Skip to content
Subscribe

San Diego Pension Reform and the Budget

Published:

Since 2003, San Diego has maintained a structural-deficit across various pension scandals in spite of multiple reform attempts. The San Diego Taxpayers Association remarked, “The main driver of the City’s fiscal woes has been the increase in pension costs.” Almost $430 million in total budgeted benefits were recorded for fiscal year 2013 – compared to just $155 million in 2001. The City's Annual Required Contribution (the minimum San Diego needs to spend to pay down these costs) has increased as well.

KPBS reports:

“San Diego's payments to the city's retirement fund  soared from $43 million in 1999 to $231.2 million this year, equal to 20 percent of the city's general fund budget.”

The ballooning pension obligations have multiple causes. Perhaps, the most well known is the scandal that spanned Susan Golding and Dick Murphy’s tenure. The San Diego City Employees' Retirement System (SDCERS) illegally lowered funding requirements while increasing benefits, resulting in irreparable damage to San Diego’s budget. Few, if any, of the benefits were rolled back after the scandal was uncovered and pension costs soared.

Additional causes for skyrocketing costs are attributable to the pension fund itself. San Diego’s pension fund requires three revenue streams to remain fiscally sound: employees who pay into the fund, government contributions, and investment earnings, which constitute the majority of funding at around 70 percent. When the stock market performs poorly the pension fund suffers as well. For instance, this year’s earnings of only 0.3% are not even close to the required 7.5% target. Therefore, the city must make up the difference.

These primary factors have prompted San Diegans to draft and pass Proposition B. This version of San Diego pension reform has been hailed as a model for other cities who want to control pension costs. However, it has not been without considerable opposition from groups like the San Diego Municipal Employees Association.

Criticism of Prop B cites budget analysis from the city’s Independent Budget Analyst, who found all of the budget savings came from the five-year freeze on pensionable pay, and not from moving employees onto 401(k)/defined contribution plans, which will cost up to $54 million to implement over three years. Provided the pay freeze remains in tact, San Diego stands to save almost $1 billion in pension costs.

It is still too early to tell whether or not Proposition B has accomplished its goal of reigning in pension costs, but Mayor Jerry Sanders has felt optimistic about San Diego's budget outlook since February when he announced, "Today, I'm pleased to announce the city's decades-long structural budget deficit is history."

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

San Diego Pension Reform and the Budget

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us