. These conclusions are now facts. Retirement benefit costs are growing at a rate the County cannot sustain. Total retirement expense has increased nearly fourfold in the last ten years and is projected to increase 27% from $140 million to $177 million between fiscal year 2004-2005 and fiscal year 2005-2006.

Another County Crisis: Pensions, Health Care, and Other Benefits
2005 Orange County Grand Jury
Orange County government’s contribution to retirement funding has grown from $45 million in fiscal year 2000-2001 to $178 million for FY 2004-2005, an increase of $133 million, or 296%.

More disturbing, a recent calculation of retirement system funding by an actuarial firm commissioned by the Orange County Employee Retirement System (OCERS) puts the system’s unfunded liability at $2.3 billion as opposed to the previous projection of $1.3 billion. That could mean an additional $110 million per year the county would be contributing to the pension fund. This is coupled with an additional $1.3 billion shortfall in liabilities related to health care costs for county employees and retirees.

The Bloated Retirement Plans of Marin County, Its Cities and Towns
2005 Marin County Grand Jury
Marin County and its cities and towns provide pension plans to their employees that are many times more generous than similar plans found in the private sector. The volatility of the cost of these pensions has caused extreme stress on the budgets of many of these entities. Despite this, there is an inexorable push from unions, through the state legislature, to continue increasing pension levels. Such large benefit levels do not seem justified by the argument that they are needed for hiring and retention of employees. Irrespective of whether the level of total compensation (salary plus benefits) is right or wrong, the mix (between salary and benefits) seems wrong in that far too much emphasis is placed on retirement benefits.

In the matter of retiree healthcare, the Grand Jury has found that the County and the Municipalities are facing an imminent requirement to include retiree healthcare obligations on their balance sheets. However, the Grand Jury found no evidence that these local governments understand the extent of these obligations, nor have they begun the process of understanding their retiree healthcare promises, of valuing their retiree healthcare obligations, and of dealing with them. This is especially troubling in the case of the County and some of the Municipalities where the obligations will apparently be very large, even as much as hundreds of millions of dollars in the case of the County.

INQUIRY INTO THE FINANCIAL IMPACT OF RETIREMENT PROGRAMS ON SANTA CLARA COUNTY AND THE CITY OF SAN JOSE
2004 Santa Clara County
In the past, a generous pension was a benefit governments used to compensate for lower salaries compared to the private sector. Considering that government salaries and other benefits, such as days off, are now comparable to the rest of the employment market, pension programs that are much better than the market standard should no longer be required. Each year, fewer private sector employers offer guaranteed pensions comparable to those of government workers. Moreover, a pension providing 85% of salary already ranks among the most generous in the nation.

The rising costs of funding retirement programs to the County and to San Jose will impact already stretched budgets and makes the delivery of essential public services to communities more expensive. It is incumbent upon elected officials in the County to balance the benefits provided to government employees against the funding of essential public services.

The Mendocino County Employees Retirement Association
2003 Mendocino County Grand Jury
By continuing to carry an ongoing and increasing UAAL, the Board of Supervisors, whether intentional or not, is effectively subsidizing the County’s fiscal budget with monies that should have been allocated each year to adequately fund the Retirement Association.

Additionally, it would seem that while another Pension Obligation Bond would solve the Board of Supervisors funding problem in the near term, it is only a band-aid that does not address all the forces that are driving the UAAL ever higher. It should also be noted that in so doing, the County Board of Supervisors would, again, be shifting the financial burden for past (retirement fund) liabilities to future generations of taxpayers with no guarantee that accrued future benefits would be funded on a “pay as you go”, or incurred basis.

...the notion of constantly pushing the payment of past obligations, (accrued benefits), into the future is a financial philosophy that is not sound for the plan participants or the Mendocino County taxpayers.