April 2012 Archives

My take in today's WSJ on the role that pension and retiree health care liabilities in states and cities are going to play in location decisions that businesses and even residents make, because people are going to be increasingly wary of buying into these huge liabilities as they see taxes increasing because of them. Below is a chart from the Civic Federation of Chicago showing that state's growing pension costs on the budget. Those costs, as I point out, are eating up much of the $7 billion tax increase that Illinois enacted last year on residents and businesses, sparking a revolt among firms.
illinois pension costs.jpg

One of the growing trends in California's era of economic recklessness has been the proliferation of local bankruptcies, often driven by the excessive legacy costs of public workers. As might be expected, the state's public-sector unions, perceiving a threat to their benefits, have been anxious to insulate themselves as much as possible from the fiscal pruning that accompanies these procedures. That's why last year organized labor got behind AB 506, a measure that requires "neutral evaluation" by a mediator for 60 days before a city can seek full bankruptcy protection (unless the city declares a fiscal emergency). The hope, of course, is that the evaluation process will lead to fewer union perks being gutted by reeling cities.
George Will's column today draws on some new research by Paul Peterson and Daniel Nadler at Harvard. They find that the higher the percentage of public employee who are unionized, the greater risk investors see of the state defaulting on its bonds, resulting in higher interest rates.
The effects that California's disastrous public policies have had on the state's population have been all over the news in recent weeks. Joel Kotkin's much-touted interview in the weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal highlighted the fact that "nearly four million more people have left the Golden State in the last two decades than have come from other states." Around the same time, the Journal also ran a piece by Art Laffer and Stephen Moore looking at how low-tax states were snatching growth away from high-tax jurisdictions, of which California was (of course) one of the prime offenders.
Yesterday, Wisconsin governor Scott Walker toured the state, touting new numbers that show savings of over $1 billion since he implemented collective bargaining changes for state and local government employees.  Last year, Walker signed a new law requiring government employees to begin making contributions toward their own pension accounts, and increasing the amount government workers must pay for health insurance, to 12.6% of their premium.  He now faces a recall election as a result of opposition to the law by public employee unions.
The chairman of the California Assembly committee that handles pension issues has sent a letter to colleagues informing them that there is no time to deal with Gov. Jerry Brown's modest plan to reform government employee pensions. Read this letter and weap. As former Arnold Schwarzenegger aide Aaron McLear notes in his blog, the Assembly does have plenty of time to deal with 650 other matters. I can guarantee that most of those matters are of far less fiscal importance to the state. Welcome to a Legislature run by the unions and for the unions.
Be sure to catch the opening statements in this week's PublicSectorInc.org online debate at 12pm today. Throughout this week, Manhattan Institute senior fellow Dan DiSalvo and University of Toledo professor Joseph Slater will be debating whether "dues check-off" and "agency shop" - two unique fund-raising mechanisms enjoyed by public sector unions - are in the public interest. Share your thoughts about their posts in real-time by using the "comment" feature found on the online debate page. Also, submit one question that you would like to see them debate by sending an email to psi@manhattan-institute.org. We will select one question from the audience, which will be debated on Wednesday, April 25, so start thinking of your submissions now. With the impending recall election of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker coming-up on June 5, this issue is of critical importance to better understanding how public unions and the public interest intersect in American politics.
10_02_pension.jpg
One of the thorniest issues that states and municipalities have faced as they seek to limit spiraling pension debt for government workers is the issue of just how much of their retirement plans they can change. A researcher at the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland has contributed a valuable summation of state laws, which depressingly shows that the majority of states have over the years placed into legislation protections not just on past benefits that workers have already earned through their service, but on any future accruals for those already working for a state or its municipalities. This, union leaders contend, makes it impossible to alter a pension plan for any worker already in the system, so that he can continue earning benefits at the highest level possible for the rest of his career. Of course, there is legal wiggle room. Courts have, for instance, declared portions of pension benefits, such as cost-of-living adjustments, as outside the law, allowing states to alter these benefits. But it seems likely we'll see plenty of court cases as the courts try to define just what constitutes acceptable change under the law.
From the Orange County Register's Brian Joseph:

Little known and often misunderstood, the State Personnel Board provides a service with no parallel in the private sector. State employees who are fired, demoted or suspended can appeal their discipline directly to the five-member board, while a private worker's only recourse is the courts.
Regardless of what one might think of the pepper-spray assault on UC-Davis Occupy protesters by a campus cop, read this Atlantic article detailing the utter impossibility of firing a California peace officer thanks to the Peace Officers Bill of Rights. Per the Atlantic:

As the independent investigators noted, they weren't afforded the opportunity to speak with Lt. Pike because, like his boss, he refused to participate in the inquiry, which he could do without being fired. The recommendations of the Reynoso task force and the independent investigators didn't extend to firing or disciplining anyone, for relevant personnel matters were beyond the duties given them. Moreover, their damning findings won't play any role in whether or not Lt. Pike keeps his job, or faces any disciplinary measure at all, which could remain secret.
Thanks to this bill of rights, a police officer can refuse to discuss the incident at issue. The officer can only be fired or disciplined based on the internal affairs investigation. That investigation is secret. And then there is the informal code of silence and more formal union protections.
One of the many pathologies afflicting the public pension system in California is the practice of double-dipping, in which a state pensioner collects both retirement benefits from a previous job and a salary for new state employment. A particularly galling example of the practice has now come to light in Southern California, and as the Orange County Register's Tony Saavedra reports, this one's hard to beat for sheer moxy:

When David Noyes retired as general manager of Serrano Water District in late 2010, he dove right into his new job --  as acting general manager of Serrano Water District. His consulting contract was effective the same day as his retirement.
It's increasingly clear that public-sector unions have put governments in a bind because of their success at garnering unsustainable pension and medical benefits for public employees. The general public seems to understand that message. But the union-reform movement must now deal with the degree to which unions have protected bad apples and stopped reasonable reforms. Here's an article detailing horrific allegations of abuse at the hands of LA County deputies who patrol the jails. In my reporting of jail issues, it's clear that the unions protect even the worst among them. Ironically, the Democrats who claim to be civil libertarians are mostly silent on such matters here in California thanks to their close association with the unions.
Whenever people complain that cuts to government will lead to terrible things, consider that those services the public really wants will continue. I wrote about proposed cuts in California state parks, which led to private donations and community organizations pitching in to keep them open. Now we see in England that cutbacks to libraries have led to similar results -- private companies and community groups pitching in. Of course, much of what government does is counterproductive or unpopular. Even important programs (roads, schools, etc.) seem to operate mainly for the benefit of those who work for the agencies that provide the services. Private companies and community groups can provide better service because they are freed from union work rules and excessive compensation packages typical in the public sector.
One of the few bright spots on California's otherwise dismal educational landscape in recent years has been the proliferation of charter schools, of which there are now nearly 1,000, serving approximately 412,000 students. In the Los Angeles Unified School District, for example, charters consistently outperform conventional public schools by dramatic margins, creating a beacon of hope amidst some of the worst schools in the state.
The most recent poll looks favorable for Scott Walker. The governor leads his two most likely opponents (Milwaukee mayor Tom Barrett) and (Kathleen Falk) by 5 and 7 percentage points respectively. Even once the Democrats pick a candidate and start running negative ads about Walker it is going to be hard to change voters perception of him because he has already received so much attention. Conversely, Barrett and especially Falk are much less well known to voters, which means Walker's campaign ads might make more of a difference. As Christian Schneider points out: "If organized labor spends tens of millions of dollars on Falk and loses, it will be a major embarrassment, and a repudiation of the entire reason for the recall."
Back in the fall, I wrote about the myth that black workers were overly dependent on government jobs and suffering because of widespread public sector downsizing. As I pointed out at the time, more than four out of five black workers in fact was employed by the private sector, and their fate was tied to the recovery of the private economy every bit as much as white or Asian workers. Now comes another version of that myth, this time focused on women workers. It appeared over the weekend on the Sunday program This Week with George Stephanopolous courtesy of two of the show's panelists, Katrina Van Heuvel and Cokie Roberts.

The 10 percent gain in state tax collections for 2011, reported yesterday by the U.S. Census Bureau, is being greeted as evidence that the economy and the fiscal shape of states are both improving substantially. But some context is needed. As the chart below shows, despite the gain, state tax revenues remain below their peak in 2008. That alone is sobering because costs have continued to rise, creating a mismatch between revenues and expenditures that has lasted so long it essentially has created a new fiscal reality for states in which none of their projections from a few years ago about how much money they'd be able to spend in the next decade now hold true. 


state tax collections.jpg

The California Redevelopment Association, the organization that represents government officials who were best known for abusing eminent domain and sending subsidies to big-box retail stores in the name of "redevelopment," has announced that it is closing its doors. Hooray! Government redevelopment agencies across the state likewise are closing their doors. So, yes, it's possible for life to go on with a smaller public sector. Here are excerpts from the sour-grapes letter from CRA President and Alhambra City Manager Julio Fuentes and CRA Interim Executive Director Jim Kennedy (he is interim, because the executive director, John Shirey, saw the hand-writing on the wall and jumped ship):
I've seen the polls suggesting support for pension reform, even among California Democrats. Everyone I talk to understands this issue. Even some politicians in liberal cities such as San Jose and San Francisco are pushing for reforms. But I still didn't think the debate was over until I read this blog in the Sacramento Bee, which quoted Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento: "I think there's an expectation that we'll pass pension reform this year and we intend to do so. And that is the right thing to do. And I think it also shows the people as we approach the November election that we're serious about the reform side of the agenda as well."
Last autumn I wrote about the growing discontent of union households over the high price of membership. A Harris Interactive poll I cited found 47 percent of those in union households saying they didn't believe they were getting their money's worth out of union dues, in part because more and more of the money seemed to be going to political campaigns and advocacy outside of labor rather than to representing workers. Now a former government union official in Michigan, a state where reformers are pushing a so-called 'right to teach' act allowing public school instructors to opt out of the teacher's union, acknowledges as much.
Earlier this year, as the truly repulsive story of Mark Berndt (warning: the link is not for the faint of heart) -- an elementary teacher in the L.A. Unified School District accused of committing unspeakable acts against his students -- came to light, I noted here on Public Sector Inc. that the failure to prevent his crimes owed in part to the influence of the California Teachers Association, the teachers union that is the state's most powerful special interest.

It was the CTA's local affiliate in Los Angeles that negotiated a contract under which past allegations of misconduct would be jettisoned from a teacher's personnel file. And it was CTA influence that created a disciplinary process so unnavigable that L.A. Unified was unable to fire Berndt even when photographic evidence of his crimes emerged. You'd think that the attendant shame would be enough to force the CTA to swallow at least modest reforms. Yet now the union is coming out swinging against legislation intended to remove problem teachers from the classroom.
When the California Teachers Association, the powerful union that is the Golden State's most influential special interest, says "jump", the Democrats who control Sacramento consistently ask "How high?" So it was last year, when the CTA got its legislative allies to muscle through a bill preventing teacher layoffs for the coming year and requiring union approval of furloughs aimed at addressing the state's crippling budget crisis. How did the legislature pass such an obvious giveaway without intense media scrutiny? Simple. They didn't make it public until an hour before the vote.
Last year was marked by crises in state government public finance. This year is shaping up to be the year of urban fiscal crises. As my colleagues on this blog have been covering the major stories are from places such as Stockton and San Diego, California and Yonkers, New York. This is because many states balanced their budgets last year by pushing the pain down onto localities. Those decisions are now hitting home.

The battle between big city mayors, most of whom are Democrats, and public employees unions is therefore heating up. So far this has been primarily a battle between mayors and teachers unions, which is not surprising since teachers are often a majority of government employees in many jurisdictions. The battles have been taking place in Newark, Cleveland, Boston, Los Angeles, and Chicago. Battles between mayors and teachers unions can be epic. And mayors often lose.
The 'b' word, or 'bankruptcy,' was first used provocatively in association with Los Angeles by former mayor Richard Riordan in a controversial editorial in the WSJ in May of 2010. But now the city's own Chief Administrative Officer, Miguel Santana, has raised the prospect that the City of Angels could indeed be heading for insolvency unless it does something to grab control of employee costs, including pension costs. In a stunning new report issued on Friday, Santana projected that even with an improving economy the city faces a rising deficit, which could hit $427 million by 2014 (see chart below).

LA budget.jpg
Last week, I issued a report detailing the history of the recall in Wisconsin, in which I made the case that the recall is currently being used in ways its original supporters never intended.  In fact, in many ways, the attempt to recall Governor Scott Walker is completely antithetical to the stated reason for instituting the recall in 1926 - when supporters thought the recall would lessen the influence of special interests.

Yesterday, I followed up with an op-ed in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, making my case in more abbreviated form:
In my Wall Street Journal op-ed on Stockton last Saturday, I observed that the city's current officials have admitted that Stockton got into its problems by making promises to employees that nobody bothered to add up at the time they were made, and by cutting deals for compensation that often hid the true cost of employee pay.

Stockton admitted that its biggest problem has been a lack of transparency resulting in a host of "hidden costs" in labor agreements for "obligations that are often difficult for citizens to identify or understand."
When it comes to reforming California's bloated public pensions, Governor Jerry Brown's proposed statewide reforms may get all the press, but the real action is actually taking place in the state's cities. In recent months, both San Diego and San Jose (California's second and third largest cities, respectively) have put pension reform initiatives on the June ballot. And in both cases unions have quickly mounted legal challenges to the proposals. In late February, big labor failed in San Diego. And now they've been slapped down in San Jose.
Putting his finger on "agency shops" in public sector labor relations, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie humorously likened his state's teachers union (NJEA) to the Eagle's Hotel California, a place where "you can check out but you can never leave." The practice of requiring nonunion members to pay "representation" or "fair share" fees is familiar to readers of this blog. (If you're unfamiliar with this practice, check out this report). In the Garden State, a full-time nonunion teacher must still pay $647 annually into the NJEA's coffers. Interestingly, the 60% of the union's 195,000 members pay the full union dues amount of $791 annually. That means from that slice of educators alone, the NJEA takes in $92,547,000 each year. That fantastic sum does not include the fair share members, part-timers, and administrative staff who pay less in union dues. And you thought Don Henely's solo career was big and bad...

This post is from the President of the Buckeye Institute, Kevin Holtsberry and is a response to the April 4 opinion piece in the Cleveland Plain Dealer from Steve Holecko.  


Mr. Holecko is the political coordinator of the Berea Federation of Teachers.  In that piece Holecko attacks current efforts to reform the Cleveland Public Schools and dismisses them as "another battle in the war on public education." 

There are so many non-sequiturs and political attacks masquerading as arguments in this Plain Dealer Op-Ed one hardly knows where to begin.

The underlying thesis of Steve Holecko's piece, however, is one that needs to be rebutted as often as it comes up.  Namely, that the "education profession"-which really means the education unions and their allies­-care about kids while those pushing for reform are greedy corporations and politicians committed to a "war on education" in order to shut out their political opponents and find convenient scapegoats.

In the private sector, the bottom line is the bottom line. In the public sector, it's common to hear officials complain about a lack of money even as they spend more money on unjustifiable expenses. As the Daily News explained, "Los Angeles Department of Water and Power General Manager Ron Nichols made his pitch Tuesday for power and water rate increases to keep up with legislative mandates and upgrade aging infrastructure." Yes, it's important to fund infrastructure improvements. But keep in mind this recent Los Angeles Times story:

School reformers often spend so much time looking at the details of various proposals that they forget to remind the public of the bigger idea behind the reform. The problem in public schools is a big one -- the entire system is designed on a government-run monopoly model. Such systems have perverse incentives, one of which is the elevation of the needs of those who work for the system above those who are supposed to be its customers. In my column from last Sunday, I reminded readers what it would mean if, say, restaurants were run in the same manner as schools. Obviously, no policy makers are about to advocate the separation of school and state, but thought experiments can be useful as we try to create workable alternatives.
Last year, when Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker enacted his plan requiring public employees to pay more towards their own pension and health benefits, he offset that new revenue with state aid cuts to local school districts.  Some districts, sensing Walker would change their benefit payment structure, renegotiated their contracts in order to "Walker-proof" their benefits.  Yet, while their benefits remained virtually intact, the state aid cuts hit hard, forcing teacher layoffs in the districts that tried to contradict Walker's plan.
Around the country, pension fund officials have often joined union leaders in denying the magnitude of the public sector pension crisis and defending benefit levels, especially for existing employees. Officials at CalPERS, the giant California public sector pension fund, have even threatened to go to court to challenge any of the state's cities that initiate reform that reduces benefits for current employees.

But as the fiscal picture continues to dim for some states, pension officials are now starting to sing a different tune. The latest is the board of the Illinois Teachers Retirement System and its executive director.

illinois pension costs.jpg

The struggle for CUNY

| 1 Comment | No TrackBacks
The City University of New York (CUNY) (my employer) is a behemoth of public universityBuilding21stCenturyCUNY.gif education. It has 280,000 undergraduates--four times more than the entire Ivy League. The system includes 17 senior and community colleges. The administration, led by Chancellor Matthew Goldstein, has proposed a general-education curriculum plan, called Pathways.  However, the faculty union, the Professional Staff Congress (PSC), is going to court to block the plan. Who has the better case?
There's an old joke actuaries tell about themselves which sort of sums of the unglamorous nature of a lot of their work. It asks, what do two actuaries do on a date for fun? They sit around figuring out one another's life expectancy.

Okay, that's not exactly the stuff of the Improv. But these days it's also untrue if you are an actuary dealing with public sector pensions these days. That's a far more challenging and dynamic world than the one traditionally confronting the profession, which is why the American Academy of Actuaries devoted a big discussion at this year's annual meeting to the provocative topic of whether it's possible for cities and states to avoid ruin after having built up some $4 trillion in unfunded pension liabilities. 
The New York Times Julie Creswell reports on the strategy undertaken by some public sector plans to embrace more investment risk in the wake of the market crash of 2008. The results are not what plan managers were hoping for.
Center for State and Local Leadership

PublicSectorInc.org is a project of the Manhattan Institute's Center for State & Local Leadership.
Copyright © 2013 Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Inc. All rights reserved.
52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10017
phone (212) 599-7000 / fax (212) 599-3494