?

Leaning right, leaning left, YBH!
Thursday February 2nd 2012

My Initiative Limiting California Public Employee Pensions

Share in an emailShare on FacebookShare on TwitterShare on Stumble UponShare on RedditShare on DiggSubscribe to Yes, But, However!Print this articleybh spacer

Initiative 1435, the “Public Employee Pension Limitation Law”, (download a petition to sign here) is currently in the “gathering of signatures” phase.  The measure needs the signatures of 433,971 registered California voters by June 14, 2010 in order to qualify for the November ballot.

Bruce Malkenhorst, a former Vernon, California city executive receives a $500,000 per year pension from the state of California.

What is Initiative 1435?

Initiative 1435 simply limits the pensions of new public hires for the state of California to no more than $100,000 per year.  Cost of living increases could bring the maximum up to $162,500.  Once enacted into law the measure can only be changed with approval of 3/4 of both houses of the legislature.  That’s it.   No back-end proposal for special interests, just a simple measure to help bring fiscal sanity back to California.

I wrote the measure because I care about our great state.  An odd divide is forming here between government employees and the private sector.  The state is bleeding private sector jobs while public employee unions grow ever stronger.   We need to restore some balance!

When crafting the initiative, I specifically left out salary limits during a worker’s active career.  I want California to have the best public employees in the nation.  Competitive salaries are an important component in attracting that great talent.  Health benefits or years-of-service reforms are also not included.

The state’s Legislative Analyst Office said of the measure (emphasis mine):

“Very few public employees now receive pensions of over $100,000, but the effects of inflation over the next few decades can be expected to greatly increase this number. Accordingly, within a few decades, this measure could result in substantial reductions in state and local defined benefit pension payments…these savings eventually could total in the billions of dollars per year (in today’s dollars).

Public employee pension and benefit obligations are coming at the state of California like a brake-less freight train.  We must act now.

There is no large financial backer of Initiative 1435 at this time.  If the measure is going to make it on the ballot it will take the hard work of people like you and me to gather the number of signatures needed.  Volunteers are definitely needed and welcome.

Initiative 1435 is not anti-Union, it is pro-California.  Let’s help get California back on track.

John Romano can be contacted at pensionlimitationlaw@yahoo.com

Information from the state of California about Initiative 1435:

Read the Legislative Analyst Offices analysis of Initiative 1435

Download and sign the Petition

Related posts:

  1. MÖBIUS: Hypnotic Melbourne Public Art From ENESS (VIDEO)
  2. California Dental, Medical Oversight Fines Often Go Unpaid
  3. Nov. 7, 1905: Remote Control Wows Public
John Romano is the publisher and editor of Yes, But However!, a musician, a former political correspondent for BBC Radio London, and a serial web entrepreneur. Follow him on twitter: twitter.com/yesbuthowever or John Romano on Google+

article archive.

Post Published: 16 February 2010
Found in section: Politics
  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1200577786 Alessandro Machi

    1435 sounds like an incredibly reasonable proposal.

    Have you had a chance to consider a pension cap that is based on a certain percentage of the state government's overall budget?

    For instance, most rational people would agree that an 80% cap would be impossible to sustain (80% of total state budget going towards pensions). Likewise, 60, or 40% is probably too large as well. However, there is some magical range that is both sustainable and reasonable.

    I don't know what that number is.

    I am guessing it is between 10-15% of the total state budget could go towards the penson program. On the other hand, I have heard that the money that goes into the pension program is reinvested and that is how it grows large enough to sustain the budget for all retirees.

    None the less, how do you feel about a reasonable "cap" on pensions that is based on a percentage of the total state budget? Don't you think that that would be an "all in one" pension solution and an easy sell to the public?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1200577786 Alessandro Machi

    Hey, I just realized I pulled a "Yes, But However" on your topic. ha ha.

  • Tough Love

    You blew it by not putting in a limit (in the form of a fixed dollar subsidy) for retiree healthcare. Without this, California is financially doomed anyway.