 |
 |
UPDATED: These two ballot measures both passed overwhelmingly. In San Diego, two-thirds of voters favored Proposition B. Meanwhile, Measure B in San Jose won with 70 percent of the vote.
Two closely watched pension reform measures – one in San Jose and the other in San Diego – were headed for clear victory on Tuesday.
In San Jose, Measure B was leading with more than 70 percent of the vote, while Proposition B in San Diego was winning with 69 percent. Under San Jose’s measure, current city employees will have to pay up to 16 percent of their salaries to hold onto their retirement plan otherwise they will have to accept scaled-back benefits. New hires will get far less generous benefits.
San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed, a Democrat, pushed hard to persuade a majority of City Council members to put the measure on the ballot.
Meanwhile, San Diego’s Proposition B calls for a six-year freeze on pay levels used to determine pension benefits. The City Council can override the freeze with a two-thirds majority vote.
It also creates a second tier system of benefits for all new hires, except for police officers. The new system includes a 401(k)-style pension plan.
There’s likely to be a legal challenge coming. But, regardless, expect to see other cities and counties following down this road. If current labor negotiations fail to come up with some meaningful changes, Sonoma County would be the best candidate to consider such a ballot measure.
- Paul Gullixson
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
All you Gov workers who DON’T have fat pensions waiting for you SAVE IT!
You are just as much to blame for this mess as your bosses if not MORE because you have less to lose by speaking up. Plus… YOU are the ones who implement all the obscenity your bosses dream up for MY TAX DOLLARS!
You clock in, piss away a bunch of MY money… money “I” should be using to better the life of “MY” family and clock out saying nothing about the waste YOU KNOW YOU SEE EVERY DAY!
So please excuse me while I play my tiny violin to drown out your whining.
…and good luck with that pension your Union promised you!
“Elect Romney, adopt the Ryan austerity budget, and I guarantee a worldwide depression before 2014.”
Possibly true. After decades of govt spending above and beyond income, being forced with live within means will not be pleasant for the middle class beneficiaries of welfare.
It will be especially true in places like California where any new business proposal is viewed with suspicion and put through a regulatory ringer. . . . unless of course it has political friends in high places, then we fast-track it.
A simultaneous reform of business regulations will be needed to offset the deflationary effect of spending cuts. But Republicans talk a better game on spending than they play. I’ll believe it when I see it.
You folks are taking years off the lives of retired public employees. Not the ones with fat pensions – the 99% who get the minimum and are are being screwed on health care. Up 70% a year for several years, and now 50% more than our mortgage. Thank your Sonoma County BOS, who are cutting more than you think.
Funny, retirees living in Sonoma County get the way better health insurance deals.
Might be nice to get all the cash, plus interest, that I put into SS, Medicare and pensions over 35 years. Since you want to take them away?
Where will I park my RV after I’m broke?
This situation is the result of evil economic and foreign policies since 1996, which got much worse after 2001. When was this ever an issue before employment, house values, stock prices and tax revenues tanked? When was that?
Must be Obama’s fault?
Why do you all want tax and budget policies that can’t possibly be good for you? Why can’t you distinguish between the 99% and the 1%?
Elect Romney, adopt the Ryan austerity budget, and I guarentee a worldwide depression before 2014.
Hope I’m wrong.
Public Safety is the elephant in the room.
Their over reaching is the direct cause of job cuts/pay freezes/forced days off to lower tiered employees.
Even in Wisconsin they have not been touched, which is just plain wrong.
Hasn’t anyone seen the article in the Kenwood Press? Once again, the 1% are running the show and asking for someone supporting a familiy on $30k/year to tighten their belts AGAIN!!They have never seen a reduction in their pay or benefits that causes them to decide between a rent payment or food.
http://www.kenwoodpress.com/pub/a/6268?full=1
County Worker-I was thinking the same thing. I will be stumbling around with my walker until I die. I was hoping I could retire when I am 66 years when I can draw my social security since my county retirement won’t be enough to live on (that will be after more than 30 years). Now, with the public hating us because we have benefits and they don’t, well, maybe never. Of course that doesn’t leave many jobs for the young which is sad, but we do have experience and we rank and file workers care about the public even though they appear not to care about us.
Unfortunately, we rank and file workers are getting fewer and fewer and that impacts community services. We workers are not the cause of the financial disaster this country is in, but we are a handy target while the corporations sneakily buy our elections because the public is looking in another direction to blame.
@RC – I agree that what SJ did was reasonable. It is very similar to what Gov Brown is proposing, except that he does not try to reduce the pensions of current employees by force, but rather by carrot. Having employees pay for half of the cost, with the option to go to a lower plan to increase current take-home pay. Current law suggests that you can not reduce pensions for existing employees. This will go to court, and it will get decided at some point. In the mean-time, it makes more sense to work with the public unions to come up with solutions that can be put in place now.
Finally, now they’ll have more money to put into welfare programs. 2012-2013 estimated annual state Budget for welfare…38% 2012-2013 Estimated annual state budget for pensions…7% Interesting fact, California has 12% of the nations population but 33% of the nations welfare recipients.
I love how quickly people want to punish those who work to feed those who do not. One police officer arrests the same person 6 or seven times. Why? Because there is no deterent to keep the person from committing crimes. Each time that person is processed from arrest to court costs the county/city how much? Why has that cost been passed over?
Though I won’t slow down in my work, or encourage job actions. I will do the eventual new math and decide how much longer I will be working. I was speaking with a co-worker who has been at the county for 30 years. She is staying until she dies. She supports her grand kids and says her job will not be open for a couple decades. Mine may not be either. I know of a 67 year old deputy in Mendocino county who’s wife needs regular medical treatment. He plans to stay until he dies. The new attrition, none. I know people who plan to stay on now for a long time to secure the most they can and grow their investments because anyone who makes $100 less than they do will think they are rich and will come after them and their benifits. Oh, well. the managers will contiue to retire with serious bank, and the average employees will plan to not retire. How cool is that?
as a city worker on the east coast I am outraged. You will now find less motivated workers if you treat them like that. Don’t be suprised when you get less help at the gov’t office!!! If this happen in my city I would reduce my work output on purpose to drive the citizens crazy. It’s your vote, we lost, but you will lose more in services with a smile…..
LBR,
And the county will never know if it can pass meaningful pension reform if it continues to use fear of a lawsuit as an excuse to do near nothing.
As I’ve said before, a voter revolt is coming. But voters only revolt when they’ve past the point of reason; then they’re ready to explode. (Think Prop 13.) Public employees shouldn’t believe weak public officials will forever protect them.
San Jose public employees are lucky Mayor (not city manager) Chuck Reid proposed a reasonable reform. A modern version of Jarvis-Gann is lurking somewhere.
@RC – The San Jose measure will be taken to court. If it survives that intact, it is my guess that you will be seeing the County and City leaders rushing to put similar measures on the ballot. Though the SJ mayor said that it was only legal because they were a “charter” city, so while it may work in Santa Rosa, I don’t know if it would work for the County…
Law enforcement management accrues years of public safety retirement long after there is any meaningful chance that they would be required to “put their life on the line.”
Vote margins like the above ought to stiffen the spines of county supervisors and city council members, but I suspect they really don’t oppose excessive, budget-busting pensions. Else, wouldn’t they have done more by now?
Real honest pension reform would include the folks who cost the most – public safety. Neither Governor Walker in Wisconsin, or the San Diego “leadership” had the courage to include police in the reform.