California pension funds are billions short, with taxpayers on the hook

A decade ago, many of California’s public pension plans had plenty of money to pay for workers’ retirements.

All that has changed, according to a far-reaching package of data from the state controller. Taxpayers are now on the hook for billions of dollars more to cover the future retirements of public workers, with the bill widely varying depending on where they live.

The City of Los Angeles Fire and Police Pension System, for instance, had more than enough funds in 2003 to cover its estimated future bill for workers’ retirement checks. A decade later, it is short $3 billion.

The state’s pension goliath, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, had $281 billion to cover the benefits promised to 1.3 million workers and retirees in 2013. Yet it needed an additional $57 billion to meet future obligations.
Somebody, who is knowledgeable and interested, is several clicks away from the ugly mess that will define California’s financial future. – Dan Pellissier, president of California Pension Reform

The bill at the state teachers’ pension fund is even higher: It has an estimated shortfall of $70 billion.

The new data from a website created by state Controller John Chiang come at a time of growing anger from taxpayers over the skyrocketing cost of public workers’ retirements.

Until now, the bill for those government pensions was buried deep in the funds’ financial reports. By making this data available, Chiang is bound to stir debate about how taxpayers can afford to make retirement more comfortable for public workers when private-sector employees’ own financial futures have become less secure. For most non-government workers, fixed monthly pensions are increasingly rare.

“Somebody, who is knowledgeable and interested, is several clicks away from the ugly mess that will define California’s financial future,” said Dan Pellissier, president of California Pension Reform, a Sacramento-area group seeking to stem rising statewide retirement costs.

Chiang has assembled reams of data from 130 public pension plans run by the state, cities and other government agencies. It’s now accessible at his website, ByTheNumbers.sco.ca.gov.

In nearly eight years as controller, essentially the state’s paymaster, Chiang has made good on a commitment to make government financial records more transparent and accessible.

Chiang, who was elected last week as state treasurer, also has made it easy for consumers to search unclaimed property held by the state, such as utility deposits or forgotten bank savings accounts.

In 2010, after the city of Bell salary scandal, he started putting pay information online for elected officials and other employees in cities, counties, special government districts, higher education, schools and the judicial system. In September, he added details on the finances of the state’s 58 counties and more than 450 cities, allowing taxpayers to track revenues, expenditures, liabilities, assets and fund balances.

The pension debate in recent years has been fueled by controversy.

Vernon’s former city manager, for example, was receiving more than $500,000 in annual pension payments. Most public safety workers can retire as early as 50. And some public employees had cashed out unused vacation and other perks to unjustly spike their retirement pay.

Meanwhile, cash-strapped cities are facing escalating bills. Rising pension costs contributed to bankruptcies in Stockton, San Bernardino and Vallejo.

Critics contend that governments can no longer afford to pay generous pensions to retirees that aren’t available to most private-sector workers. Unions, meanwhile, have vehemently defended the status quo, saying these benefits were promised to workers for years of serving the public.

“In the months ahead, California and its local communities will continue to wrestle with how to responsibly manage the unfunded liabilities associated with providing retirement security to police, firefighters, teachers and other providers of public services,” Chiang said.

“Those debates and the actions that flow from them ought to be informed by reliable data that is free of political spin or ideological bias,” said Chiang.

A million items of new pension information online — covering the fiscal years 2002-03 through 2012-13 — should “empower greater citizen participation in how government handles a policy matter which is central to California’s long-term prosperity,” Chiang said.

Though pension lingo can be daunting, the online information being offered includes a range of easy-to-understand and more complicated data. There is even a glossary of terms to help.

Relatively proficient computer users, researchers and statisticians can use the data to compare different city and county pension systems.

The funds range from the giant California Public Employees’ Retirement System to a tiny fund for the city of Pittsburg in the San Francisco Bay Area, with only about $9,000 in assets.

In introducing his new website, Chiang pointed to trends that highlight the state’s growing pension costs. Employer retirement contributions rose 36% between 2003 and 2013, while employee contributions jumped 57%.

At the same time, the number of active government workers and retirees receiving pensions rose by 10% to 3.4 million.

Labor union leaders don’t share Pellissier’s dire forecast, but some praised Chiang for his transparency.

“It adds some facts to the discussion,” said Laphonza Butler, president of the California Council of the Service Employees International Union. “I think that can be helpful.”

Terry Francke, the general counsel of Californians Aware, a Sacramento-area group that supports open government, agreed. He praised Chiang’s initiatives as “a stellar model” for getting information to the public “in the most direct and painless way.”

[email protected]

https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-controller-pension-website-20141114-story.html

So let’s start with the bracing news: Orange County cities have promised their workers more than $3.3 billion in retirement benefits that they do not have.

Editorial –

What this Report Confirms is that City Hall Exists Solely for City Hall and Solely to Provide for City Employees – O.C. Grand jury finds $3.3 billion retirement hole –

O.C. Grand jury finds $3.3 billion retirement hole

So let’s start with the bracing news: Orange County cities have promised their workers more than $3.3 billion in retirement benefits that they do not have.

But smile in the face of danger: Thanks to unpleasant prodding from CalPERS, they’ll be painfully paying down that debt in coming years. It will hurt – likely impacting programs for Joe Citizen – but it should not cripple any bergs in O.C. (though the same obviously can’t be said for the likes of Stockton, San Bernardino or Vallejo, which are either in or teetering on the edge of bankruptcy, thanks largely to retirement obligations).

This latest in local public pension number-crunching comes courtesy of the Orange County grand jury, which examined unfunded liabilities and urged greater transparency in a recent report.

“The 2013-2014 Grand Jury is aware that there is a political element to any discussion of unfunded pension liabilities,” it said up front. “Unions may view the problem as being exaggerated as a means to weaken the power of public employee unions and strip hard-won benefits and influence future negotiations. Others are concerned with the affordability of pensions that many people describe as ‘generous.’” (We at The Watchdog cop to that last part).

“The public commitment to addressing the issues in a timely manner and accepting some pain now and not pushing the issues off to the future must be in place,” the grand jury continued in a slightly-scolding tone. “If unfunded pension liabilities are not addressed, cities could reach a crisis where outcomes are painful enough that they affect the quality of life in Orange County.”

Big picture:

• Orange County cities have promised workers $10.45 billion in retirement benefits.

• They have set aside $7.13 billion to pay these benefits.

• That, unfortunately, leaves them the aforementioned $3.32 billion short.

• On average, O.C. cities have just 68.2 percent of the money they’ll need stashed away – far less than the 80 percent figure many strive for (though some experts say even 80 percent isn’t good enough).

• The most underfunded city is Costa Mesa, at just 61.9 percent, followed closely by Newport Beach (62.2 percent), Garden Grove (65.8 percent) and Huntington Beach (66 percent).

• The most well-funded cities are Laguna Niguel, Laguna Woods, Dana Point, Lake Forest and Aliso Viejo, all at 77.2 percent.

• For a great many, what they owe exceeds what they spend in an entire year; for some, it exceeds what they spend in two years.

Why should you care? These retirement benefits are guaranteed. If there’s not enough money in the pot, California taxpayers must make up the difference.

“Money spent by OC cities to deal with unfunded pension obligations necessarily comes at the expense of other services cities provide to their residents,” the grand jury wrote. “Catch up contributions to amortize these unfunded liabilities can be a significant expenditure in a city’s budget, and the growth and unpredictability of these unfunded liabilities make it difficult to budget for future years.

“Orange County cities made painful cuts in services to their residents in response to the 2008 Great Recession and would like to restore these services as the economy recovers,” it continued. “However, restoration of services will be delayed or even further reduced in many cities until unfunded liabilities are dealt with.”

FUN WITH MATH

Now, measuring the depth of pension holes is as much art as science. How to compute the value of current investments – by fair market value, or by egghead actuarial value? And how much interest do you expect to earn on those investments each year – as much as 7.5 percent, as little as 5 percent? How long do you expect people to live?

The answers to those questions grow or shrink the hole. So it’s a bit like gazing into a crystal ball.

Of course, what counts right now is how the California Public Employees Retirement System answers these questions. It is Pension Czar for 33 of O.C.’s 34 cities, and after some extremely optimistic assumptions more than a decade ago (Everything’s going great and always will! Give better retirement benefits to your workers – it’ll cost nearly nothing!) CalPERS has gone all Grinch.

It lowered the expected rate of return on investments (which deepens the hole). It’s going to increase expected lifespans for retirees (which deepens the hole). It’s using market rather than actuarial value for investments (which deepens the hole).

If you just use actuarial (rather than market) value for investments, the hole for O.C. cities instantly shrinks $1.4 billion! the grand jury noted. Down to $1.9 billion, from the aforementioned $3.3 billion!

But enough daydreaming. The economic recovery has indeed translated into revenue increases for cities – but those increases will likely be consumed playing catch-up on unfunded pension liabilities. “For example, one city’s internal budget shows pension contributions ramping up from 8 percent to 12 percent of their General Fund and remaining there for several years and then ramping back down to 8 percent,” the grand jury wrote.

BEWARE

Public workers are in no way insulated from this pain. They’re kicking in more for their retirements, just as cities are, but one popular move may backfire on Joe Public.

To ease the blow, many public agencies are offsetting newly-required worker contributions with salary hikes. Which can make the picture worse.

“(T)he city of Garden Grove decided to offset an increase of 3 percent in public safety employee pension contributions with a 3 percent increase in salary,” the grand jury noted. “In some ways this looks like a very tempting zero-sum game; the new rules are followed, and the city’s budget and employee’s take home pay are essentially unaffected.

“The catch is that the employee will now have a base salary at retirement 3 percent higher than the pension system had been assuming in predicting its pension payout to that employee. This increased pension payment will be made for the remainder of that employee’s life, i.e., a new unfunded pension liability has been created,” it warned.

ACTION

None of this is news to public agencies, which are doing all sorts of hat dances to make things work. One of the most interesting might be in Irvine.

A year ago, Irvine adopted an “unprecedented plan to aggressively pay down” almost all of its unfunded liability in 10 years. To wit: It’s borrowing from a special fund set aside for infrastructure rehabilitation, and has already kicked in $13 million toward a $141.5 million unfunded liability.

This results in a virtuous cycle of savings. The early payoff will save Irvine some $33 million, which will be put back into the community, Mayor Steven S. Choi said in a prepared statement.

Of course, Irvine is one of the more fiscally comfortable cities in California, known for jealously guarding its infrastructure (and thus having an infrastructure fund of $51 million in cash); many cities can only dream about that sort of cushion.

Anaheim, O.C.’s largest city (not coincidentally with its largest unfunded liability at $612 million), is already making way on the transparency thing. Beginning with the 2014-15 budget, Anaheim’s five-year plan for its general fund calls out expected increases for salaries and benefits, including CalPERS increases due to assumption changes and expected medical cost increases, officials said.

The grand jury admittedly didn’t address the other elephant in the room – promises to pay for retiree medical care, “an issue which deserves attention similar to that needed for pension funding,” it said. Agencies are at least stashing money aside to pay for pensions; almost nothing has been set aside for health care. But that’s another story.

Contact the writer: [email protected]:@ocwatch

https://www.ocregister.com/articles/percent-628043-cities-pension.html

Participation Certificates – Bonds – and the “Shadow Banking” System – Hocus-Pocus Financing – Demystified.

The shadow banking system is a term for the collection of non-bank financial intermediaries that provide services similar to traditional commercial banks. Former Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke provided a definition in April 2012: “Shadow banking, as usually defined, comprises a diverse set of institutions and markets that, collectively, carry out traditional banking functions–but do so outside, or in ways only loosely linked to, the traditional system of regulated depository institutions. Examples of important components of the shadow banking system include securitization vehicles, asset-backed commercial paper (ABCP) conduits, money market mutual funds, markets for repurchase agreements (repos), investment banks, and mortgage companies.” Shadow banking has grown in importance to rival traditional depository banking and was a primary factor in the subprime mortgage crisis of 2007-2008 and global recession that followed.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_banking_system

A Participation Certificate (PC) (also known as a Certificate of Participation) is a financial instrument, a form of financing, used by municipal or government entities which allows an individual to buy a share of the lease revenue of an agreement made by these entities. It is different from a bond issued by these agencies since participation certificates are secured by lease revenues. Municipal and government entities use this instrument to circumvent restrictions that might exist on the amount of debt in other forms they are able to take on.

Participation certificates are a new form of credit instrument whereby banks can raise funds from other banks and other central bank approved financial institutions to ease liquidity. In this case banks have the option to share their credit asset(s) with other banks by issuing participation certificates. With this participation approach, banks and financial institutions come together either on risk sharing or non-risk sharing basis. While providing short term funds, participation certificates can also be used to reduce risk. The rate at which these certificates can be issued will be negotiable depending on the interest rate scenario.

On June 14, 2013, the city of Detroit announced, as a policy move to preserve cash during its financial crisis, that it would not be making payments [1] on a certificates of participation it had issued.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participation_certificate

At its meeting on October 19, the Tustin City Council approved selling bonds in an amount not to exceed $45 million dollars to complete financing Tustin Ranch Road from Walnut Avenue south to Warner Avenue.

The bonds will have no financial impact on the City’s budget, as all
payments of principal and interest will be paid solely from revenues generated by development at Tustin Legacy. The bonds will also be used to fund other major infrastructure projects at Tustin Legacy.

Funds to complete the road will come from a variety of funding sources,
including these bond proceeds and funds from the City of Irvine allocated to mitigate traffic impacts from its adjacent development, the Irvine Business Complex. No monies from the general fund will be used.

https://www.tustinca.org/departments/citymanager/releases/releases/182.pdf

To provide for business start-up opportunities and expansion of existing businesses, the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency provides access to a variety of financing programs authorized by either the federal or state government, as well as programs provided by other private, public and non-profit agencies. The Agency also provides technical assistance, educational support and other similar needs of a non-financial nature to the business community. A brief summary of the possible assistance and incentive programs that can be made available are as follows:
Zoning incentives to encourage economic development through:

Floor area ratio bonuses
Allowance for mixed use projects
Combining of public and private uses
Planned Unit Developments
Density bonuses
Assistance in land assembly:
Land banking
Eminent domain
Land swaps
Land write downs
Assistance with construction of infrastructure improvements.
Provision of technical assistance.
Provision of developer unique financing opportunities, consisting of:
Tax Increment Financing
20% Housing Set-Aside Funds
Special Purpose Financing Districts
1911, 1913, 1915 Acts
Mello Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982
Landscape and Lighting District of 1972
Revenue bonds
Lease Revenue bonds
Tax Allocation bonds
Lease Purchase financing
Industrial Development bonds
Certificates of Participation
Mortgage Revenue Bonds
Loans and Advances
Leases
Land Disposition Proceeds
Rental Payments
Participation in future cash flows

https://www.tustinca.org/departments/redev/busassist.html

Certificates of Participation (COPs). A form of lease revenue bond that permits the investor to participate in a stream of lease payments, installment payments or loan payments relating to the acquisition or construction of specific equipment, land or facilities. In theory the certificate holder could foreclose on the equipment or facility financed in the event of default, but so far no investor has ended up owning a piece of a school house or a storm drainage system. A very popular financing device in California since Proposition 13 because COP issuance does not require voter approval. COPs are not viewed legally as “debt” because payment is tied to an annual appropriation by the government body. As a result, COPs are seen by investors as providing weaker security and often carry ratings that are a notch or two below an agency’s general obligation rating.

https://www.emuni.com/glossary.php

Hangar Fire - "Without Litigation" - City of Tustin Already On the Hook for $90 Million in Clean-Up Costs - "Not Including the Actual Hangar Property" - and Heading for a Billion Dollars - Developers Likely Not Off the Hook Either - Property Value Assessments Undergoing Official Review - Ask Yourself - Would You Buy or Rent at the Tustin Legacy - Remember there's "Another" Hangar Too
Addicted? 1-800-662-HELP
URGENT REMINDER - if You're on Southern California Edison's - "Time to Fuck You" - "Electricity Rate Plan" - "Opt Out Now" - Call Today or Visit the Website - 1-800-810-2369