The California Supreme Court will soon schedule oral argument in controversial cases involving legislative pension reform impacting the pension benefits of state and local government employees. By the close of 2020, the Supreme Court will issue a decision that may very well strike at the heart of the so-called “California Rule.”
For nearly 60 years,
In December, we reported on renewed proposals to amend California’s Constitution, as it relates to public employee pension benefits. At that time, former San Jose Mayor, Chuck Reed, and former San Diego City Councilmember, Carl DeMiao, were aiming to move one of two voter initiatives towards the November 2016 ballot, depending on the Attorney General’s
Former San Jose Mayor, Chuck Reed, and former San Diego City Councilmember, Carl DeMiao, are spearheading two voter initiatives that would amend the California Constitution as it relates to public employee pension benefits. The first is the “Voter Empowerment Act of 2016” and the second is the “Government Pension Cap Act of 2016.” The initiatives
This guest post was authored by Alison Neufeld
Public sector pension reform has been a hot topic for months. But despite the public focus on the Governor’s 12-Point Pension Reform Plan, voter initiatives, charter amendments, litigation and bankruptcies fueled by unfunded pension liabilities, time seemed to be running out for pension reform during the current
Pension reform might still have a fighting chance. As we mentioned in yesterday’s Special Bulletin, Governor Brown announced that he had reached an agreement with Legislative Democrats to move forward on pension reform with the California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act of 2013 (”CPEPRA”).
At the eleventh hour, the joint Conference Committee on
This guest post was authored by Steve M. Berliner
Governor Brown issued a press release today indicating that an agreement was reached with legislative Democrats on public employee pension reform at the state level to take effect on January 1, 2013. Details are sketchy at this point but it does appear that most of the
Does your public agency contract with, or a member of, CalPERS, STRS, or a ’37 Act system? Have you exhausted all possible ways under those systems to reduce pension costs such as reducing benefits for new hires, eliminating or reducing employer paid member contributions, or reducing special compensation? Do you want to achieve
This guest post was authored by Alison Neufeld
The City of San Diego has been ordered to delay implementation of the pension reform initiative that was approved by an overwhelming majority of voters at the election on June 5, 2012. In our previous blog dated June 12, 2012, we described how Proposition B – also
Two pension reform ballot measures were overwhelmingly passed by voters in San Diego and San Jose last week. Now, other cities, counties and districts in California that participate in CalPERS or STRS, or maintain a ’37 Act system are asking, “can we do the same thing?” The short answer is, “no,” at least not at
On March 14, 2012, our Blog Post examined CalPERS’ decision to lower the discount rate from 7.75 percent to 7.5 percent in its assumption when determining employer contribution rates. At a meeting of the CalPERS Board of Administration, staff were asked to study the possibility of phasing-in the increased employer contribution rates over a two