Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1982/02/23 Item 8COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item g Meeting Date 2/23/82 ITEM TITL Resolution /D 7~.Z- Supporting a Claim of the City of Anaheim for State Mandated Costs Associated with Cost of Living Increases for Retirees Under the Public Employees Retirement System SUBMITTED BY: City Manager ~~~ ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X ) The C'ty of Anaheim has filed a test SB 90 claim with the State Board of Control for reimb rsement of costs resulting from the passage of A.B. 2674. This bill provided for a quarterly 10% cost of living increase for PERS retirees over a two-year period. Funds for the cost of living increases were taken from PERS contingency reserves with ut authorization by local contracting agencies. The City of Anaheim is seeking supp rt from other cities in their claim against the State Board of Control for reim ursement of these costs. It is my RECD h1ENDATION: That Council adopt resolution. BOAR S/COMMISSION RECOP~IMENDATION: N.A. DISC SSION: As i dicated, A.B. 2674 was adopted by the State Legislature and the PERS Board in comp fiance with the statute has provided cost of living increases to PERS retirees out f a contingency reserve fund never intended to be used for this purpose. These cont ngency funds were originally created to offset employer unfunded obligations for enefit payments that could not be met because of lost investment earnings and fluc uation in actuarial assumptions. Because the PERS Board of Administration cons stently underestimated investment earnings, the unanticipated investment income was redited to this reserve account but all employer contributions were periodically incr ased because of the artificial shortfall that seemed to be occurring. When A.B. 2674 provided for the cost of living bonua payments through the use of thes underestimated earnings, it effectively deflected the use of these monies for etirement plan payments and resulted in higher contributions from each employer. I be ieve the City of Chula Vista has also been required to effectively pay the full cost of the cost of living increases (.roughly estimated at $50,000 or more) in t e future. Since this additional expense is attributable to the passage of A.B. 2674, I believe we should support the claim of the City of Anaheim since any success that Anaheim may have in pursuit of their claim would ultimately ben fit the City. FIN NCIAL IMPACT: While no precise figure can be determined as to the amount of S.B. 90 funds Chula Vis a would be entitled to, it is believed that the amount could be $50,000 or mo r . r _ ~ _.. .~ y.. ~ ~ _ ~_ .__ - ERA lm i~ .. 1, f ... I ~ i `, S ~ orm A-1 3 (Rev. 11/79) ~ ~~ THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL X JOHN SEYMOUR, Mayor DON R. ROTH, Mayor Pro Tem E. LLEWELLYN OVERHOLT, JR., Councilman MIRIAM KAYWOOD, Councilwoman BEN BAY, Councilman CITY OF ANAHEIM. CALIFORNIA 92803 February 11, 1982 May r Will T. Hyde Cit of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Ave. Chu a Vista, CA 92010 Dead Mayor Hyde: Th City of Anaheim has filed a test SB-90 Claim with the State Board of Co trol for reimbursement of costs resulting from the passage of AB 2674 (B atT•~right). The bill, chaptered as Section 21231 of the Public Employees` F.e'irement Law, establishes a quarterly ten percent cost-of-living increase fo PERS retirees over a two-year period. Funds for payment are taken from th PERS contingency reserve account without authorization by local agencies. Th reserve account is intended to offset employer obligations for benefit pa ments created because of losses in investment earnings and fluctuations in actuarial ass>>mptions of the system. It is pat intended as a funding so~rce for increased benefits. The PERS Board of Administration's practice of underestimating the Retirement Fund earnings has resulted in surplus ea pings being credited to the contingency reserve account. In 1975 the contingency reserve was $100 million; by June, 1981, the contingency reserve ac ount had grown to $540 million. Th understatement of interest earnings of the Retirement Fund artificially cr ates a short-fall that requires a higher employer contribution to fund re irement plans. Financing of each member agency's retirement plan is i~F_'.'Li'Jed ~rOm t~ilCe uOL'.rCeS; ~.L) 1~",tTii`,1C•_~Tee .:.Ontri bl:tiCnS 8.t 3 f1`<iGC1 i'atC es ablished by State statute; (2) Interest earnings from invested t~.;nds; an (3) Employer contributions based upon a specific agency's long-term fu ding needs, including income frcm employee contributions and interest ea Wings as determined by the system actuaries. When the system actuaries un erestimate interest earnings from Retirement Fund investments, the em layer's contribution, which is the balancing variable, goes up. Th City of Anaheim believes that use of interest earnings to f>,ind the cost- of living bonus payment approved throagh the Boatwright bill effectively de lects the use of the monies from retirement plan payment and results in a hi her contribution from the employer. ode estimate that the City of Anaheim ~~ ~~~ WRITTEN COMMIINI~ATYC31~ CITY COUNCIL MEETING -v2 ~" c- e : C'- D .a 200 South Anaheim Boulevard, P. O. Box 3222, (714) 999-5166 2 ha effectively borne the full cost of the benefit increase at approximately $1 3,615. We have therefore submitted a claim for SB 90 reimbursement of th s amount. I m writing to you to enlist your Council's support in obtaining classifica- ti n of this kind of benefit adjustment as a State mandated-cost which is re mbursable to cities. Attached is a sample resolution which we suggest be adopted and forwarded to Garry McRae, Human Resources Director of the City of Anaheim. We are preparing a very precise and detailed case to take before th State Board of Control. Your help will benefit all California cities wh ch are members of the PERS system. Si cerely, y J N SEY Ma or JS CC:bh At achment ~' I~~>~j RESOLUTION N0. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL SUPPORTING THE CLAIM OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM FOR STATE-MANDATED COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH CHAPTER 1244, STATUES OF 1980 WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim has filed a claim for reimbursement from State of California for costs incurred in complying with Chapter 1244, tatues of 1980, dealing with cost of living increased for retirees of a ocal agency contract with the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS); WHEREAS, said legislation was passed after the effective date of rticle XIIIB of the California State Constitution, also known as Proposi- ion 4, which required, among other things, that the State must provide a ubvention of funds to reimburse local government for costs of any new rogram or any increased level of service caused by legislation or State gency action; and WHEREAS, the City of has, or shortly will, incur costs to omply with the increased benefit requirements of Chapter 1244, Statues of 980; and WHEREAS, an option previously available to the City of , as in fact been removed by Chapter 1244, Statutes of 1980; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council eby declares its unanimous support for the claim of the City of Anaheim or reimbursement for costs associated with Chapter 1244, Statues of 1980. 2 igned and approved this day of February, 1982. Mayor TTEST: City Clerk I HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the meeting held on the to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: day of February, 1982, by the following vote, City Council at its regular ~ /~~~~- City C.Lerk