Continuing our online conversation about pension reform, today we’re asking you to share your views on a second issue at the center of the debate over public pension reform in California:

Should public employees pay half the cost of their retirement benefits?

“Earlier this month, we announced that would host an online conversation about pension reform,” said Marcia Fritz, president of CFFR. “Our first Question of the Week asked if public and private employees should have similar retirement plans. A related question is whether government employees should contribute half the cost of their retirement plans. I’ll be thrilled if the responses are as thoughtful and instructive.”

Comments may still be made on last week’s question. Future questions will include:

• Should public safety employees have different retirement plans than other government employees?
• Should taxpayers pay healthcare costs for the lifetime of someone who retires from government service?
• Should an employee’s unused vacation and sick pay be considered when his/her annual pension is calculated?

On January 6, CFFR posted two alternative pension reform approaches on our website and invited the public to comment. Proposals from others will be posted for public comment as they become available. CFFR is also reaching out to economists, legal scholars, financial analysts and pension managers to analyze pension reform proposals and contribute to CFFR’s online library.

“California can’t solve its fiscal problems until it solves its public pension crisis. Whether lawmakers or voters do the job, we need a plan that has been thoroughly analyzed and debated by voters, stakeholders and experts,” Fritz said.

WHAT DO YOU THINK? Should public employees pay half the cost of their retirement benefits? Tell us . . . leave a comment!

Print This.