SAN JOSE — A taxpayer group filed court papers Wednesday seeking to block city efforts to invalidate San Jose’s controversial pension reform Measure B to make way for a negotiated settlement with city unions.
“The city walked away from its duty to voters to defend Measure B,” said former City Councilman Pete Constant, one of the plaintiffs. “If they’re not going to defend the voters, somebody needs to, and we’ll stand up and do that.”
Constant, along with the Silicon Valley Taxpayers’ Association and its treasurer, Steve Haug, filed legal papers in Santa Clara County Superior Court to intervene in the city’s petition to nullify Measure B — the latest wrinkle in the city’s pension reform saga.
The challenge is being sponsored by a group called Hold Politicians Accountable, which is funded by Charles Munger, Jr., the billionaire former chairman of the Santa Clara County Republican Party.
Munger did not respond to emails for comment. Public records show Munger scheduled a phone call and meeting with Mayor Sam Liccardo to discuss the settlement at least twice last year.
Crafted by former Mayor Chuck Reed, Measure B, the 2012 voter-approved pension reform initiative, reduced retirement benefits for current and future San Jose employees to control skyrocketing costs. Though a judge in 2013 struck down provisions to reduce current workers’ pensions, local unions filed lawsuits against the measure, arguing it was an attack on their vested benefits.
The acrimonious fight between City Hall and its workers led to an exodus of police officers and other city employees. As a new mayor, Liccardo, who backed Measure B as a councilman, promised to settle the pension dispute with the 11 unions and reached a compromise within his first year in office.
The accord locked in some of the city’s expected savings from Measure B by maintaining the elimination of retiree bonus checks and bringing new hires into a scaled-back retirement benefits plan more generous than the measure allowed. It also included cuts to retiree health benefits and abandoned efforts to seek pension cuts from current employees.
But Constant says those changes needed to go back out to voters for approval.
“Measure B was voted in by the people and a provision in it said any changes in retirement benefits would go to the voters,” Constant said Wednesday. “Sam’s trying to do what’s best for the city, but I think he’s wrong. The voters are not dumb and being honest with them is the best way to go.”
Former Mayor Reed said Wednesday he isn’t sure if the new legal challenge will hurt efforts to invalidate Measure B, but said it will likely delay it. He supports Liccardo’s proposed settlement with the unions.
San Jose officials decided to replace the measure with the settlement by asking a judge to invalidate the measure based on an error — the city didn’t bargain with unions over the final measure language in February 2012 before it went out to voters.
The city hadn’t submitted its petition to overturn Measure B until late Tuesday. Liccardo called an emergency closed-session meeting to get the final signoff.
A judge was scheduled to hear the case March 24. Now union leaders say Constant and other opponents threaten to jeopardize that progress — and the hard-fought compromises.
“Pete Constant’s latest temper tantrum validates how out of touch he is with the public safety crisis he helped create,” said Paul Kelly, president of the San Jose Police Officers’ Association, adding that the current police academy has only six cadets. “Constant should put down his rattle, insert his pacifier and take a timeout from trying to force San Jose residents to relive the Measure B nightmare.”
In a statement, Liccardo said he believes the settlement is fair to all sides and “it’s important that we move as rapidly as possible to help us rebuild our police department.”
Contact Ramona Giwargis at 408-920-5705. Follow her at Twitter.com/ramonagiwargis.
