Pensions

Grand jury: County’s unfunded pension liability better than peers

Yet panel warns of significant risks from $173 million obligation
2013-07-06T16:30:00Z Grand jury: County’s unfunded pension liability better than peersPETER JENSEN Napa Valley Register
July 06, 2013 4:30 pm  • 

Napa County’s prudent fiscal management of employee pensions and post-employment benefit costs have put it in a stronger position than other California counties confronting the state’s pension crisis, a new report from the Napa County grand jury states.

The grand jury evaluated the county’s practices regarding managing pensions and post-employment benefits this year, and found that while the county’s in a better spot than others in California, significant risks remain for its unfunded liability of $173 million.

The county’s 1,330 employees and retirees receive benefits through a contract Napa County has with CalPERS, which was funded at 60 percent when the economy was recovering from its crash in June 2009, according to the grand jury’s report.

The county was able to increase that level of funding to 73 percent in 2011, and has raised employee cost-sharing and decreased pension formulas through negotiations with unions. Its decision to pre-fund other post-employment benefits has it on a path to fully cover the unfunded liability over the next 20 years, the grand jury report states.

It’s also avoided “spiking” retiring employees’ final salary levels by barring them from tacking on bonuses, vacation time that was never used, overtime, and other compensations. This practice has allowed some public employees to collect higher income in retirement than they did on salary, according to the report.

Napa County was one of the first counties in the state to opt to pre-fund post-employment benefit liabilities once the state Legislature changed its policies in 2008. The changes acheived through union negotiations will allow the county to save $12 million over 10 years, according to the report.

“There is no doubt that Napa County’s strong and stable economic climate has facilitated the ability to be proactive in managing all of its assets,” the grand jury report states. “The county is fortunate in that it is a relatively young public entity measured by the high number of active employees supporting the retirement income of retired employees, and has a high-valued land base and well-established agricultural and tourist commerce supporting tax revenues.”

Still, the report faults the county for allowing retroactive benefits in 2004 and 2005; coupled with a market downturn, this caused the county’s annual pension costs to jump from $7.5 million in 2005 to $11.2 million in 2006.

But, the county got agreements with the unions to share future shifts in the annual required contribution, a move the report labels “an action of great foresight.”

Ultimately, the grand jury determined that there’s more cause for concern regarding other post-employment benefits costs than the pension program.

“At the heart of the county concerns are the steep increases in healthcare premiums, which have risen faster than the cost of living adjustments that affect pension funds,” the report states.

The report predicts that every municipal government in California can expect to see the annual required contribution increases due to a planned overhaul of CalPERS’ investment policies.

“By 2015, several of the state’s largest cities estimate that as much as 33 percent of their operating budget will be consumed to make the annual required contributions to CalPERS,” the report concludes. “Even Napa County, with a significant and stable economic base, no incidence of abusive pension practices, and no risk of bankruptcy has had to confront tough choices as the shortfall in funding of retirement obligations over the last decade has created larger and larger (annual required contribution) payments to CalPERS.”

Overall, the grand jury praised the county’s practices when it came to managing its pension programs and other post-employment benefit costs.

“The grand jury found that the county has been collegial in proactively working with its employee bargaining units, CalPERS and citizens to make positive changes to its retirement benefits program,” the report states. “The county has shown very good stewardship.”

Copyright 2015 Napa Valley Register. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(4) Comments

  1. publiusa
    Report Abuse
    publiusa - July 06, 2013 6:06 pm
    Unfunded liability? That is a politically correct way to explain "theft" from our children in the future to pay for today's corruption at every level of government. The weak kneed supervisors bowed to their union bosses who financed their election campaigns and gave unsustainable pay and benefits to county employees. This is a too common Lib-Dem-Prog tactic of extorting and misusing tax dollars to buy Democrat votes.
  2. justreading
    Report Abuse
    justreading - July 06, 2013 11:29 pm
    I don't think it has to do with politics.When you smell a problem do something
    to stop it .Our ability to calculate is better than ever ,we need to stay on top of
    it.And not end up like a lot of Pensions that are heading to a mess .Theirs a reason
    why Bees make more Honey then they need ,they play safe.

  3. rocketman
    Report Abuse
    rocketman - July 07, 2013 7:23 am
    Pensions that have been established are guaranteed by the State Constitution. A new ruling just re-established that premise in Pacific Grove. Besides, the Board of Supervisors have the same pensions as the employees.
  4. Old Time Napkin
    Report Abuse
    Old Time Napkin - July 07, 2013 8:23 am
    Interesting to note in the article that the biggest rise in the unfunded liability area is the cost of health care. Just wait until Obamacare really takes effect and see what happens to health care costs. The Affordable Care Act is the biggest scam ever sold to the public.
Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick