Pension reform waits till 2016

The pension reform of San Jose mayor Chuck Reed, a Democrat, is going to have to wait till 2016:

The proposed initiative would have allowed local governments to reduce benefits for current employees, which have strained the finances of California cities.

Reed said the official description of the proposal, written by the attorney general’s office, inaccurately portrayed it in a negative light, hampering the ability to gather enough signatures to qualify it for the November ballot.

A state court rejected Reed’s attempt to change the description, leading the mayor to abandon the effort for the year.

Here’s AG Kamala Harris’ obviously biased title and summary:

PUBLIC EMPLOYEES. PENSION AND RETIREE HEALTHCARE BENEFITS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Eliminates constitutional protections for vested pension and retiree healthcare benefits for current public employees, including teachers, nurses, and peace officers, for future work performed. 

Actually, public employees still would enjoy generous pay, perks and pensions — just not as generous as those they now get.

Reed is appealing Harris’ Orwellian description.

In the meantime, the state’s infrastructure and public works will continue to crumble as more money is diverted to retirees instead of to current public needs. Even San Jose, a rich city in the heart of Silicon Valley, suffers horrible roads and declining services.

On the positive side, by 2016 the court battle will be over with and the need for pension reform will be even more obvious. By then, the roads will be worse and state and local budgets will be hit harder by increasing pension payments. More cities may have followed San Bernardino, Stockton and Vallejo into bankruptcy because of pensions.

And there will be even more members of the $100K Pension Club, those getting pensions of more than $100,000 a year. The current total is 12,199.