Former San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed and former San Diego Councilman Carl DeMaio plan to revise and resubmit their proposed statewide initiative aimed at requiring voter approval for new government pension plans in response to a summary by the attorney general that they consider unfair.
Reed partnered with DeMaio to craft the Voter Empowerment Act, which requires voters to approve traditional pensions for new government hires or increases in retirement plans for current workers. The duo, who each authored pension reform measures in their respective cities, are targeting the initiative for the November 2016 ballot.
California Attorney General Kamala Harris’ office is tasked with drafting the title and summary for all state ballot measures. Reed and DeMaio say her description of their proposed 2016 measure is designed to derail their initiative with language sympathetic to government employee unions.
This isn’t the first time Reed has taken issue with Harris’ description of his statewide pension reform efforts. Reed sued Harris in 2013 over what he called a “misleading and unfair” description of a pension initiative he crafted at the time that would have allowed local governments to lower pension formulas for their workers’ remaining years on the job.
Reed and his supporters withdrew the initiative after Harris described it in a way Reed felt would unfairly undermine support. A judge ruled the description was fair.
For their current initiative, Reed and DeMaio sought to avoid changes to existing workers’ pensions because California courts have bestowed ironclad protections that effectively bar reductions in government workers’ pensions for the duration of their careers, allowing changes only affecting new hires.
Harris’ summary stated the proposed initiative “eliminates constitutional protections for vested pension and retiree healthcare benefits for current public employees, including those working in K-12 schools, higher education, hospitals, and police protection, for future work performed.” The state’s legislative analyst and union lawyers have indicated that the proposed initiative would change current workers pension rights.
DeMaio said Friday that “our lawyers have crafted a strategy that will allow us to continue to advance pension reform.” He and Reed threatened another lawsuit against the attorney general if their revised initiative is characterized as changing current workers’ pension rights.
Each time Reed and DaMaio rewrite the initiative, Harris is required to write a new title and summary. The duo then have 180 days to gather roughly 580,000 signatures to qualify the measure for the ballot. The 180-day clock restarts with every revision, according to the Secretary of State office, and there’s no limit to how many times Reed and DeMaio can revise and resubmit the measure. But they must have their signatures verified by June 30 to meet the deadline for the 2016 ballot.
Dave Low, chairman of Californians for Retirement Security, called it a “small move in the right direction” but said the measure still won’t pass muster with voters. He said the initiative is entirely flawed and polls show it’s destined to fail.
“The issue is not whether it impacts future or current workers,” Low said. “The issue is they’re taking pensions away from teachers, nurses and firefighters. We feel very confident that it’s going to be defeated no matter what they do.”
Follow Ramona Giwargis at Twitter.com/ramonagiwargis or contact her at 408-920-5705.
