News

      The following letter to the editor appeared in the Feb. 3 edition of the Sacramento Bee newspaper.

Pension cost exaggerated
Re "Sparks fly at CalPERS forum on pension cost" (Page A1, Jan. 30): At the recent CalPERS forum on pension costs and at several public appearances, anti-public employee critics have deliberately spread untruths and exaggerations about the pensions I and thousands of public retirees have earned and deserve.
 
For example, Gov. Schwarzenegger said in his State of the State address that public employees' pensions have jumped 2,000 percent in the last 10 years. The figures are a deliberately cropped picture. The "2,000 percent increase" compares a time when the state paid little or nothing to the pension system during years of robust investment earnings to the recent market cycle extremes and current economic downturn.
 
In 1981-82, pension contributions for the largest category of CalPERS employees cost the state 19.6 percent of payroll. For the current 2009-10 fiscal year, the state is paying 16.9 percent.
When erroneous or misleading information is repeated enough times, it can be perceived as the truth by those who don't take the time to understand the pension system or who need an easy target during these troubling economic times.
– Roger Marxen, president of CSEA Retirees Inc., Sacramento
 

Read More »

 

2010 Retirement Check Pay Days
     CalPERS recently released the schedule of retirement check pay days for 2010.
     Retirement benefits are paid at the end of the month. For example, the payment you receive on or about the first of June is for your May benefits. For tax reasons, your December retirement check is always dated on the first day of the new year.
     The State Controller's Office determines the mailing dates and sends the checks. If you have direct deposit, your financial institution has until the close of the direct deposit date to place the funds into your account. Please contact your financial institution to find out what time it places your funds in your account.
2010 Retirement Check Pay Days
Benefit Month
Mailing Date
Direct Deposit Date
December 2009
December 30
January 4
January
January 28
February 1
February
February 25
March 1
March
March 30
April 1
April
April 28
April 30
May
May 28
June 1
June
June 28
July 1
July
July 28
July 30
August
August 30
September 1
September
September 28
October 1
October
October 29
November 1
November
November 29
December 1
December
December 28
January 3, 2011
     If you have your retirement check mailed to you and have not received it by the sixth of each month, or if you believe your check has been lost or stolen, you should call 888 CalPERS (or 888-225-7377). If you've moved recently, or are planning to move, be sure to notify CalPERS and CSEA Retirees, Inc.

Read More »

SACRAMENTO BEE 1-23-10
 The Legislative Analyst's Office has completed its analyses of three proposed initiatives for the 2010 ballot that take straight aim at cutting health and pension benefits for new state and public sector workers.

The LAO and Department of Finance prepare a detailed fiscal analysis of each proposed initiative and submit them to the Attorney General as part of the initiative process.

The theme is similar across all three reports, though each of the proposed initiatives are different in their own details.

The LAO says that "minor" short term savings could be achieved by adopting the proposed benefit reductions. The savings would be more substantial in the longer-term, it suggests.

Yet the analyses carry a major-league caveat.

The LAO notes that to offset the decline of retirement benefits offered to new employees, "some governments likely would increase other forms of compensation for some employees in order to remain competitive in the labor market."

As Bee colleague Kevin Yamamura reported this week, California is projected to have unfunded pension liabilities of more than $100 billion through 2014-15.

Yamamura also reported that the governor has met with backers of one of the proposed initiatives analyzed above and is considering supporting the measure, which would reduce benefits for public sector workers who begin new jobs in Juy 2011 or later.

Read More »

Formal debate may be postponed for weeks as senior Democrats are looking to other issues, such as jobs. One lawmaker calls for 'a breather.'

LOS ANGELES TIMES 1-23-10

 

Senior Democrats on Capitol Hill, struggling to figure out how to resuscitate their stalled healthcare overhaul, are looking to move away from the politically explosive issue and turn to other legislation -- especially efforts to stimulate job growth.

That could put off any formal debate of healthcare legislation for weeks, if not longer, senior lawmakers and Democratic officials said Friday. But it would allow the rattled party to focus on a more popular issue with voters while calming Democratic anxiety over healthcare in the wake of this week's Republican victory in the Massachusetts Senate election.

Speaking with reporters after a meeting of Democratic lawmakers at the Capitol, Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), one of the lead architects of the healthcare legislation, called for "a breather."

House Democrats, most of whom returned to their districts Thursday, suspended healthcare strategizing on Friday.

Congressional Democrats and White House officials have been discussing two possible strategies for passing some form of healthcare legislation despite losing a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.

Under one scenario, the House would pass the bill approved in the Senate just before Christmas; that would send the bill directly to President Obama for his signature. Then, both chambers would adopt a series of changes to the legislation sought by House Democrats through a process called budget reconciliation that requires only 51 votes in the Senate.

Senior Democrats also are exploring ways to scale back the healthcare bills developed last year.

 

 

Read More »

His proposals to privatize prisons, curtail teachers' seniority protections and reduce the number of in-home care workers would be major blows to powerful labor interests. They're girding for a fight.

Los Angeles Times 1-25-10

 

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has put organized labor squarely in his cross-hairs in 2010, opening a fight that will largely determine the shape of his final year in office.

Schwarzenegger's proposals would cut the size of the union workforce, reduce pay, shrink future pensions and roll back job protections won through collective bargaining.

Labor and the unions' Democratic allies are already girding for battle.

"It's a continuing jihad against organized labor," said Steve Maviglio, a Sacramento-based Democratic strategist. "The governor thinks public employee unions are Enemy No. 1."

Among the plans in the governor's budget: privatize prisons, which would strip members from the influential guards union; curtail seniority protections for teachers, a key union-won protection; and reduce the number of sick, disabled and elderly Californians cared for through the state's In-Home Supportive Services program -- almost all union jobs -- while cutting what their caregivers are paid.

Schwarzenegger also wants to permanently lower state workforce salaries by 5% without returning to the bargaining table with public-sector unions. And he would require state workers to chip 5% more into their retirement plans.

"The public sector also has to take a haircut," Schwarzenegger said, arguing his policies would save California billions of dollars, now and in the future.

Matt David, Schwarzenegger's communications director, says the governor's proposed budget makes hard but necessary choices, given a $20-billion deficit.

"This budget wasn't about attacking any specific group," he said. "It was about trying to fix what's broken in this state and prioritize the funding we have so we can protect education."

Yet even in nonbudget proposals, union leaders see an antilabor agenda. For example, Schwarzenegger has pushed to limit seniority protections for teachers and expand charter schools, which are largely staffed by nonunion teachers. He argues both moves would improve the quality of schools.

Union leaders see their members as the targets. "That seems to be his goal, to basically change a unionized sector of the economy to a nonunion sector," said Marty Hittelman, president of the California Federation of Teachers.

The unions have spent millions to thwart some of the governor's past initiatives and hope to do so again.

"To go after unions means tearing down the middle class," said Laphonza Butler, head of United Long Term Care Workers, a branch of the giant Service Employees International Union that represents 180,000 in-home services workers.

Democratic lawmakers, who hold the majority in the Legislature and are the largest recipients of union campaign money, thus far have given the governor's plans a chilly reception.

"I did take note that in his State of the State address [the governor] said that we had only Sophie's choices," said Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco). "Do we harm seniors, do we harm the disabled, do we harm the poor? But you didn't hear him suggest there were tax loopholes we could close to pinch corporations."

State Treasurer Bill Lockyer, a Democrat, explained the legislative balance of power during impassioned legislative testimony last fall: "It's impossible for this Legislature to reform the pension system," he said. "I don't think anybody can do it here -- because of who elected you," he added, making a barely veiled reference to labor's power.

Top Democratic lawmakers have suggested Schwarzenegger is driven by a corporate special interest agenda.

 

 

Read More »

 

     Retirees Tim Behrens and Gene Waggoner II are the victors in the elections to fill two positions on the

CSEA Retirees, Inc. Board of Directors.

     The results were announced Jan. 5 after members of the CSEA Golden Girls and one Chapter 165 member counted the ballots at the CSEA Retirees’ corporate office in Sacramento.
     Behrens, the former president of the Association of California State Supervisors (ACSS) and a member of CSEA Retirees’ Chapter 35, garnered 394 votes. He was followed by incumbent Addie Jackson, who received 303 votes in the race for the District F position on the board.
     Richard Ballinger came in third place with 199 votes, followed by Stephanie Day with 60 votes. There were a total of 990 ballots received and 34 invalid ballots.
     District F represents members in Chapters 11, 16 and 35 in the counties of Amador, Calaveras, Fresno Kings, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, Tulare and Kern (Western side of the Tehachapi Mountains.)
     The victor for the District G position on the board is Gene Waggoner II, the longtime president of CSEA Retirees’ Chapter 6 and chair of the Presidents’ Forum, which is a group comprised of CSEA Retirees’ 25 chapter presidents.
     Waggoner received 443 votes, followed by incumbent Fred Cordova, who got 404 votes.
     Other candidates were Diane Whorton, who garnered 364 votes; Danny Morales with 138 votes; and Samuel Jurado who received 77 votes.
     There were 1,478 ballots received and 52 invalid ballots.
     District G represents members in Chapters 6, 12, 17 and 34 within the counties of Imperial, Inyo, Mono, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, portions of Los Angeles and Kern (Eastern side of the Tehachapi Mountains).

Read More »

LOS ANGELES TIMES Jan. 11, 2010

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's budget proposal was depressing by itself. And the reaction to it made the Capitol even gloomier.

Blame the governor for his populist pouncing on the federal government, trying to lay partial responsibility for Sacramento's dogged deficit on Washington.

Cite Democrats and their interest groups for too many predictable, pedestrian potshots.

And, while we're at it, fault Republicans for their obstinate opposition to even considering a temporary tax increase.

OK, there's merit on all sides. Everyone's got a legitimate beef. And this is an election year in California, when politics is particularly poisonous.

It doesn't help everyone's mood that the Capitol has been socked in by dreary tule fog. It was drizzling outside Friday as the governor was unveiling his budget with its painful program cuts that even he called draconian.

But all the bromides and sound bites -- whether meritorious or just mischievous -- will make it harder for the politicians to resolve arguably the worst budget mess ever.

The answer to Rodney King's famous question -- "Can't we all just get along?" -- is "Rarely" in politics. But this is one time when the politicians urgently need to search for common ground to build bridges.

Perhaps wishing for that level of pragmatism is Pollyannaish. And, after all, this is merely the opening curtain on what Schwarzenegger has always called "the kabuki . . . this whole song and dance" of budget negotiating.

In Japan, the traditional kabuki drama is revered. Sacramento's version is reviled, based on polling of voters. And I'm sounding a loud catcall for the entire cast.

Schwarzenegger struck a Democratic nerve -- in Washington and Sacramento -- by declaring in his otherwise upbeat State of the State speech and later in the bleak budget roll-out that the federal government is partly to blame for California's red ink. He stepped up the attack during an appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday, targeting the California congressional delegation.

He isn't asking for "a federal bailout, just federal fairness," the governor asserts.

Democrats especially smarted when he declared that "Congress is about to pile billions more [state costs] onto California with the new healthcare bill" -- this from a governor who three years ago tried to push his own multibillion-dollar healthcare proposal through the Legislature.

You may recall that when Schwarzenegger was first elected, the Hollywood action hero proclaimed himself "the collectinator" who would seize California's fair share from Washington. By his own measure, he has failed.

In truth, the governor has some valid points about Washington shortchanging California.

One example: The federal government has failed to protect the border but has stuck the states with paying for most of the costs of incarcerating illegal immigrant felons. Schwarzenegger is demanding -- as many other California governors have, futilely -- that the feds pay all the cost. He's seeking $880 million and already is counting it in his budget.

But Schwarzenegger the governor -- unlike Schwarzenegger the candidate or actor -- never does particularly well on the attack. Governing requires collaboration, including with California's two Democratic U.S. senators, if one expects help from Washington.

"California's budget crisis was created in Sacramento, not Washington," Sen. Dianne Feinstein shot back. "These problems are not going away until there is wholesale reform of the state's budget process. . . . Pointing fingers is not constructive."

Sen. Barbara Boxer called a teleconference with reporters to rebut Schwarzenegger's assertion that California gets back only 78 cents for every dollar it sends Washington in taxes. That figure is several years old, she contended; Washington currently sends back $1.45.

She accused the governor of "threatening people" with his "trigger" plan.

That's his plan to shoot the wounded unless the feds pony up $6.9 billion he figures is rightfully California's. He already has tallied that sum in his proposed $83-billion "balanced" general fund budget for the fiscal year starting July 1.

If the federal money doesn't come through, Schwarzenegger will pull the trigger and fire to kill. He'll aim to eliminate the state's welfare program, CalWorks. Ditto the Healthy Families healthcare program for poor kids. He'd also wipe out In-Home Supportive services for the elderly and disabled. Even if the Washington money does arrive, he'll try to cripple home care services.

Without federal funds, the governor would cut state employees' salaries by an additional 5% -- on top of 10% he'd take in any case from their checks (5% pay, 5% pension contribution) and whittle the workforce by 5%.
 

Read More »

SACRAMENTO BEE Jan. 8, 2010

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger unveiled an $82.9 billion state spending plan today that calls for no tax hikes but envisions pay cuts for state workers, reductions in services to California's neediest residents - and on the benevolence of the federal government.

The governor also declared yet another fiscal emergency, and called for yet another special session of the Legislature, designed to keep a projected $19.9 billion budget deficit from growing by another $2.4 billion.

"We must begin our work immediately," Schwarzenegger said in his message to legislators. "If we fail to take action in the special session that I have called, our problem will only grow, and the decisions that will be required to make up for lost savings will grow even more difficult than those now before us."

Under Schwarzenegger's proposed budget for the fiscal year that begins July 1:

• Temporary increases of sales and income taxes that were approved last year by the governor and lawmakers would be allowed to expire on June 30 and December 31, respectively. Last May, voters rejected proposals to extend the 1-cent sales tax hike and 0.25 percent income tax until 2012.

• The state's current 6 percent sales tax on a gallon of gasoline would be dropped, and replaced by a 10.8-cent increase in per-gallon excise taxes. Administration officials estimate the overall impact would be a 6-cent-per-gallon reduction in gas prices. The seemingly arcane switch would allow the state to legally cut the money it must currently pay to local governments for transportation programs, and to schools. That's because the sales tax revenues from gasoline are part of voter-approved formulas that determine how much the transportation and schools get from the state.

• About 200,000 state employees who currently must take three unpaid days off each month - equivalent to a 14 percent pay cut - would go back to work full time. But the furloughs would be replaced by a 5 percent pay cut; a 5 percent increase in contributions to retirement plans and a directive to all state departments to cut overall payroll costs by 5 percent through layoffs, attrition or hiring people at lower salaries.

• Spending on most elementary and high school programs would be kept at current levels. But a $1.2 billion cut would be sought in school district level administration. None of the cuts could be shifted to classroom reductions.

• The fastest-growing segment of state spending over the past decade - prisons - would be cut by $1.2 billion, most of it through reducing medical costs to prisoners. That could trigger even more legal battles with federal judges and a court-appointed federal receiver who are overseeing California's prison health system.

• Funding for Medi-Cal and services to Californians whose ability to care for themselves is limited would be reduced.

Read More »

January 6, 2010
Prepared text of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's State of the State address:

I want to begin with a true story from which we can draw a worthwhile lesson.

As you might guess, the Schwarzenegger household is something of a menagerie.

An Austrian bodybuilder, a TV journalist, four children, a dog, the normal goldfish and hamsters and so forth -- and in recent years we added a miniature pony and a pot-bellied pig.

It's not unusual for me to look up from working on the budget or something to find a pig and a pony standing there staring at me.

Now, the dog's food, which we keep in a canister with a screw-on lid, sits on the top of the dog's kennel.

The pony has learned to knock the canister off the top of the kennel, and then he and the pig wedge it into the corner.

There's this ridge on the lid of the canister, and the pig with his snout pushes this ridge around and around until it loosens, and then they roll the canister around on the floor until the food spills out.

I don't know how they ever figured all of that out.

It's like humans figuring out how to create fire.

But it is the greatest example of teamwork. I love it.

So one lesson to draw from the pig and the pony story is what we can accomplish when we work together.

And last year we here in this room did some great things working together.

We had a pig and pony year.

Now before some reporter writes that I compared the legislature to a pig or a pony, that is not the message at all.

Together, as a team -- as fractious, tentative and uncertain as it might have been -- together, we got California through the front end of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

Although not without pain, we closed a budget gap of 60 billion dollars!

These decisions were very hard for both sides of the aisle.

On the Republican side, we had leaders who sacrificed their careers or put them at risk.

On the Democratic side, we had legislators who were threatened by their own interest groups.

To those on both sides of the aisle who took these risks for the good of the state, you have my deepest admiration.

We did what we had to do.

We made painful spending cuts. We passed temporary tax increases. We permanently eliminated COLAs for most state programs.

We made major reforms in welfare and parole.

And there are two accomplishments in particular I want to recognize.

Just last night the Assembly passed major educational reform, reform that once seemed impossible, but now will become law as soon as it hits my desk.

For too many years, too many children were trapped in low-performing schools.

The exit doors may as well have been chained.

Now, for the first time, parents -- without the principal's permission -- have the right to free their children from these destructive schools.

That is a great freedom.

Also in the past, parents had no power to bring about change in their children's schools.

But that will now change.

Parents will now have the means to get rid of incompetent principals and take other necessary steps to improve their children's education.

To increase accountability, we broke down the firewall so that teacher performance can be linked to student performance.

Another major accomplishment: for decades this state was in a literal war over water, with old and deep divisions, Northern California versus Southern California, Democrat versus Republican, farmer versus environmentalist, business versus labor.

We here in this room made history with the most comprehensive water package in nearly half a century.

Working together, we got it done.

And now we must work to pass the 11 billion dollars in water bonds that will be on the ballot in November.

Some people say... how can we afford these bonds in the current economic climate?

I say, how can we not?

It is the law that you cannot build a school; you cannot build a factory; you cannot build an office building or a housing development without identifying a source of water.

As a result, huge projects with thousands of jobs have been put on hold.

Our economy cannot grow without water. Our population cannot live without water. It is our state's lifeblood.

Now is exactly the time to invest in it, so that when Californians turn on the faucet, there is safe, reliable and clean water coming out the tap -- not just five years from now but 30, 40 or 50 years.

Now, the coming year.

If I had to summarize in one word our focus for the coming year, it would be the word "priorities."

We have to get them straight and we have to keep them straight.

The first priority for the coming year is the economy and jobs.

The people and businesses of California are an engine of self-betterment and progress.

As long as government keeps the engine oiled with prudent policies -- and more importantly -- does not pour sand in its gears, this state will persevere and prosper.

I will come to the main thing we can do to help the economy in a moment, but there are four proposals to spur job growth that I will introduce.

First, you will receive a $500 million jobs package that we estimate could train up to 140,000 workers and help create 100,000 jobs.

Second, you will receive a measure to streamline the permitting of construction projects that already have a completed environmental report.

Third, to stimulate other construction jobs, you will receive a proposal for homebuyer tax credits of up to $10,000 for the purchase of new or existing homes.

And fourth, since we want California to be the dynamo of green technology, I ask you to pass our proposal exempting the purchase of green tech manufacturing equipment from the sales tax.

That, too, means jobs -- jobs for the new economy.

While we still have a long way to go, the worst is over for California's economy.

And the really good thing is that we have the right economic mix going forward -- high tech, green tech, bio-tech, Hollywood-tech, farmer-tech and so forth.

Our economy is well-positioned to take advantage of the future.

So let me tell you the main thing that we here in this chamber can do to help the economy and jobs. We can be a better partner to the economy. To strengthen the economy, which is the foundation of all jobs, we here in this chamber must reform California's budget and tax system. That would be a huge stimulus.

The basic problem is that our tax system does not reflect our economy.

In 2009, California's economic growth declined 2.8%...but our tax revenues were down more than 8 times that much.

Our economy is diverse, whereas our tax system is not.

144,000 taxpayers pay almost 50 percent of all personal income taxes.

Think about it. 38 million Californians have to rely on 144,000 people for their schools, their fire protection, their health care, their public safety and many other services.

That makes no sense.

Here is what we need to accept: our economy is 21st Century, but our tax system is 20th Century.

It's stuck in the wrong century.

The Tax Reform Commission did its work and came up with a plan for reform that was praised by both Willie Brown and the Wall Street Journal.

How often does that happen?

The Commission proposed major, radical reforms.

Some people say they are too bold and thus they would be too hard to enact.

What do they mean too bold?

Bold is what we do in California.

What do they mean too hard? If I had hesitated to attempt something because it was too hard, I'd still be yodeling in Austria.

We must begin work on these tax reforms because we simply cannot wait for the rich to bounce back.

State revenues are not expected to return to where they were until 2013 to 2014.

I sent you the Tax Reform Commission's plan in late September, but it seems to have disappeared somewhere under this dome.

Where is it? Maybe the pig and the pony have taken it.

But I am looking forward to working with the legislature to get this done.

Budget reform is just as important.

The budget crisis is our Katrina. We knew it was coming. We've known it for years. And yet Sacramento would not reinforce the economic levees.

In addition to taking action on the Commission's plan, I ask you to also take action on the Best Practices Budget Accountability Act, which has been drafted by the reform group, California Forward.

I especially support its proposals for performance-based budgeting and applying one-time spikes in revenues to one-time uses, such as debt reduction, infrastructure and the rainy day fund.

The leaders of this body have said that the legislature should be given a chance to enact reforms before reforms go directly to the people.

Here is that chance. I urge you to take it.

And as we struggle to overcome our differences, what I ask you to remember is that the current tax and budget system is cruel.

It is cruel because it is forcing us to make a Sophie's choice among our obligations.

Which child do we cut? The poor one? The sick one? The uneducated one? The one with special needs?

That is cruel.

We overcame the divisions on water. We can do it on the tax system and budget systems. I will address our immediate budget situation more fully in a few days, but let me give you an overview.

We face a $19.9 billion deficit -- $6.6 billion for the rest of this budget year and $13.3 billion for the upcoming budget year.

Big picture, let me tell you what will be required.

First, as bitter as the words are in my mouth, we face additional cuts.

We know what that means.

We know the pain it entails.

What can we say at this point except the truth? That we have no choice.

But I am drawing this line. Because our future economic well-being is so dependent upon education, I will protect education funding in this budget.

And we can no longer afford to cut higher education either.

The priorities have become out of whack over the years.

Thirty years ago 10 percent of the general fund went to higher education and 3 percent went to prisons.

Today almost 11 percent goes to prisons and only 7 1/2 percent goes to higher education.

Spending 45 percent more on prisons than universities is no way to proceed into the future.

What does it say about a state that focuses more on prison uniforms than caps and gowns?

It simply is not healthy.

I will submit to you a constitutional amendment so that never again do we spend a greater percentage of our money on prisons than on higher education.

The way we get this done is to find more cost-effective ways to run our prison system and allows private prisons to compete with public prisons. Competition and choice are always good.

California spends $50,000 per prisoner.

By comparison, the ten largest states spend $32,000.

They spend less, and yet you do not see federal judges taking over their prison health care.

Why do we have to spend so much more than they do?

If California's prisons were privately run, it would save us billions of dollars a year.

That's billions of dollars that could go back to higher education where it belongs and where it better serves our future.

Choosing universities over prisons: this is a historic and transforming realignment of California's priorities.

If you have two states and one spends more on educating and one spends more on incarcerating, in which state's economy would you invest?

I ask you to make the right choice for California.

Another major item is this: federal funds have to be part of our budget solution because the federal government is part of our budget problem.

When President Clinton was in office, California got back 94 cents on the dollar from the federal government. Today we get only 78 cents back.

Texas gets 94 cents. Pennsylvania gets $1.07. Alaska, with all its oil, gets back $1.84 for every dollar. New Mexico gets $2.03.

This should be more fair and equitable.

We are not looking for a federal bailout, just federal fairness.

Californians carry a special burden since we are a border state.

The federal government alone controls immigration policy. It alone controls border security.

While acknowledging its responsibility, the federal government is not even funding a 50-50 split of the costs of undocumented immigrants.

We can no longer ignore what is owed to us, or what we are forced to spend on federal mandates.

We are currently owed billions of dollars by the federal government for various programs.

We need to work with the feds so that we can fix the flawed formula that demands that states spend money they do not have.

Now Congress is about to pile billions more onto California with the new health care bill.

While I enthusiastically support health care reform, it is not reform to push more costs onto states that are already struggling while other states get sweetheart deals.

Health care reform, which started as noble and needed legislation, has become a trough of bribes, deals and loopholes.

You've heard of the bridge to nowhere. This is health care to nowhere.

California's congressional delegation should either vote against this bill that is a disaster for California or get in there and fight for the same sweetheart deal Senator Nelson of Nebraska got for the Cornhusker State. He got the corn; we got the husk.

Now, another priority relating to the budget is pension reform.

The cost for state employee pensions is up 2,000 percent in the last ten years, while revenues have only increased by 24 percent.

The pension fund will not have enough money to cover this amount, so the state -- that means the taxpayer -- has to come up with the money.

This is money that is taken away from important government services.

This is money that cannot go to our universities, our parks and other government functions.

Now, for current employees these pensions cannot be changed -- either legally or morally.

We cannot break the promises we already made. It is a done deal.

But we are about to get run over by a locomotive. We can see the light coming at us.

I ask the legislature to join me in finding the equivalent of a water deal on pensions, so that we can meet current promises and yet reduce the burden going forward.

These are serious issues we face.

Read More »

The governor presents initiatives to spend more on higher education than prisons, alter state employee pensions and the budget and push employee training.

LOS ANGELES TIMES Jan. 6, 2010

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger this morning presented lawmakers with an ambitious agenda for his final year in office, calling for broad changes to the state's budget, pension and tax systems, a constitutional requirement to spend more on higher education than prisons and a greater share of federal funding for California.

Schwarzenegger, who has criticized lawmakers for inaction in his annual address in years past, praised them this time for working together to close tens of billions of dollars in budget deficits, for reaching a deal to fix the state's water system and, as recently as Tuesday night, passing legislation to change the state's educational system that he said he'd sign.

"Together, as a team -- as fractious, tentative and uncertain as it might have been -- together we got California through the front end of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression," Schwarzenegger said in his final State of the State speech, speaking in the Assembly chamber.

Schwarzenegger's initiatives are certain to be difficult given that he and lawmakers face another $20-billion deficit -- similar to the one that took months to close last year -- and that they already have cut drastically many state programs.

The governor told them today that he would refuse to again cut education, which has lost billions in the last two years. At the same time, Schwarzenegger suggested a constitutional amendment -- the third ballot measure he would be supporting in a single year -- to reverse the ratio under which California now spends 11% of its budget on prisons and 7.5% on higher education.

"If you have two states and one spends more on education and the other one on incarcerating, in which state's economy would you invest?" he asked.

That goal, which the governor said could be accomplished by privatizing state prisons, is likely to meet with opposition from the state prison guards union and the federal courts that have taken over prison medical care.

Schwarzenegger asked lawmakers to reconsider a proposal he backed to revamp the state's tax structure, which he said had "disappeared somewhere under this dome." He said the state employee pension costs had increased 2,000% in a decade and needed to be controlled. He said the state budget system should be aligned with actual expenses.

 

Read More »

SACRAMENTO BEE Jan. 1, 2010

An Alameda Superior Court judge has ordered the Schwarzenegger administration to stop furloughing thousands of state workers who are members of three big public sector unions, including Service Employees International Union Local 1000, offering them a huge legal victory as 2010 begins.

In three rulings released late Thursday, Judge Frank Roesch said the governor's reliance on the state's Emergency Services Act to order three furlough days a month, triggering pays cuts of almost 15 percent, was flawed and illegal.

The judge was silent on the issue of back pay. Union lawyers said they'll seek it.

SEIU attorney Felix De La Torre said he and the 95,000 members of his powerful statewide union were pleased and grateful for the ruling.

"I couldn't think of a better way for our union and its members to ring in 2010 after being under siege by the Schwarzenegger administration for over a year," De La Torre said.

Schwarzenegger press secretary Aaron McLear said the administration will appeal, and predicted furloughs will continue until the cases are resolved.

"In these tough economic times, there's no reason that state workers should be shielded from the same economic realities the rest of the state is facing," McLear said.

"This is three of 24 lawsuits on the furlough issue – we've won some, we've lost some. Ultimately, it's going to be decided in the California Supreme Court," he added.

Attorneys for two of the unions said they'll ask Roesch to lift the automatic stay of proceedings that occurs when an appeal is filed and try to get workers' full pay reinstated immediately. 

Read More »

Leo Mayer, who served as statewide president of CSEA between 1983 and 1984, passed away Dec. 4, just shy of his 84th birthday on Christmas day.

A native of Beck, Mo., Mayer moved to West Los Angeles to attend University High School. He earned a bachelor’s degree and an MBA from the University of Southern California.

Mayer began his lengthy career with a life insurance company in 1952, holding many different positions. He was also a supervisor in the State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF).

In the late 70s, he moved to the San Francisco Bay Area and then to Sacramento. After serving as CSEA vice president, Mayer held the position of president in 1983-84. He was also director of CSEA’s Region III and a member of CSEA Retirees’ Chapter 2.

He considered CSEA his family and stayed connected with many of the members.

Read More »

SACRAMENTO BEE -- Dec. 12, 2009

Usually employers want to reduce the amount of money they have to contribute to pension plans.

So what Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger proposes is unprecedented. He wants the state to kick in more next year than the people who run California's retirement system are asking for. CalPERS board members must now decide to accept the $4.8 billion the governor offered instead of the $1.5 billion its staff has said is sufficient. It's a tough choice.

The board's constitutional and fiduciary responsibility is to the financial interest of the pension fund. Under normal circumstances, that should lead it to side with the governor. Politically, however, the board is dominated by public employee unions. By paying an extra $3.3 billion into the pension fund, the governor puts an additional financial burden on state government, which already faces a $21 billion deficit. If layoffs are required to close the gap, state workers, nearly all of them union members, risk big job losses.

Faced with the biggest market drop in fund history, CalPERS had to raise contribution rates for state and local government employers to keep its pension fund healthy. To give financially ailing government employers a break, CalPERS acted to isolate its massive losses over the last two years, phase them in slowly over the next three years with moderately higher contribution rates and then pay the losses down over 30 years – a controversial financial maneuver known as smoothing.

The pension fund's financing scheme will reduce governments' costs today but raise them for decades to come. Hoping the economy will rebound, most local governments are willing to accept that risk to get through the current fiscal crisis with as little additional pain as possible. The city of Sacramento, for example, will pay $4 million in 2011, when its latest CalPERS assessment comes due, instead of $8 million.

But the governor argues persuasively that delay burdens future generations unfairly.

Another worrisome and potentially more serious issue looming is earnings assumptions. To keep the pension fund financially healthy, at least on paper, CalPERS forecasts a 7.75 percent return on investments in perpetuity, a return that many financial experts say is overly optimistic. If CalPERS fails to earn that much, over time state and local governments are in for even bigger contribution hikes into the distant future.

Read More »

Former statewide CSEA President J.J. Jelincic emerged the unofficial victor Dec. 11 in the run-off election for an open seat on the CalPERS Board of Administration.

The results announced by a CalPERS official in Sacramento showed Jelincic with 109,088 votes (51.037%). His opponent, Cathy Hackett of SEIU, Local 1000, received 104,656 votes (48.963%). The results of the election must still be certified by the Secretary of State’s Office.

CSEA Retirees, Inc. supported Jelincic in the race because of his experience, education and dedication to protecting pensions and health care for state workers and retirees. Besides his extensive involvement in CSEA, Jelincic has worked at CalPERS for 23 years, currently as an investment officer.

Asked for his reaction after the results were announced, Jelincic said: “I feel great! And I love the retirees!”

All CalPERS members – active and retired – were eligible to vote in the election for the seat that will be vacated with the January retirement of Charles P. Valdes, who is also a former CSEA president.

CalPERS, the largest public retirement system in the nation, manages retirement benefits for more than 1.6 million California public employees, retirees and their families. CalPERS also manages health benefits for nearly 1.3 million members. The retirement fund’s assets currently stand at about $200 billion.

"I wish to thank the thousands of public employees and retirees from all across California who have put their trust in me to protect and defend their pensions and health care benefits,” Jelincic said in a statement.

"This is a challenging time for CalPERS. Recent events have shown that internal reforms to change the way CalPERS operates are needed,” he said. “But the key is to carry out these needed reforms to protect the hard earned pensions without allowing people like [former Assemblyman] Keith Richman and his allies to weaken or destroy the public employee retirement system that has served our state, its political subdivisions and its workers so well.

"I pledge that I will serve as a strong voice for the more than 1.6 million CalPERS members who depend upon the system for their retirement and health security,” Jelincic said.

His term on the the 13-member board is for four years.     

Read More »

Sacramento Bee

Dec. 10, 2009

True or false: "Many civil servants can retire at 50 or 55 years old with virtually full salary and health care benefits until the day they die."

You'll be able to answer that for yourself in a minute. First, some context.

GOP gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman made that assertion recently during a Q&A with the Sacramento County Republican Party and recorded by Bee reporter Jack Chang.

The former eBay CEO was answering a question about whether public employee unions have a "stranglehold" on state government.

Public employee pensions and benefits have become a huge political issue around the nation as governments face billions and billions of dollars in retirement promises to baby boomers now on the cusp of retirement.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Whitman have both said California state worker pensions are too rich. And a locally based pension-reform group is trying to qualify a ballot initiative for November 2010 that could roll back retirement benefits for all state and local government hires. (Retirement benefits for current employees can't be legally changed.)

On the other side, public employees and their unions argue that cutting pension benefits breaks an implicit understanding: Civil service means you earn less now than what counterparts in the private sector make, but you get better benefits and a more secure retirement later. Cut the benefits, and you can kiss off recruiting and retaining good people.

Read More »


Reasons to join CSEA Retirees, Inc.

Click the image to watch a video explaining the many reasons why state retirees and future state retirees should join CSEA Retirees, Inc. To hear sound, you must have speakers connected to your computer.

This Content Requires Adobe Flash Player | Download Now


After viewing the video, help protect your pension and health care by joining CSEA Retirees, Inc. Call (888) 808-7197 or join CSEA Retirees, Inc. by filling out an application. Print out this application, fill it out and send it to:

CSEA Retirees, Inc.
1108 O St.
Sacramento, CA 95814

The sooner you become a member, the sooner we can join together to protect our pensions and health care.


About Us

CSEA Retirees, Inc. is the largest, most experienced organization exclusively representing state government retirees. With 24 chapters statewide, we help protect the health care and pension benefits of nearly 30,000 members.

CSEA Retirees, Inc. is the largest, most experienced organization exclusively representing state government retirees. With 24 chapters statewide, we help protect the health care and pension benefits of nearly 30,000 members.


CSEA Retirees PAC Brochure

Do your part to protect our pensions, health care and benefits – Join the new political action committee for CSEA Retirees, Inc. today!

Click here to see the CSEA Retirees, Inc. PAC brochure and application. Print it out, fill it out and mail it to CSEA Retirees, Inc., 1108 O St., Sacramento, CA 95814.

Do your part to protect our pensions, health care and benefits – Join the new political action committee for CSEA Retirees, Inc. today!

Click here to see the CSEA Retirees, Inc. PAC brochure and application. Print it out, fill it out and mail it to CSEA Retirees, Inc., 1108 O St., Sacramento, CA 95814.


Take Action!

Use our new Action Center to contact legislators, write letters to the editor and more!

Use our new Action Center to contact legislators, write letters to the editor and more!


CalPERS Member Web Site

CalPERS has introduced the first release of a new, secure Web site designed with members in mind. my|CalPERS allows members to view and manage their personal information, and conduct their financial and retirement planning activities in a quick and secure way.

CalPERS has introduced the first release of a new, secure Web site designed with members in mind. my|CalPERS allows members to view and manage their personal information, and conduct their financial and retirement planning activities in a quick and secure way.


Links

Copyright (c) 2010 CSEA Retirees Inc. Terms Of Use Privacy Statement