Friends with Benefits - Part 18 New Accounting Standards

We've been following the underfunded public pension issue for awhile now.  Over the weekend, the Wall Street Journal reported in a piece titled "States to Face New Pressure Over Pensions" and said

New accounting rules are likely to show that public pensions plans are underfunded by hundreds of billions of dollars more than previously thought, putting new pressure on state and local governments to act.  The revamped rules expected to be approved Monday by an accounting-standards group will force governments to record pension costs sooner than they did before and disclose shortfalls more prominently.

Here's an insightful passage in the piece

Some pension officials said they don't plan to make drastic changes based on GASB's decision.  For example, many pension officials plan on using two sets of numbers when calculating pension obligations:  one for official reporting purposes and another to determine taxpayers' pension bills.  GASB's new rules would allow that.

This is a ticking package that won't go away.

Comments

[Joe]

We might see some progress on the pension timebomb if it doesn't get derailed in the backroom by Friday's vote:

California state and local governments stand to save between $40 billion and $60 billion over 30 years, according to a hasty fiscal analysis of a pension reform measure set for a vote later this week, according to CalPERS.
The fund's top actuary, Alan Milligan, announced the estimate with plenty of caveats during a special meeting of the fund's Board of Administration. Lawmakers didn't issue the 38 pages of language for Assembly Bill 340 until Tuesday evening. CalPERS staff worked overnight to analyze it in time for this afternoon's special
"We've had limited time in which to review the provisions," Milligan said, "so this estimate will change as we continue to delve in to the language of the bill."
CalPERS continues to refine it's numbers, Milligan said, aiming for a more more accurate accounting in time for Friday's Assembly and Senate floor votes on the bill.
Fund staff concluded the biggest employer savings wouldn't be realized for many years if the bill is enacted, since most of the pension downgrades apply to new state and local government hires, including provisions that reduce benefits and cap wages that can be considered for retirement purposes.

Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/the_state_worker/2012/08/calpers-pegs-california-public-pension-reform-savings-at-up-to-60-billion.html#storylink=cpy

[Holyroller]

What is the ratio of Public Safety, vs. maintenance regarding impact on the Pension fund CALPERS?
After 911, Public Safety was given "Cart Blanche" regarding wage and benifits during labor negotiations.
The funding of Burlingame Police/Fire wage and pension benefits are ridiculous.
Do you think a City of Burlingame "entry level" police or fireman should be paid more than Oakland, or San Jose?
They are.
Should the PD in Mayberry RFD get paid more than PD in East Palo Alto?

[Joe]

News today from San Berdoo - this won't help CalPers' balance sheet:

Oct 18 (Reuters) - San Bernardino, California, has failed to make more than $6 million in payments to the state's powerful public employee pension fund, heightening speculation of a high-stakes showdown between the fund and other creditors as the city seeks eligibility for bankruptcy protection.

Since July 31, the day before San Bernardino declared bankruptcy, the city has failed to make six biweekly employer contribution payments of more than $1 million to the California Public Employees' Retirement System (Calpers), a city spokesperson said.

The action taken by San Bernardino is in stark contrast with two other California cities - Vallejo, which emerged from bankruptcy in 2011, and Stockton, which is seeking bankruptcy protection. Both cities decided to keep current on all payments to the pension fund.

[Account Deleted]

Nice to see some courageous folks trying to effect change; I wonder if the powers that be in Burlingame will support this effort explicitly:

http://www.mercurynews.com/politics-government/ci_24316652/san-jose-mayor-others-push-statewide-pension-ballot

[Joe]

We might finally see a real balance sheet from cities, towns and the state:

Thanks to new accounting standards, California’s state and local governments are being forced to acknowledge tens of billions of dollars in previously obscure debt for unfunded pension liabilities.

The Governmental Accounting Standards Board says that “unfunded actuarial accrued liabilities” should be listed on balance sheets along with the more traditional debts.

As those revised balance sheets began to emerge this year, they revealed some hefty numbers – such as Los Angeles County’s $8 billion-plus unfunded pension debt.

State Sen. John Moorlach, R-Costa Mesa, has been keeping a running tab and says that in just nine large counties, including Los Angeles, total pension debts top $20 billion.

The state government’s balance sheet, which will be released soon, is likely to reveal some particularly big numbers.

A recent report from the state controller pegs “net pension liability” for the state’s public safety and “miscellaneous” employees for the 2012-14 fiscal year at $34 billion on $128.7 billion in pension obligations.

To put it another way, it’s a 26 percent shortfall, and that assumes the state will see a 7.65 percent investment return, which many authorities say is unrealistically high. If earnings are just 1 percentage point lower, the debt balloons to more than $50 billion.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/politics-columns-blogs/dan-walters/article66251307.html#storylink=cpy